Use of space and activity budgets in relation to age and social status in a captive herd of American bison, <i>Bison bison</i>

Robitaille, Jean‐François; Prescott, Jacques

doi:10.1002/zoo.1430120407

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While all females demonstrated relatively equivalent use of the mud wallow, position within the dominance hierarchy was positively correlated with the percentage of time spent at the watering hole, such that dominant females spent significantly more time at this resource than subordinate individuals. A similar result has been seen in captive bison, in which dominant individuals are known to occupy higher quality sites within the exhibit [Robitaille and Prescott, 1993].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…Recent decades have seen a decisive movement among zoological institutions to increase the size and environmental complexity of their animal exhibits [Hutchins, 2006], yet published findings on the use of space and resources in the captive setting exist for relatively few species [chimpanzees; Bettinger et al, 1994;wild boars;Blasetti et al, 1988;sloth bears;Forthman and Bakeman, 1992;Forthman Quick and Pappas, 1986;manatees;Horikoshi-Beckett and Schulte, 2006;South American tapir;Mahler, 1984; American bison; Robitaille and Prescott, 1993]. Further, although there have been no formally published studies on this topic in captive elephants, it has been argued that such exhibit alterations may enhance their welfare by promoting increased exercise, foot health, skin health, and psychological well-being [Clubb and Mason, 2002;Doyle and Roy, 2006;Roocroft and Oosterhuis, 2001].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

GPS assessment of the use of exhibit space and resources by African elephants (Loxodonta africana)

Leighty¹,

Soltis

Savage

2010

Zoo Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In public discussions of animal rights and welfare, we as members and proponents of zoological institutions often face significant challenges addressing the concerns of our detractors due to an unfortunate deficiency in systematically collected and published data on the animals in our collections. In the case of elephants, there has been a paucity of information describing their use of space within captive environments. Here, using collar-mounted GPS recording devices, we documented the use of exhibit space and resources by a herd of five adult female African elephants (Loxodonta africana) housed at Disney's Animal Kingdom((R)). We found that dominant animals within the herd used a greater percentage of the available space and subordinate females avoided narrow or enclosed regions of the enclosure that we termed "restricted flow areas." In their use of other resources, dominant females demonstrated increased occupation of the watering hole over subordinate females, but all females demonstrated relatively equivalent use of the mud wallow. Overall, our results provide preliminary evidence that position within the dominancy hierarchy impacts the percentage of space occupied in a captive setting and may contribute to resource accessibility. These findings can be applied to future decisions on exhibit design and resource distribution for this species.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

GPS assessment of the use of exhibit space and resources by African elephants (Loxodonta africana)

Leighty¹,

Soltis

Savage

2010

Zoo Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Silage was available throughout the day. Why did low‐ranking stags not shift their feeding bouts to times of the day when high‐ranking stags were not feeding (a strategy observed in subordinate bison; Robitaille & Prescott 1993)? It is unlikely that low‐ranking stags needed the security advantages of a group to feel safe to feed, because they did not feed in groups of peers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feeding Tactics of Low‐ranking Red Deer Stags at Supplementary Feeding Sites

Schmidt¹,

Hoi²

1999

Ethology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Schmidt\ K[ T[ + Hoi\ H[ 0888] Feeding tactics of low!ranking red deer stags at supplementary feeding sites[ Ethology 094\ 238*259[ AbstractWe tested the hypothesis that low!ranking red deer Cervus elaphus stags adjust feeding tactics according to the spatio!temporal availability of the food[ We observed free!ranging red deer at two supplementary feeding sites in the Scottish Highlands[ It was predicted that at spatially clumped food\ low!ranking stags would avoid high!ranking stags\ 0[ spatially when food is available only for a short period\ but 1[ temporally when the food is available continuously [ We observed several feeding tactics in low!ranking stags and the prevalence of a feeding tactic was related to the spatial distribution of the food[ When food was highly clumped some low!ranking stags rushed in between feeding high! ranking stags\ took a bite and retreated to process the bite "sneaking tactic#[ Bite rate:min did not di}er between sneaking "9[18 2 9[94# and non!sneaking low! ranking stags "9[15 2 9[94#[ Compared with non!sneaking low!ranking herd mem! bers\ sneaking stags took larger bites\ as re~ected in a signi_cantly longer handling time "014 2 01[3 s:bite# and thus achieved a higher intake\ although still con! siderably less than high!ranking stags[The temporal availability of the food did not in~uence feeding tactics in low! ranking stags[ Low!ranking stags always avoided higher!ranking herd members spatially but did not shift their feeding bouts to times of the day when high!ranking stags were not feeding[ Corresponding author] K[ T[

show abstract

“…Specifically, in territorial species where at least two social groups -breeders and non-territorial floaters -are recognized, territorial ownership can lead to holders behaving differently from the floating counterpart of the population (Jamieson & Zwickel 1983, Arcese 1987, Zach & Stutchbury 1992, Rohner 1997, Stamps & Krishnan 1998. Additionally, social status can be reflected in many aspects of an individual's behaviour and ecology, including habitat use, interactions with conspecifics or willingness to take risks (Robitaille & Prescott 1983, Gese & Ruff 1998, Fero et al 2007, Herberholz et al 2007. Several behavioural traits have been described in detail for territorial individuals of many species (Hojesjo et al 2007, Afonso et al 2008, Kinahan & Pillay 2008, whereas behaviours of the less detectable and frequently overlooked floating contingent of animal populations remain largely unexplored (Penteriani & Delgado 2009a).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Social status influences microhabitat selection: breeder and floater Eagle OwlsBubo bubouse different post sites

Campioni

Delgado

Penteriani

2010

Ibis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social status can be reflected in many aspects of an individual’s behaviour and ecology, including habitat use and conspecific interactions. In territorial species where at least two social groups – breeding birds and non‐territorial floaters – are recognized, the diverse tasks associated with territorial ownership can lead territory holders to behave differently from the non‐territorial part of the population. Territory holders defend their breeding area and reproduce, whereas floating individuals are dispersing and lead a more transient life, during which they do not show any territorial behaviour even when settling in a more or less fixed area (known as the stop phase). As social interactions are based on visual and vocal cues, the use of specific sites for sending and/or receiving signals can be a crucial choice in an animal’s life. By analysing the post‐site selection of Eagle Owl Bubo bubo breeders and floaters during their nocturnal activity, we found that: (1) territory holders selected more visible and dominant posts than non‐territorial floaters; (2) the choice of posts made by floating individuals did not differ between the wandering and stop phases of dispersal; and (3) floating females intruded more frequently than floating males within a breeder’s home‐range. These findings highlight the fact that two social strategies are possible within the same species, depending on an individual’s social status and its related tasks. Breeders could take advantage of visible locations to declare their status as territory holders, whereas floaters could benefit from a more secretive life to wander unnoticed among occupied territories. This secretive life would help floaters to reduce the risks associated with conspecific aggression. Finally, the greater occurrence of floating females within breeders’ home‐ranges can be explained by the fact that female incursions in a breeder’s home‐range are less risky than male intrusions.

show abstract

Use of space and activity budgets in relation to age and social status in a captive herd of American bison, Bison bison

Cited by 12 publications

References 17 publications

GPS assessment of the use of exhibit space and resources by African elephants (Loxodonta africana)

GPS assessment of the use of exhibit space and resources by African elephants (Loxodonta africana)

Feeding Tactics of Low‐ranking Red Deer Stags at Supplementary Feeding Sites

Social status influences microhabitat selection: breeder and floater Eagle OwlsBubo bubouse different post sites

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About