CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 45Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesPrimate Behavior and EcologyWildlife Ecology and Conservation

Housing and social environments of African (Loxodonta africana) and Asian (Elephas maximus) elephants in North American zoos

Open access
Meehan, Cheryl L., Hogan, Jennifer N., Bonaparte-Saller, Mary K., Mench, Joy A.·2016·PLOS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0146703PMC PMC4944928
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We evaluated 255 African (Loxodonta africana) and Asian (Elephas maximus) elephants living in 68 North American zoos over one year to quantify housing and social variables. All parameters were quantified for the both the day and the night and comparisons were made across these time periods as well as by species and sex. To assess housing, we evaluated not only total exhibit size, but also individual animals' experiences based on the time they spent in the unique environments into which the exhibits were subdivided. Variables developed to assess housing included measurements of area as a function of time (Total Space Experience), environment type (Indoor, Outdoor, In/Out Choice) and time spent on hard and soft flooring. Over the year, Total Space Experience values ranged from 1,273 square feet to 169,692 square feet, with Day values significantly greater than Night values (p<0.001). Elephants spent an average of 55.1% of their time outdoors, 28.9% indoors, and 16% in areas with a choice between being in or out. Time spent on hard flooring substrate ranged from 0% to 66.7%, with Night values significantly greater than Day (p<0.001). Social factors included number of animals functionally housed together (Social Experience) and social group characteristics such as time spent with juveniles and in mixed-sex groups. Overall Social Experience scores ranged from 1 to 11.2 and were significantly greater during the Day than at Night (p<0.001). There were few significant social or housing differences between African (N = 138) and Asian (N = 117) species or between males (N = 54) and females (N = 201). The most notable exception was Total Space Experience, with African and male elephants having larger Total Space Experience than Asian and female elephants, respectively (P-value<0.05). The housing and social variables evaluated herein have been used in a series of subsequent epidemiological analyses relating to various elephant welfare outcomes.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0146703

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Calculated Total Space Experience values for elephants in North American zoos ranged from 117 to 15,742 m2, with mean Overall Total Space Experience of 3,642 m2 for African elephants and 1,781 m2 for Asian elephants.

    “Calculated Total Space Experience (measurements of area as a function of time) values ranged from 117 to 15,742 m 2 (mean Overall Total Space Experience for African elephants was 3,642 and 1,781 m 2 for Asian elephants).”

    From Continuing challenges of elephant captivity: the captive environment, health issues, and welfare implications (2024) · cites this paper as Meehan et al., 2016a

    The Methods (Variable Creation; page unavailable) define Space Experience as area weighted by time spent in each environment. The Results (Table 3; page unavailable) give an overall range of 1,273.4–169,691.8 ft², approximately 118–15,765 m², and the Discussion gives African and Asian means of 39,338.8 and 19,264.2 ft², approximately 3,655 and 1,790 m². The cited sentence captures the measure and species difference, but its stated range and both converted means do not match those values. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • African elephants spend more time in unique environments and experience greater total space and more outdoor space than Asian elephants.

    “African elephants spend more time in unique environments, and experience greater total space and more outdoor space than Asian elephants”

    From Continuing challenges of elephant captivity: the captive environment, health issues, and welfare implications (2024) · cites this paper as Meehan et al., 2016a

    The Results report greater Total Space Experience and Overall Outdoor Space Experience for African than Asian elephants. They also report that African elephants spent time in more unique environments, but this measures the number of distinct environments, not a longer time spent in them (Materials and Methods, Variable Creation). (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In North America, only 20% of the 226 adult elephants in U.S. zoos studied by Meehan et al. (2016a) had the opportunity to interact with young elephants.

    “only 20% of the 226 adult elephants in U.S. zoos studied by Meehan et al. (2016a) had the opportunity to interact with young elephants”

    From Continuing challenges of elephant captivity: the captive environment, health issues, and welfare implications (2024) · cites this paper as Meehan et al., 2016a

    The Discussion reports that 45 of 226 adult elephants—20%—had the opportunity to spend time with juveniles. However, the paper describes the study population as elephants in North American zoos, not specifically U.S. zoos, so the geographic qualifier is not established by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. [1]Butterworth A, Mench JA, Wielebnowski N. Practical strategies to assess (and improve) welfare In: Appleby MC, Mench JA, Olsson IAS, Hughes BO, editors. Animal Welfare. 2nd ed Cambridge: CABI Publishing; 2011 pp. 200– 214.
  2. [2]DeVries TJ, von Keyserlingk MAG, Weary DM. Effect of feeding space on the inter-cow distance, aggression, and feeding behaviour of free-stall housed lactating dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2004; 87: 1432– 143. 15290991
  3. [3]Li C, Jiang Z, Tang S, Zeng Y. Influence of enclosure size and animal density on fecal cortisol concentration and aggression in Père David's deer stags. Gen Comp Endocrinol. 2007; 151: 202– 209. 17324429
  4. [4]Brummer SP, Gese EM, Shivik JA. The effect of enclosure type on the behavior and heart rate of captive coyotes. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2010; 125: 171– 180.
  5. [5]Valuska AJ, Mench JA. Size does matter: The effect of enclosure size on aggression and affiliation between female New Zealand white rabbits during mixing. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2013; 149: 72– 76.
  6. [6]Shepherdson D, Lewis KD, Carlstead K, Bauman J, Perrin N. Individual and environmental factors associated with stereotypic behavior and fecal glucocorticoid metabolite levels in zoo housed polar bears. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2013; 147: 268– 277.
  7. [7]Garner JP, Kiess AS, Mench JA, Newberry RC, Hester PY. The effect of cage and house design on egg production and egg weight of White Leghorn hens: An epidemiological study. Poult Sci. 2012; 9: 1522– 1535. 22700495
  8. [8]Hockenhull J, Creighton E. Management practices associated with owner-reported stable-related and handling behaviour problems in UK leisure horses. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2014; 155: 49– 55.
  9. [10]Holdgate MR, Meehan CL, Hogan JN, Miller LJ, Soltis J. Walking behavior of zoo elephants: associations between GPS-measured daily walking distances and environmental factors, social factors and welfare indicators. PLoS ONE 2016. doi: pone.0150331. PMC4944962 27414411
  10. [11]Holdgate MR, Meehan CL, Hogan JN, Miller L, Rushen J, de Passillé AM, et al Recumbence behavior in zoo elephants: determination of patterns and frequency of recumbent rest and associated environmental and social factors. PLoS ONE 2016. doi: pone.0153301. PMC4945027 27414809
  11. [15]Fernando P, Lande R. Molecular genetic and behavioral analysis of social organization in the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2000; 48: 84– 91.
  12. [16]Archie EA, Morrison TA, Fole CAH, Moss CJ, Alberts SC. Dominance rank relationships among wild female African elephants, Loxodonta africana. Anim Behav. 2006a; 71: 117– 127.
  13. [17]Thomas B, Holland JD, Minot EO. Elephant (Loxodonta africana) Home Ranges in Sabi Sand Reserve and Kruger National Park: A Five-Year Satellite Tracking Study. PLoS ONE. 2008; 3(12): e3902 10.1371/journal.pone.0003902 19065264 PMC2587706 · DOI
  14. [18]de Silva S, Rangeewa A, Kryazhimskiy S. The dynamics of social networks among female Asian elephants. BMC Ecology. 2011; 11: 17 10.1186/1472-6785-11-17 21794147 PMC3199741 · DOI · Paper page
  15. [19]Olson IAS, Westlund K. More than numbers matter: the effect of social factors on behaviour and welfare of laboratory rodents and non-human primates. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2007; 103: 229– 254.
  16. [20]Price EE, Stoinski TS. Group size: determinants in the wild and implications for the captive housing of wild mammals in zoos. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2007; 103: 255– 264.
  17. [21]Galindo F, Newberry RC, Mendl M. Social conditions In: Appleby MC, Mench JA, Olsson IAS, Hughes BO, editors. Animal Welfare. 2nd ed Cambridge: CABI Publishing; 2011 pp. 228– 24.
  18. [22]Rault JL. Friends with benefits: social support and its relevance for farm animal welfare. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2012; 136: 1– 14.
  19. [23]Nielsen BL, Appleby MC, Waran NK. Physical conditions In: Appleby MC, Mench JA, Olsson IAS, Hughes BO, editors. Animal Welfare. 2nd ed Cambridge: CABI Publishing; 2011 pp. 215– 227
  20. [24]Hogan ES, Houpt KA, Sweeney K. The effect of enclosure size on social interactions and daily activity patterns of the captive Asiatic wild horse (Equus przewalskii). Appl Anim Behav Sci. 1988; 21: 147– 168.
  21. [25]Wiedenmayer C. Effect of cage size on the ontogeny of stereotyped behaviour in gerbils. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 1996; 47: 225– 233.
  22. [26]Kaufman BM, Pouliot AL, Tiefenbacher S, Novak MA. Short and long-term effects of a substantial change in cage size on individually housed, adult male rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2004; 88: 319– 330.
  23. [27]Hansen SW, Malmkvist J, Palme R, Damgaard BM. Do double cages and access to occupational materials improve the welfare of farmed mink? Anim Welf. 2007; 16: 63– 76.
  24. [28]Clubb R, Mason G. Animal Welfare: Captivity effects on wide-ranging carnivores. Nature. 2003; 425: 473– 474. 14523435
  25. [29]Fowler ME. An overview of foot conditions in Asian and African elephants In: Csuti B, Sargent EL, Bechert US, editors. The Elephant's Foot: Prevention and Care of Foot Conditions in Captive Asian and African Elephants. Ames: John Wiley & Sons; 2001a pp. 3– 7.
  26. [30]Fowler ME. Foot disorders In: Fowler ME, Mikota SK, editors. Biology, Medicine, and Surgery of Elephants. Ames: Blackwell Publishing; 2006 pp. 217– 261.
  27. [31]West G. Musculoskeletal system In: Fowler ME, Mikota SK, editors. Biology, Medicine, and Surgery of Elephants. Ames: Blackwell Publishing; 2006 pp. 263– 271.
  28. [33]Barker ZE, Amory JR, Wright JL, Mason SA, Blowey RW, Green LE. Risk factors for increased rates of sole ulcers, white line disease, and digital dermatitis in dairy cattle from twenty-seven farms in England and Wales. J Dairy Sci. 2009; 92: 1971– 1978. 10.3168/jds.2008-1590 19389954 · DOI
  29. [34]Frankena K., Somers JGCJ, Schouten WGP, van Stek JV, Metz JHM, Stassen EN, et al The effect of digital lesions and floor type on locomotion score in Dutch dairy cows. Prev Vet Med. 2009; 88: 150– 157. 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2008.08.004 18842310 · DOI
  30. [35]Haufe HC, Gygax L, Wechsler B, Stauffacher M, Friedli K. Influence of floor surface and access to pasture on claw health in dairy cows kept in cubicle housing systems. Prev Vet Med. 2012; 105: 85– 92. 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2012.01.016 22326044 · DOI
  31. [36]Greco BJ, Meehan CL, Miller LJ, Shepherdson DJ, Morfeld KA, Andrews J, et al Elephant management in North American zoos: environmental enrichment, feeding, exercise, and training. PLoS ONE 2016. doi: pone.0152490. PMC4944993 27414654
  32. [37]Lewis KD, Shepherdson DJ, Owens TM, Keele M. A survey of elephant husbandry and foot health in North American zoos. Zoo Biol. 2010; 29: 221– 236. 10.1002/zoo.20291 20014111 · DOI
  33. [38]Fuller G, Kuhar CW, Dennis PM, Lukas KE. A Survey of Husbandry Practices for Lorisid Primates in North American Zoos and Related Facilities. Zoo Biol. 2013; 32: 88– 100. 10.1002/zoo.21049 23161761 · DOI · Paper page
  34. [39]Gadgil M, Nair PV. Observations on the social behaviour of free ranging groups of tame Asiatic elephant (Elephas maximus Linn). Proc Ind Acad Sci (Anim Sci). 1984; 93: 225– 233.
  35. [40]Lee PC. Allomothering among African elephant. Anim Behav. 1987; 35: 278– 291.
  36. [41]Fagen R. Animal play behavior. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1981.
  37. [42]Johnsen PF, Johannesson T, Sandøe P. Assessment of farm animal welfare at herd level: many goals, many methods. Acta Agr Scand A-Anim Sci Suppl. 2001; 30: 26– 33.
  38. [43]Fontenot MB, Wilkes MN, Lynch CS. Effects of outdoor housing on self-injurious and stereotypic behavior in adult male rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). J Am Assoc Lab Anim. 2006; 45: 35– 43 16995645
  39. [44]Nakamura K, Tanaka T, Nishida K, Uetake K. Behavioral indexes of piglet welfare: comparison of indoor and outdoor housing systems. Anim Sci J. 2011; 82: 161– 168. 10.1111/j.1740-0929.2010.00806.x 21269375 · DOI
  40. [45]Schumann K, Guenther A, Jewgenow K, Trillmich F. Animal housing and welfare: effects of housing conditions on body weight and cortisol in a medium-sized rodent (Cavia aperea). J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2014; 17: 111– 124. 10.1080/10888705.2014.884407 24665951 · DOI
  41. [46]Owen MA, Swaisgood RR, Czekala NM, Lindburg DG. Enclosure choice and well-being in giant pandas: Is it all about control? Zoo Biol. 2005; 24: 475– 48.
  42. [47]Ross SR. Issues of choice and control in the behaviour of a pair of captive polar bears (Ursus maritimus). Behav Processes. 2006; 3: 117– 120. 16687218
  43. [48]Kurtycz LM, Wagner KE, Ross SR. The Choice to Access Outdoor Areas Affects the Behavior of Great Apes. J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2014; 17: 185– 197. 10.1080/10888705.2014.896213 24673476 · DOI
  44. [49]Haley DB, de Passillé AM, Rushen J. Assessing cow comfort: Effects of two floor types and two tie stall designs on the behaviour of lactating dairy cows. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2001; 71: 105– 117. 11179563

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Meehan, C. L., Hogan, J. N., Bonaparte-Saller, M. K., & Mench, J. A.
Affiliations
University of California, Davis (US)
Corresponding author
Meehan, Cheryl L.
ORCID
Venue
PLOS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2016-07-14
Volume
11
Issue
7
Pages
e0146703
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0146703
PMC
PMC4944928
OpenAlex
W2472857344
Cited by
45
References
6
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 10
FWCI
12.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Institute of Museum and Library Services (LG-25-10-0033-10)
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
Loxodonta africana, Asian elephant, captive elephants, social environment, space use, diurnal variation, social group composition, sex differences, animal welfare
MeSH terms
Animals, Animal Welfare, Animals, Zoo, Elephants, Female, Housing, Animal, Male, Sex Factors, Social Environment, Species Specificity, United States

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