CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 26Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesWildlife Ecology and ConservationVeterinary Equine Medical Research

Commonalities in management and husbandry factors important for health and welfare of captive elephants in North America and Thailand

Open access
Brown, Janine L., Bansiddhi, Pakkanut, Khonmee, Jaruwan, Thitaram, Chatchote·2020·Animals
DOI 10.3390/ani10040737PMC PMC7222785
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This review paper is a synthesis of results from multiple studies that we have conducted over the past several years using similar methodologies to identify factors related to welfare of captive populations of elephants in North American zoos and Thailand tourist camps. Using multiple conservation physiology tools, we found that, despite vastly disparate management systems, there are commonalities in how environmental and husbandry factors affect physical and physiological outcomes. Elephants appear to have better welfare, based on fecal glucocorticoid metabolite (FGM) analyses, when housed under conditions that provide a more enriched, stimulating, and less restrictive environment. We also found it is essential to balance diet and exercise for good body condition and metabolic function. In Thailand, use of tools to control elephants, such as the ankus (i.e., guide, hook) and chains, did not equate to poor welfare per se, nor did riding; however, improper uses were associated with higher wound scores and FGM concentrations. Foot health was good overall in both regions, with cracks being the most common problem, and better foot scores were found in elephants kept on softer substrates. Based on these findings, science-based guidelines are being developed in Thailand, while in North America, changes are being incorporated into elephant standards and husbandry resource guides. Management across venues can be improved by encouraging elephant exploration and exercise, establishing socially compatibility groups, ensuring proper use of tools, and providing balanced diets. We contend there is no "one-size-fits-all" management strategy to guarantee good welfare for elephants, but there are essential needs that must be met regardless of where or how they are managed. Future studies are needed to find ways to better socialize elephants; determine how temperament affects coping styles and resilience; study the importance of good handler-elephant relationships; identify more ways for elephants to engage with the environment; and assess the effect of life history on subsequent physiological and psychological well-being.

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 · 10.3390/ani10040737

Cites

78 of 78 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?

  • Welfare can be better in camps situated in natural environments, with forests and rivers providing more natural foraging and exercise opportunities than zoos.

    “Welfare can be better in camps situated in natural environments, with forests and rivers providing more natural foraging and exercise opportunities than zoos (62).”

    From Comparison of animal welfare assessment tools and methodologies: need for an effective approach for captive elephants in Asia (2024) · cites this paper as [62]

    The paper’s Simple Summary and Abstract link natural, stimulating, less restrictive environments, foraging, and exercise with elephant welfare. The Conclusions and Future Directions section discusses improvements in both camps and zoos, but does not establish that camps with forests and rivers offer better welfare or more opportunities than zoos; no page numbers are provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Brown et al. (2020) noted better elephant welfare in enriched, less constricted, and more stimulating environments.

    “A similar conclusion was reached by Brown et al. (2020), who noted better elephant welfare in enriched, less constricted, and more stimulating environments.”

    From Continuing challenges of elephant captivity: the captive environment, health issues, and welfare implications (2024) · cites this paper as Brown et al., 2020

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: 2

  1. [47]Boden G. Chapter 8—Insulin resistance and inflammation: Links between obesity and cardiovascular disease Glucose Intake and Utilization in Pre-Diabetes and Diabetes Watson R.R. Dokken B.B. Academic Press Boston, MA, USA 2015 95 101
  2. [71]Kurt F. Garai M. Stereotypies in captive Asian elephants—A symopsium of social isolation, a research update on elephants and rhinos Proceedings of the International Elephant and Rhino Research Symposium Vienna, Austria 7–11 June 2001 57 63

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Brown, J. L., Bansiddhi, P., Khonmee, J., & Thitaram, C.
Affiliations
  • Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute (US)
  • Chiang Mai University (TH)
Corresponding author
  • Brown, Janine L.
  • Thitaram, Chatchote
ORCID
Venue
Animals
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-04-23
Volume
10
Issue
4
Pages
737
ISSN
2076-2615 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/ani10040737
PMC
PMC7222785
OpenAlex
W3019032291
Cited by
26
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3
FWCI
0.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Animals (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Institute of Museum and Library Services (LG-25-10-0033-10)
  • National Research Council of Thailand (170183)
  • Thailand Research Fund (MRG5980072)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Equine › Veterinary Equine Medical Research
Keywords
captive elephants, elephant welfare, zoo management, tourist camps, fecal glucocorticoid metabolites, environmental enrichment, diet and exercise, body condition, chains, horsemanship, foot health, substrate hardness, social compatibility, conservation physiology, North America, Thailand

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