Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T04:13:16.278Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The effectiveness of environmental enrichment on reducing stereotypic behaviour in two captive vicugna (Vicugna vicugna)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

M Parker*
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
D Goodwin
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
E Redhead
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
H Mitchell
Affiliation:
Marwell Preservation Trust, Colden Common, Winchester, Hampshire SO21 1JH, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: mop101@soton.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Environmental enrichment by increasing foraging behaviour and providing food item choice are widely practised and generally accepted as effective methods for reducing stereotypic behaviour in captive animals. In this study, the effectiveness of increasing foraging patch choice and food item choice on reducing motor stereotypy in two captive vicugna were examined. For the purposes of the study, first, browse was added to the vicugna's enclosure as an additional forage item and, second, the vicugna's normal feed was divided: half being provided in the indoor quarters and half in the outdoor yard. The results revealed that providing browse as an additional forage item increased the observed stereotypic behaviour; however, dividing the vicugna's feed, and therefore increasing forage patch choice, decreased stereotypy. This study was limited because of the small sample size and because the area in which the vicugna were performing stereotypic behaviour was partially visually obscured. However, this study has implications for animal welfare because it highlights the need to evaluate the suitability of foraging enrichment items, and suggests that more research into accommodating the adaptive foraging behaviour of this species in captivity may be necessary.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2006 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Appleby, MC 1997 Life in a variable world: behaviour, welfare and environmental design. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 54: 119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baer, JF 1998 A veterinary perspective of potential risk factors in environmental enrichment. In: Shepherdson, DJ, Mellen, JD and Hutchins, M (eds) Second Nature: Environmental Enrichment for Captive Animals pp 277301. Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Brown, JH 1981 Two decades of homage to Santa Rosalia: towards a general theory of biodiversity. American Zoologist 21: 877888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danzer, R and Mittleman, G 1993 Functional consequences of behavioural stereotypy. In: Lawrence, AB and Rushen, J (eds) Stereotypic Animal Behaviour: Fundamentals and Applications to Welfare pp 4164. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, D, Davidson, HPB and Harris, P 2002 Foraging enrichment for stabled horses: effects on behaviour and selection. Equine Veterinary Journal 34: 686691CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mason, GJ 1991 Stereotypies: a critical review. Animal Behaviour 41: 10151037Google Scholar
Moncorps, S, Bousses, P, Reale, D and Chapuis, J-L 1997 Diurnal time budget of the mouflon (Ovis musimon) on the Kerguelen archipelago: influence of food resources, age, and sex. Canadian Journal of Zoology 75: 18281834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nowak, RM 1991 Walker's Mammals of the World, 5th Edition. Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, USAGoogle Scholar
Wiepkema, PR 1983 On the significance of ethological criteria for the assessment of animal welfare. In: Schmidt, D (ed) Indicators Relevant to Farm Animal Welfare pp 7179. Martinus Nijhoff: The Hague, The NetherlandsCrossRefGoogle Scholar