Cited by 40Wildlife Ecology and ConservationAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesAnimal Behavior and Reproduction

Factors influencing breeding success, ovarian cyclicity, and cub survival in zoo-managed tigers (Panthera tigris)

Saunders, Sarah P., Harris, Tara, Traylor-Holzer, Kathy, Beck, Karen Goodrowe·2014·Animal Reproduction Science

Abstract

Understanding factors that influence reproduction and offspring survival in zoo populations is critical for management of threatened and endangered species. Examination of long-term data (1989-2011) compiled from the Association of Zoos and Aquarium's zoo-managed tiger breeding program provides the basis for a more thorough understanding of reproduction and scientifically based decisions for effective population management in this endangered felid. Biological and management-related factors that could influence tiger breeding success and cub survival were evaluated using logistic mixed models. Breeding success improved with female age until approximately age five, then declined thereafter. Experienced female breeders had greater breeding success than inexperienced females. Litter size was most predictive of cub survival, with average-sized litters (3-4 cubs) experiencing the highest proportional survival. Management-related factors, such as whether the breeding institution had a recent tiger litter and whether both animals were already located at the same institution, also influenced breeding success and cub survival. These results highlight the importance of institutional husbandry experience and the need to retain knowledge through staff turnovers to achieve optimal reproductive success. Using fecal estrogen data, frequency of ovarian cyclicity and mean cycle length did not differ by female age or parity; thus, lack of cyclicity and/or increased cycle duration are not likely explanations for declining breeding success with age. These results provide valuable reproductive information that should improve scientific management of zoo-based tiger populations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2013.11.006

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Saunders, S. P., Harris, T., Traylor-Holzer, K., & Beck, K. G.
Affiliations
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Minnesota Zoo (US)
Corresponding author
Saunders, Sarah P.
Venue
Animal Reproduction Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-01
Volume
144
Issue
1-2
Pages
38-47
ISSN
0378-4320 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2001712807
Cited by
40
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Animal Reproduction Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Riverbanks Zoo and Garden
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • 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
tiger, captive breeding, breeding success, cub survival, ovarian cyclicity, fecal estrogen, maternal age, litter size, parity, endangered species management
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Animals, Animals, Zoo, Breeding, Conservation of Natural Resources, Feces, Female, Litter Size, Male, Menstrual Cycle, Pregnancy, Reproduction, Survival, Logistic Models, Gonadal Hormones, Tigers

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