The influence of the zoo environment on social behavior of groups of cotton‐topped tamarins, Saguinus oedipus oedipus
Abstract
The cotton‐topped, tamarin, Saguinus oedipus oedipus, is a species that is severely threatened in the wild. Thus, if its survival is to be ensured, a self‐sustaining captive population needs to be established. However, the breeding results of cotton‐topped tamarins in zoos are far from optimal; infant mortality is high and the fertility of captive‐born specimens is critically low. The roots of both these problems may be sought in the social behavior of this species in zoos. In order to evaluate the influence of the zoo environment on behavior, a comparison is made between the behavior of a group of tamarins housed in a typical zoo environment and groups of successfully breeding cotton‐topped tamarins housed off public display in the zoo. Significant differences were found between the behavior of the animals in the two different situations. Behavioral differences were correlated with the number of visitors in the zoo environment and with the design of the cage.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Higher rates of aggression associated with visitor presence were noted in baboons, Indian gaur and cotton-top tamarins.
“Higher rates of aggression associated with visitor presence were noted in baboons [89], Indian gaur [90] and cotton-top tamarins [91]”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [91]
Glatston et al (1984) found that on-show cotton-topped tamarins showed significantly less social behaviour than off-show groups.
“They found that the animals on display to the public showed significantly less social behaviour than those off display”
From Zoo animals and their human audiences: what is the visitor effect? (2000) · cites this paper as Glatston et al (1984)
In Glatston et al (1984), tamarin groups allocated to on-show or off-show conditions differed significantly in behaviour, contrary to the visitor attraction hypothesis.
“The visitor attraction hypothesis predicts that the behaviours of the on-show and off-show groups would not differ significantly, which was clearly not the case.”
From Zoo animals and their human audiences: what is the visitor effect? (2000) · cites this paper as Glatston et al 1984
Cotton-topped tamarins in small, glass-fronted cages showed more agonistic and less amicable behaviours than those in large, mesh cages.
“For example, cotton-topped tamarins in small, glass-fronted cages showed more agonistic and less amicable behaviours than those in large, mesh cages (Glatston et aI1984).”
From Zoo animals and their human audiences: what is the visitor effect? (2000) · cites this paper as Glatston et al 1984
Visitor presence is probably stressful to captive primates.
“Some of the earliest studies (eg Glatston et al [1984]; Chamove et al [1988]) interpreted visitor presence as stressful to captive primates, and this is probably now generally felt to be true.”
From Zoo animals and their human audiences: what is the visitor effect? (2000) · cites this paper as Glatston et al 1984
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sources of stress in captivity
Morgan, K. N., & Tromborg, C. T. (2007) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2006.05.032 · Cited by 1,085 · see citing works
How does the zoo environment affect the behaviour of captive primates?
Hosey, G. R. (2005) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2004.08.015 · Cited by 362 · see citing works
Wielebnowski, N. C., Fletchall, N., Carlstead, K., Busso, J. M., & Brown, J. L. (2002) · Zoo Biology · doi:10.1002/zoo.10005 · Cited by 344 · see citing works
The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare
Sherwen, S. L., & Hemsworth, P. H. (2019) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani9060366 · Cited by 267 · see citing works
“Higher rates of aggression associated with visitor presence were noted in baboons [89], Indian gaur [90] and cotton-top tamarins [91] and greater visitor numbers were associated with higher rates of aggression in mangabeys [73], mandrills [75] and gorillas [92].”
BackgroundZoo animals and their human audiences: what is the visitor effect?
Hosey, G. R. (2000) · Animal Welfare · doi:10.1017/s0962728600022946 · Cited by 249 · see citing works
A preliminary model of human-animal relationships in the zoo
Hosey, G. (2008) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2007.04.013 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
A note on the influence of visitors on the behaviour and welfare of zoo-housed gorillas
Wells, D. L. (2005) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2005.06.019 · Cited by 157 · see citing works
Mallapur, A., Sinha, A., & Waran, N. (2005) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2005.02.012 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Evidence that zoo visitors influence HPA activity in spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyii rufiventris)
Davis, N., Schaffner, C. M., & Smith, T. E. (2005) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2004.08.020 · Cited by 128 · see citing works
Visitor effects on anxiety in two captive groups of western lowland gorillas
Carder, G., & Semple, S. (2008) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2008.06.001 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Blaney, E., & Wells, D. (2004) · Animal Welfare · doi:10.1017/s0962728600026841 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Visitor effects on zoo orangutans in two novel, naturalistic enclosures
Choo, Y., Todd, P. A., & Li, D. (2011) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2011.05.007 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
A Case Study: The Effect of Visitors on Two Captive Pumas With Respect to the Time of the Day
Maia, C. M., Volpato, G. L., & Santos, E. F. (2012) · Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science · doi:10.1080/10888705.2012.683758 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
- Authors
- Glatston, A. R., Geilvoet‐Soeteman, E., Hora‐Pecek, E., & Van Hooff, J. A. R. A. M.
- Affiliations
- Utrecht University (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Glatston, Angela R.
- Venue
- Zoo Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1984-01
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 241-253
- ISSN
- 0733-3188 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2361
- OpenAlex
- W2008955051
- Cited by
- 91
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 1.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Zoo Biology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
- Keywords
- cotton-top tamarin, social behavior, captive breeding, infant mortality, fertility, tourism impacts, cage design, primate conservation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
