4.2 Article

Pair Housing for Female Longtailed and Rhesus Macaques in the Laboratory: Behavior in Protected Contact Versus Full Contact

Journal

JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL WELFARE SCIENCE
Volume 15, Issue 2, Pages 126-143

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10888705.2012.658330

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [RR00164, RR00166]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pair housing for caged macaques in the laboratory generally allows unrestricted tactile contact but, less commonly, may involve limited contact via grooming-contact bars or perforated panels. The purpose of using this protected contact housing, which prevents entry into pair-mates' cages, typically is to accommodate research and management requirements. The study used behavioral data collected on 12 pairs of female longtailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) at the Washington National Primate Research Center and 7 pairs of female rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) housed at the Tulane National Primate Research Center to assess the relative benefits of protected versus full protected contact. The study collected data in stable pairs housed first in protected contact followed by full contact. Species combined, the study found the presence of the panel was associated with lower levels of social grooming and higher levels of self-grooming, abnormal behavior, and tension-related behavior. Within species, only the protected- versus full-contact contrasts for abnormal and tension were statistically significant-and only for rhesus macaques. Results suggest that for female rhesus macaques, potential disadvantages or inconveniences of full contact should be balanced against the improved behavioral profile in comparison to protected contact. The use of protected contact among female longtailed macaques does not appear to require the same cost-benefit analysis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available