Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:23:46.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of aviary and box sizes on body mass and behaviour of domesticated budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

SG Gebhardt-Henrich  and
A Steiger
SG Gebhardt-Henrich*
Affiliation:
Division of Animal Housing and Welfare, Vetsuisse Faculty of the University of Bern, PO Box, CH-3001 Bern, Switzerland
A Steiger
Affiliation:
Division of Animal Housing and Welfare, Vetsuisse Faculty of the University of Bern, PO Box, CH-3001 Bern, Switzerland
*
* Contact for correspondence and request for reprints: [email protected]
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.

Forty-eight budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus) were pairwise housed in small (80 × 40 × 50 cm) and large (160 × 40 × 50 cm) (length × breadth × height) boxes, as well as in 2.0 × 1.0 × 2.0 m aviaries. All boxes and aviaries had two or three (aviaries) perches and food was offered on the bottom. The body masses of female budgerigars increased significantly when they were housed in boxes instead of aviaries. The size of the box did not influence body mass. The frequency of flying was adjusted to the size of the box as both males and females flew approximately twice as often from perch to perch in a small box than in a large box of double length. Flying behaviour differed significantly between large and small boxes and aviaries. The ratio of invariantly flying from perch to perch to all flying events increased from aviaries < large boxes < small boxes. About 75% of all flying events in small boxes consisted of flying from perch to perch. Females in boxes spent more time on the bottom where the food was placed than females in aviaries. Both the significant body mass gain in female budgerigars, as well as the invariant, stereotypic flying movements, indicated reduced welfare in budgerigars housed in boxes, compared with those in aviaries. Providing a large box did not prevent body mass gain, but did increase the variation in flying patterns. Under long-term housing conditions, boxes could lead to at least two serious welfare problems; obesity and stereotypic behaviour, and should be avoided for budgerigars. Therefore, aviary housing should be chosen wherever possible.

Keywords

animal welfarebehaviourbudgerigarhousingobesitystereotypy
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , November 2006 , pp. 353 - 358
Copyright
© 2006 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Bairlein, F 2002 How to get fat: nutritional mechanisms of seasonal fat accumulation in migratory songbirds. Naturwissenschaften 89: 1–10CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Banz, K 1982 Zur Tiergerechtigkeit der Käfighaltung von Wellensittichen. PhD Thesis, University of Berne, Switzerland [Title translation: Welfare of budgerigars kept in cages.]Google Scholar
Brockway, BF 1963 Ethological studies of the budgerigar (Melopsittacus undulatus): non-reproductive behavior. Behaviour 22: 193–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brockway, BF 1964 Ethological studies of the Budgerigar: reproductive behavior. Behaviour 23: 295–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz-Uriarte, R 2001 The analysis of cross-over trials in animal behavior experiments: review and guide to the statistical literature. http://bioinfo.cnio.es/~rdiaz/cross-over.pdf (accessed 16 Jan 2006)Google Scholar
Díaz-Uriarte, R 2002 Incorrect analysis of crossover trials in animal behaviour research. Animal Behaviour 63: 815–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garner, JP, Mason, GJ and Smith, R 2003 Stereotypic route-tracing in experimentally caged songbirds correlates with general behavioural disinhibition. Animal Behaviour 66: 711–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gebhardt-Henrich, SG and Steiger, A 2005 Clutch-size and reproductive behaviour in different types of budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). Bird Behavior 17: 19–28Google Scholar
Isenbügel, E 1999 Vögel als Heimtiere. Schweizer Tierschutz STS: Basel, Switzerland [Title translation: Birds as pets.]Google Scholar
Keller, P, Gebhardt-Henrich, SG and Steiger, A 2005 How much space requires a budgerigar? Housing in boxes and aviaries of different sizes. In: Einschütz, K (ed) 36th Internationale Arbeitstagung Angewandte Ethologie pp 92–98. KTBL: Freiburg, Germany [Meeting translation: International Meeting of Applied Ethology.]Google Scholar
Mason, GJ 1991a Stereotypies and suffering. Behavioural Processes 25: 103–115CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mason, GJ 1991b Stereotypies: a critical review. Animal Behaviour. 41: 1015–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicol, CJ and Pope, SJ 1993 A comparison of the behaviour of solitary and group-housed budgerigars. Animal Welfare 2: 269–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schnegg, A, Gebhardt-Henrich, SG, Keller, P, Visser, GH and Steiger, A 2006 Feeding behaviour and daily energy expenditure of domesticated budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). In: Mendl M, Bradshaw JWS, Burman OHP, Butterworth A, Harris MJ, Held SDE, Jones SM, Littin KE, Main DCJ, Nicol CJ, Parker RMA, Paul ES, Richards G, Sherwin CM, Statham PTE, Toscano MJ, Warriss PD (eds) Proceedings of the 40th International Congress of the ISAE pp 84. ISAE Scientific Committee: Cranfield University Press, Beds, UKGoogle Scholar
Wedel, A 1999 Ziervögel Erkrankungen, Haltung, Fütterung. Parey: Berlin, Germany [Title translation: Ornamental Birds: Diseases, Husbandry, Feeding.]Google Scholar
Wyndham, E 1980a Diurnal cycle, behaviour and social organisation of the budgerigar Melopsittacus undulatus. Emu 80: 25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyndham, E 1980b Environment and food of the budgerigar Melopsittacus undulatus. Australian Journal of Ecology 5: 47–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyndham, E 1980c Total body lipids of the budgerigar, Melopsittacus undulatus (Psittaciformes: Platycercidae) in inland mid-eastern Australia. Australian Journal of Zoology 28: 239–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyndham, E 1983 Movements and breeding seasons of the budgerigar. Emu 82: 276–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar