4.2 Article

Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) Responses to Caregiver Use of Chimpanzee Behaviors

期刊

ZOO BIOLOGY
卷 27, 期 5, 页码 345-359

出版社

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/zoo.20194

关键词

species-specific behaviors; husbandry; animal welfare; human interaction

资金

  1. Animal Welfare Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The relationships between captive primates and their caregivers are critical ones and can affect animal welfare. Friendly relationships can improve quality of life; adversely, agonistic relationships can decrease quality of life. Caregivers in and of themselves should not be stressful to their charges, instead the caregivers' behaviour and the nature of their interactions with captive primates is likely the basis for the stress. One method to promote positive relationships in the captive environment is for caregivers to employ species-specific behaviours in their interactions with their charges. This study tested the effect of caregivers' use of these behaviors with chimpanzees at the Zoo Northwest Florida in Gulf Breeze. The Chimpanzee participants were three males. Data collection occurred during typical interactions between the human participants and the chimpanzees. Some days the caregiver presented chimpanzee behaviors and vocalizations (CB Chimpanzee Behavior Condition) in the data collection interactions with the chimpanzees. On the other days the caregiver presented human behaviors and used speech (HB-Human Behavior Condition) in the interactions with the chimpanzees. The interactions were videotaped. Data coders recorded the behavioral contexts for each chimpanzee as they occurred on the videotape and the time that each context began. Overall they engaged in significantly more friendly behaviors such as play in CB than in HB. They were significantly less interactive in HB than CB. Caregivers should understand and employ species-specific interactions with chimpanzees to promote friendly interactions and animal welfare. Zoo Biol 27:345-359. 2008. (C) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据