Cited by 151Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesPrimate Behavior and EcologyWildlife Ecology and Conservation

Effects of browse, human visitors and noise on the behaviour of captive orang-utans

Open access
Birke, L·2002·Animal Welfare

Abstract

This paper reports a study of the behaviour of captive orang utans(Pongo pygmaeus)at Chester Zoo, UK. The study addressed two questions: what is the effect of the presence of fresh browse on the animals’ behaviour; and what is the effect of the presence of visitors? The first part of the study analysed the animals’ time budgets. The results indicated that the provision of fresh browse led to a decrease in the time spent sitting inactive by both adults and infants; it also led to an increase in the time spent by adults foraging for small food items in the woodchip floor-covering beneath the branches of browse. The time-budget data also showed differences in the animals’ behaviour between periods when large groups of visitors arrived and other periods on the same days when visitors were fewer. Specifically, adults used available paper sacks to cover their heads more during periods of high visitor density, and infants held onto adults more. The second part of the study comprised an experiment in which visitor behaviour was manipulated. Visitor groups of similar sizes were asked to behave either quietly or noisily (making vocal noise), in order to determine whether the observed effects of visitors were attributable to group size or to the fact that larger groups tend to be noisier. The experiment indicated that the animals responded particularly to noise: when confronted with noisy groups, all animals looked more at the visitors, and infants approached and held onto adults more. The findings suggest that zoo managers may need to take visitor behaviour into account in order to promote orang utan welfare.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0962728600028141

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Increasing visitor numbers were associated with less time visible to the public in orangutans, jaguars and siamangs.

    “increasing visitor numbers were associated with less time visible to the public in a range of species, including orangutans [77], jaguars [84] and siamangs [85].”

    From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [77]

    In “Effects of visitors on behaviour” (Table 3; page unavailable), adult orangutans used sacks more often during high- than low-visitor-density periods. The discussion says they sometimes put sacks over their heads when visitors arrived, but the paper does not report that they spent less time visible to the public. This citation is attached to orangutans; jaguars and siamangs have separate citations. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A male orangutan in Birke's study displayed increased aggressive behaviours in response to human stares.

    “a male orangutan in Birke’s [77] study also displayed increased aggressive behaviours in response to human stares.”

    From The visitor effect on zoo animals: implications and opportunities for zoo animal welfare (2019) · cites this paper as [77]

    In “Effects of visitors on behaviour,” Birke reports that an adult male stared and displayed in response to prolonged staring by humans. The general discussion describes Sibu banging and calling on several such occasions, but says the behaviour was too infrequent to quantify. The paper supports a response to human stares, not a measured increase in aggressive behaviour. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Chamove A S 1989 Environmental enrichment: a review. Animal Technology 40: 155-178
  2. Martin P and Bateson P 1993 Measuring Behaviour: An Introductory Guide, Second Edition. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK
  3. Mather L 1999 Response of captive orang utans to human audiences. MPhi1 thesis, University of Manchester (Bolton Institute), UK
  4. Oswald M and Kuyk K 1977 The behavior of three lorisoid primate species before and after the public opening of the nocturnal house. In: Crockett C and Hutchins M (eds) Applied Behavioral Science pp 81- 100. Pika Press: Seattle, USA

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Birke, L.
Affiliations
Chester Zoo (GB)
Corresponding author
Birke, L
Venue
Animal Welfare
Published
2002-05
Volume
11
Issue
2
Pages
189-202
ISSN
  • 0962-7286 (ISSN-L)
  • 2054-1538
OpenAlex
W3002451978
Cited by
151
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
5.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Animal Welfare (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Manchester Metropolitan University
  • Chester Zoo
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Keywords
orangutans, Bornean orangutan, captive primates, zoo animal welfare, time budget, visitor behavior, group size, infant attachment

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