2019
DOI: 10.1002/zoo.21520
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Foraging enrichment alleviates oral repetitive behaviors in captive red‐tailed black cockatoos (Calyptorhynchus banksii)

Abstract: The relationship between inadequate foraging opportunities and the expression of oral repetitive behaviors has been well documented in many production animal species. However, this relationship has been less-well examined in zoo-housed animals, particularly avian species. The expression of oral repetitive behavior may embody a frustrated foraging response, and may therefore be alleviated with the provision of foraging enrichment. In this study, we examined the effect of different foraging-based enrichment item… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 33 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In general, there is a correlation between time spent on feeding and time spent on "oral stereotypy", since the time spent on "oral stereotypy" decreases as time spent on feeding increases (Bashaw et al, 2001;Baxter & Plowman, 2001;Facey, 2017;Duggan et al, 2015). This correlation is supported by other studies, wherein a connection between overall feeding-related behaviour and decreases in stereotypies was found (Wagman et al 2018;Fangmeier et al 2019).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 51%
“…In general, there is a correlation between time spent on feeding and time spent on "oral stereotypy", since the time spent on "oral stereotypy" decreases as time spent on feeding increases (Bashaw et al, 2001;Baxter & Plowman, 2001;Facey, 2017;Duggan et al, 2015). This correlation is supported by other studies, wherein a connection between overall feeding-related behaviour and decreases in stereotypies was found (Wagman et al 2018;Fangmeier et al 2019).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 51%