4.2 Article

Hair plucking, stress, and urinary cortisol among captive bonobos (Pan paniscus)

期刊

ZOO BIOLOGY
卷 35, 期 5, 页码 415-422

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/zoo.21320

关键词

undesirable behavior; glucocorticoid; trichotillomania

资金

  1. Rebecca Jeanne Andrew Memorial Award
  2. College of Arts and Science Dean's Scholar Award, Miami University
  3. Nacey Maggioncalda Foundation
  4. University of Oregon

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hair plucking has been observed in many captive primate species, including the great apes; however, the etiology of this behavioral pattern is poorly understood. While this behavior has not been reported in wild apes, an ethologically identical behavior in humans, known as trichotillomania, is linked to chronic psychosocial stress and is a predominantly female disorder. This study examines hair plucking (defined here as a rapid jerking away of the hair shaft and follicle by the hand or mouth, often accompanied by inspection and consumption of the hair shaft and follicle) in a captive group of bonobos (N=13) at the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium in Columbus, Ohio. Plucking data were collected using behavior and all-occurrence sampling; 1,450 social and self-directed grooming bouts were recorded during 128hr of observation. Twenty-one percent of all grooming bouts involved at least one instance of plucking. Urine samples (N=55) were collected and analyzed for the stress hormone cortisol. Analyses of urinary cortisol levels showed a significant positive correlation between mean cortisol and self-directed plucking for females (r=0.88, P<0.05) but not for males (r=-0.73, P=0.09). These results demonstrate an association between relative self-directed hair plucking and cortisol among female bonobos. This is the first study to investigate the relationship between hair plucking and cortisol among apes. Overall, these data add to our knowledge of a contemporary issue in captive ape management. Zoo Biol. 35:415-422, 2016. (c) Wiley Periodicals, 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