Plastic animals in cages: behavioural flexibility and responses to captivity

By G. Mason, C. Burn, J. Dallaire, Jeanette Kroshko, H. M. Kinkaid, Jonathan M. Jeschke. 2013

134 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Billions of wild and semiwild animals live in captive conditions very different from their ancestral environments. Some of the potential challenges they face here, such as greater human proximity, constrained natural behaviours and altered climates, resemble those occurring during urbanization, translocation and other forms of human-induced rapid environmental change (HIREC) in the wild. These parallels between HIREC and captivity suggest that certain species could be in double jeopardy: struggling in both wild and captive environments. This raises new hypotheses for future research, including one tested in this paper: that a species' presence in captivity predicts its chances of establishment when translocated to novel natural habitats. Furthermore, understanding the mechanisms that predispose captive populations to thrive or fail can yield new insights into how animals respond to HIREC. For example, populations adjusting to captivity demonstrate rapid developmental effects. Within one generation, captive-reared animals may show beneficial phenotypic changes (e.g. smaller stress responses than F0s wild caught as adults), illustrating how adaptive developmental plasticity can help populations succeed. However, captive-reared animals also illustrate the risks of developing in evolutionarily new environments (being prone to reduced behavioural flexibility, and sometimes impaired reproduction), suggesting that disrupted ontogeny is one reason why HIREC can be harmful. Overall, analogies between captivity and HIREC are thus interesting and useful. However, captivity and HIREC do differ in some regards, captivity tending to be safer yet more monotonous; we therefore end by discussing how species-typical risk/protective factors, and the phenotypic changes induced in affected animals, may vary between the two.

Subfields: Ecology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Small Animals

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4e630b3cde2f36aeb0ef74042b961ec3cbd5f847

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. C. Burn
2. Andrew Sih
3. M. Zeder

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. C. Burn
2. Andrew Sih
3. Daniel T. Blumstein
4. A. Bell
5. J. Stamps
6. B. R. Smith
7. N. Dingemanse
8. Tomas Brodin

In Small Animals

1. L. Riley
2. P. Rose
3. Steven M. Nash
4. C. Burn
5. Andrew Sih

Citations in the corpus

• Understanding variation in behavioural responses to human-induced rapid environmental change: a conceptual overview (2013, background): “Perhaps the best developed example of using evolutionary history to understand animal behaviour in extreme environments involves the study of normal versus stereotypical behaviour in captive animals (Mason et al. 2013).”
• Bestial boredom: a biological perspective on animal boredom and suggestions for its scientific investigation (2017, background): “Taking a different approach, monotony causes many species to seek novelty, even novel stimuli they would normally avoid (reviewed in Berlyne, 1960; Kirkden, 2000; Mason et al., 2013; Stevenson, 1983).”
• To pace or not to pace? A review of what abnormal repetitive behavior tells us about zoo animal management (2017, background): “Although some dietary generalist species typically adapt well to captivity, this is widely true across the primate order (Mason et al., 2013).”