The effects of zoo visitors on Quokka (Setonix brachyurus) avoidance behavior in a walk‐through exhibit
Open accessAbstract
The behavior of zoo animals may be influenced by visitors, with possible implications on animal welfare. We examined the effects of the presence of visitors on the presence and visibility of free-ranging quokkas (Setonix brachyurus) in preferred areas of a walk-through enclosure at Melbourne Zoo, Australia. In a controlled experiment, two visitor treatments were randomly imposed: (1) enclosure open to visitors as normal ("Open") and (2) enclosure closed to visitors ("Closed"). Treatments were imposed for 2-day periods, with five replicates of each treatment (10 2-day periods in total). Instantaneous point sampling of camera footage at 1-min intervals from 09:00 to 16:00 hr each day recorded the location and visibility of quokkas. Data were analyzed using a two-factor ANOVA (visitor treatment and study area), with 2-day summary values as the unit of analysis. While the presence of quokkas in the study areas was not affected by treatment, fewer (p < 0.05) quokkas were visible from the visitor paths and more (p < 0.05) quokkas were obscured from the visitor paths in the "Open" treatment than the "Closed" treatment. Number of quokkas differed between study areas across treatments (p < 0.01), but there was no interaction (p > 0.05) between visitor treatment and study area. The reduction in quokka visibility when visitors were present indicates that visitors were at least moderately fear provoking for the quokkas in this experiment, but further research is required to examine the effects of visitor presence and behaviors on the behavior and stress physiology of quokkas in walk-through enclosures, as there may be possible welfare implications.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Variation in penguin behaviour related to visitor contact may be due to species or individual animal differences, such as past experiences and coping style, enclosure design, or the nature of the visitor interactions.
“Also, this variation in penguin behaviour related to visitor contact may be due to species or individual animal differences, such as past experiences and coping style, enclosure design or the nature of the visitor interactions [17].”
From Effects of Regulating Visitor Viewing Proximity and the Intensity of Visitor Behaviour on Little Penguin (Eudyptula minor) Behaviour and Welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [17]
When visitors were blocked from a quokka exhibit, more quokkas were visible from the visitor pathways.
“and when visitors were blocked from a quokka exhibit, more quokkas were visible from the visitor pathways [76].”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [76]
The presence of visitors was associated with fewer animals being visible in a group of quokkas.
“The presence of visitors was associated with fewer animals being visible in a group of quokkas [76]”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [76]
Only a handful of studies exist that have studied welfare outcomes for animals in free range enclosures.
“Currently, only a handful of studies exist that have studied welfare outcomes for animals in these settings [76,86].”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [76]
Both studies on free range enclosures found behavioural differences in response to different visitor conditions, with increasing visitor numbers resulting in increased time spent vigilant towards visitors in red kangaroos and Kangaroo Island kangaroos, and the presence of visitors resulting in fewer quokkas visible in their enclosure.
“Both these studies found behavioural differences in response to different visitor conditions, with increasing visitor numbers, resulting in increased time spent vigilant towards visitors in red kangaroos and Kangaroo Island kangaroos [86], and the presence of visitors resulted in fewer quokkas visible in their enclosure [76].”
From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [76]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Animal–visitor interactions in the modern zoo: Conflicts and interventions
Fernandez, E. J., Tamborski, M. A., Pickens, S. R., & Timberlake, W. (2009) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2009.06.002 · Cited by 311 · see citing works
New directions for zoo animal welfare science
Whitham, J. C., & Wielebnowski, N. (2013) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2013.02.004 · Cited by 273 · 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
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
Bloomfield, R. C., Gillespie, G. R., Kerswell, K. J., Butler, K. L., & Hemsworth, P. H. (2015) · Zoo Biology · doi:10.1002/zoo.21207 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Self-citationGroup differences in captive gorillas’ reaction to large crowds
Kuhar, C. W. (2008) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2007.04.011 · Cited by 83 · 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
Effects of visual contact with zoo visitors on Black-capped capuchin welfare
Sherwen, S. L., Harvey, T. J., Magrath, M. J. L., Butler, K. L., Fanson, K. V., & Hemsworth, P. H. (2015) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2015.03.004 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
Self-citationHosey, G., & Melfi, V. (2015) · Zoo Biology · doi:10.1002/zoo.21182 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 26
- Appleby, M. (1997). Life in a variable world: Behavior, welfare and environmental design. Applied Animal Behavior Science, 54(1), 1-19.
- Balcombe, J., Barnard, N. and Sandusky, C. (2004). Laboratory routines cause animal stress. Contemporary topics in Laboratory Animal Science, 43(6), 42-51.
- Bashaw, M., Bloomsmith, M., Marr, M. & Maple, T. (2003). To hunt or not to hunt? A feeding enrichment experiment with captive large felids. Zoo biology, 22(2), 189-198.
- Bloomfield, R.C., Gillespie, G.R., Kerswell, K.J., Butler, K.L. & Hemsworth, P.H. (2015). Effect of partial covering of the visitor viewing area window on positioning and orientation of zoo orangutans: a preference test. Zoo Biology. (In press)
- Bonney, K. R., & Wynne, C. D. L. (2004). Studies of learning and problem solving in two species of Australian marsupials. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 28(6), 583-594.
- Carlstead, K. (2009). A comparative approach to the study of keeper-animal relationships in the zoo. Zoo biology, 28(6), 589-608.
- Clayton, S., Fraser, J., & Saunders, C.D. (2008). Zoo experiences: conversations, connections, and concern for animals. Zoo Biology, 28, 377-397.
- Cochran, W.G. & Cox, G.M. (1957). Experimental Designs. pp.56-57. Wiley: New York.
- Davey, G. (2007). Visitors' Effects on the Welfare of Animals in the Zoo: A Review. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 10(2), 169-183.
- De Tores, P. J., Hayward, M. W., Dillon, M. J., & Brazell, R. I. (2007). Review of the distribution, causes for the decline and recommendations for management of the quokka, A u t h o r M a n u s c r i p u a n u s c r i p t Setonix brachyurus (Macropodidae: Marsupialia), an endemic macropodid marsupial from south-west Western Australia. Conservation Science Western Australia, 6(1), 13-73.
- Forkman, B., Boissy, A., Meunier-Salaun, M.-C., Canali, E., & Jones, R.B. (2007). A critical review of fear tests used on cattle, pigs, sheep, poultry and horses. Physiology & Behavior, 92, 340-374.
- Goulart, V., Azevedo, P., van de Schepop, J., Teixeira, C., Barçante, L., Azevedo, C. & Young, R. (2009). Gaps in the Study of Zoo and Wild Animal Welfare. Zoo biology, 28(6), 561-573.
- Gray, J. A. (1987). The Psychology of Fear and Stress, 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.
- Hemsworth, P.H., & Coleman, G.J. (2011). Human-Livestock Interactions: The Stockperson and the Productivity and Welfare of Farmed Animals, 2nd Edition. CAB International: Oxon, UK.
- Hosey, G. (2005). How does the zoo environment affect the behavior of captive primates? Applied Animal Behavior Science, 90(2), 107-129.
- Jones, H., McGregor, P. K., Farmer, H. L. A., & Baker, K. R. (2016). The influence of visitor behavior on captive Crowned Lemurs (Eulemur coronatus) and implications for welfare. Zoo Biology, 35(3), 222-228.
- Manna, D., Rodeano, M., & Ferrero, E. A. (2007). A lemur mixed exhibit at Parco Zoo Punta Verde, Italy. International Zoo News, 54(8), 452-457.
- Maple, T. & Perdue, B. M. (2013). Zoo animal welfare. New York: Springer.
- Melfi, V. (2009). There are big gaps in our knowledge, and thus approach, to zoo animal welfare: a case for evidence-based zoo animal management. Zoo biology, 28(6), 574-588.
- Melfi, V. (2013). Is training zoo animals enriching? Applied Animal Behavior Science, 147(3-4), 299-305.
- Mellor, D. J. (2012). Animal emotions, behavior and the promotion of positive welfare states. New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 60, 1-8.
- Morgan, K. & Tromborg, C. (2007). Sources of stress in captivity. Applied Animal Behavior Science, 102(3-4), 262-302. Moss, A. & Esson, M. (2010). Visitor Interest in Zoo Animals and the Implications for Collection Planning and Zoo Education Programmes. Zoo biology, 29(6), 715-731.
- Packer, W. C. (1969). Observations on the Behavior of the Marsupial Setonix brachyurus (Quoy and Gaimard) in an Enclosure. Journal of Mammalogy, 50(1), 8-20.
- Sherwen, S.L., Hemsworth, P.H., Butler, K.L., Fanson, K.V., & Magrath, M.J.L. (2015b). Impacts of visitor number on kangaroos housed in free-range exhibits. Zoo Biology, 34(4), 287-296.
- Wells, D. (2005). A note on the influence of visitors on the behavior and welfare of zoo- housed gorillas. Applied Animal Behavior Science, 93(1-2), 13-17.
- Learmonth, M. J., Sherwen, S. & Hemsworth, P. H. (2018). The effects of zoo visitors on Quokka (<i>Setonix brachyurus</i>) avoidance behavior in a walk-through exhibit. ZOO BIOLOGY, 37 (4), pp.223-228. https://doi.org/10.1002/zoo.21433. Persistent Link: http://hdl.handle.net/11343/284165
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
Self-citationChiew, S. J., Butler, K. L., Sherwen, S. L., Coleman, G. J., Fanson, K. V., & Hemsworth, P. H. (2019) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani9060285 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Learmonth, M. J., Sherwen, S., & Hemsworth, P. H.
- Affiliations
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- Zoos Victoria (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Learmonth, Mark James
- Venue
- Zoo Biology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-07
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 223-228
- ISSN
- 0733-3188 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2361
- OpenAlex
- W2852293942
- Cited by
- 25
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 3.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Zoo Biology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Australian Research Council (LP140100373)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
- Keywords
- quokka, Setonix brachyurus, zoo visitors, animal welfare, zoo animal behavior
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
