Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:24:22.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Use of Artificial Turf as a Foraging Substrate for Individually Housed Rhesus Monkeys (Macaca Mulatta)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

K Bayne ,
S Dexter ,
H Mainzer ,
C McCully ,
G Campbell  and
F Yamada
K Bayne
Affiliation:
Office of Animal Care and Use, Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, Building 14D, Room 313, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA
S Dexter
Affiliation:
Office of Animal Care and Use, Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, Building 14D, Room 313, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA
H Mainzer
Affiliation:
Office of Animal Care and Use, Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, Building 14D, Room 313, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA
C McCully
Affiliation:
Pediatric Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health
G Campbell
Affiliation:
Division of Computa: Research and Technology, National Institutes of Health
F Yamada
Affiliation:
Division of Computa: Research and Technology, National Institutes of Health
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.

The provisioning of foraging opportunities to primates has been shown to be an effective means of enriching the laboratory environment. In this study artificial turf was used as the substrate for a particulate food given to the subjects as an environmental enrichment technique. Eight rhesus monkeys exhibited a significant reduction in behavioural pathology when allowed to extend the amount of time they spent in consummatory activities. An increasing trend in time spent foraging with a concomitant decline in aberrant behaviour over a period of six months was particularly noteworthy. No significant difference in preference for particulate monkey chow or more flavourful particulate food treats was expressed by the primates.

Keywords

animal welfareenvironmental enrichmentpsychological well-being
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , February 1992 , pp. 39 - 53
Copyright
© 1992 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Anderson, J R, Chamove, A S 1984 Allowing captive primates to forage, pp 253-256. In Standards in Laboratory Animal Management. Universities Federation for Animal Welfare: Potters BarGoogle Scholar
Bayne, K, Mainzer, H, Dexter, S, Campbell, G, Yamada, F, Suomi, S 1991 The reduction of abnormal behaviors in individually housed rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) with a foraging/grooming board. American Journal of Primatology 23(1): 23–33CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloom, K R, Cook, M 1989 Environmental enrichment: behavioral responses of rhesus to puzzle feeders. Lab Animal 18(5): 23–31Google Scholar
Bloomsmith, M, Maple, T 1988 Enrichment strategies and techniques currently in use. Workshop on Chimpanzee Behavior. National Institutes of Health: Bethesda MD (USA)Google Scholar
Boccia, M L 1989 Preliminary report on the use of a natural foraging task to reduce aggression and stereotypies in socially housed pigtail macaques. Laboratory Primate Newsletter 28: 3–4Google Scholar
Environmental Protection Agency 1989 Good Laboratory Practice Standards. Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 792Google Scholar
Erwin, J, Deni, R 1979 Strangers in a strange land; abnormal behaviors or abnormal environments? In Erwin J, Maple T, Mitchell G (eds) Captivity and Behavior, pp 128. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co: New YoikGoogle Scholar
Food and Drug Administration 1978 Good Laboratory Practice Regulations. Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations Part 58Google Scholar
Gust, D A, Swenson, K B, Smith, M B, Sikes, J 1988 An apparatus and procedure for studying the choice component of foraging in a captive group of chimpanzees. Primates 29(1): 139–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herbers, J M 1981 Time resources and laziness in animals. Oecologia 49(2): 252–262CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hollander, M, Wolfe, D A 1972 Nonparametric Statistical Methods. John Wiley and Sons: New YorkGoogle Scholar
Line, S W 1987 Environmental enrichment for laboratory primates. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 190: 854–859Google ScholarPubMed
Line, S W, Houghton, P 1987 Influence of an environmental enrichment device on general behavior and appetite in rhesus macaques. Laboratory Animal Science 37: 508Google Scholar
Maki, S, Alford, P, Bloomsmith, M, Franklin, J 1989 A food puzzle device simulating termite-fishing for captive chimpanzees (Pan trogolodytes). American Journal of Primatology Supplement 1: 71–78Google Scholar
Malik, I, South wick, C H 1988 Feeding behavior and activity patterns of rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) at Tughlaqabad, India. In Fa, J E, Southwick, C H (eds) Ecology and Behavior of Food-Enhanced Primate Groups, pp 95–111. Alan R Liss: New YorkGoogle Scholar
Marriott, B M 1988 Time budgets of rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) in a forest habitat in Nepal and on Cayo Santiago. In Fa, J E, Southwick, C H (eds) Ecology and Behavior of Food-Enhanced Primate Groups, pp 125–149. Alan R Liss: New YorkGoogle Scholar
McGrew, W C, Brennan, J A, Russell, J 1986 An artificial ‘gum-tree’ for marmosets (Callithrix j. jacchus). Zoo Biology 5: 45–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milton, K 1980 The Foraging Strategies of Howler Monkeys: A Study in Primate Economics. Columbia University Press: New YorkGoogle Scholar
National Research Council 1978 Committee on Animal Nutrition, Panel on Nonhuman Primate Nutrition. Board on Agriculture and Renewable Resources, Nutrient Requirements of Nonhuman Primates. Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals. Vol 14. National Academy of Sciences Press: Washington D CGoogle Scholar
NIH 1985 Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. National Institutes of Health: Bethesda, MD, (USA)Google Scholar
Novak, M, Suomi, S 1988 Psychological well-being of primates in captivity. American Psychologist 43: 765–773Google ScholarPubMed
O’Neill, P 1988 Developing effective social and environment enrichment strategies for macaques in captive groups. Lab Animal 17: 23–36Google Scholar
O’Neill, P, Price, C, Suomi, S 1989 Daily patterns in activity levels relative to age and sex in a free-ranging group of rhesus monkeys. American Association of Laboratory Animal Scientists Meeting. Little Rock, ArkansasGoogle Scholar
Reinhardt, V, Houser, W D, Cowley, D, Champo ux, M 1987a Preliminary comments on environmental enrichment with branches for individually caged rhesus monkeys. Laboratory Primate Newsletter 26(1): 1–3Google Scholar
Reinhardt, V, Houser, W D, Eisele, S G, C hampo ux, M 1987b Social enrichment of the environment with infants for singly caged adult rhesus monkeys. Zoo Biology 6: 365–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, E M, Dold, G M, Mcintosh, J S 1989 A perch for primate squeeze cages. Laboratory Animal Science 39: 166–167Google Scholar
Strier, K B 1987 Activity budgets of woolly spider monkeys, or muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoïdes). American Journal of Primatology 13: 385–395CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolff, A V 1989 Polyvinyl chloride piping as perch material for squirrel monkeys. Laboratory Primate Newsletter 22(1): 7Google Scholar