A Review of Welfare Assessment Methods in Reptiles, and Preliminary Application of the Welfare Quality® Protocol to the Pygmy Blue-Tongue Skink, Tiliqua adelaidensis, Using Animal-Based Measures
Open accessAbstract
Reptiles are held at wildlife parks and zoos for display and conservation breeding programs and are increasingly being kept as pets. Reliable indicators of welfare for reptiles need to be identified. Current guidelines for the captive management of reptiles utilize resource-based, rather than animal-based indicators; the latter being a more direct reflection of affective state. In this paper we review the literature on welfare assessment methods in reptiles with a focus on animal-based measures. We conclude that, whilst a number of physiological and behavioral indicators of welfare have been applied in reptiles, there is need for further validation of these methods across the diversity of species within the Class. Methods of positive welfare state assessment are comparatively understudied and need elucidation. Finally, we examine some widely-used welfare assessment tools in mammals and explore the application of the Welfare Quality® Protocol to the endangered pygmy blue-tongue skink, Tiliqua adelaidensis. We propose that this framework can form the basis for the development of taxon-specific tools with consideration of species-specific biology.
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.
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
Does positive affect influence health?
Pressman, S. D., & Cohen, S. (2005) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.131.6.925 · Cited by 2,087 · see citing works
Assessment of positive emotions in animals to improve their welfare
Boissy, A., Manteuffel, G., Jensen, M. B., Moe, R. O., Spruijt, B., Keeling, L. J., Winckler, C., Forkman, B., Dimitrov, I., Langbein, J., et al. (2007) · Physiology & Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.02.003 · Cited by 1,486 · see citing works
The Genesis of Animal Play: Testing the Limits
Burghardt, G. M. (2005) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/3229.001.0001 · Cited by 1,094 · see citing works
Assessment of positive welfare: a review
Yeates, J. W., & Main, D. C. J. (2008) · The Veterinary Journal · doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2007.05.009 · Cited by 504 · see citing works
Garner, J. P. (2005) · ILAR Journal · doi:10.1093/ilar.46.2.106 · Cited by 329 · 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
Scientific assessment of animal welfare
Hemsworth, P., Mellor, D., Cronin, G., & Tilbrook, A. (2015) · New Zealand Veterinary Journal · doi:10.1080/00480169.2014.966167 · Cited by 252 · see citing works
Assessment of welfare in zoo animals: towards optimum quality of life
Wolfensohn, S., Shotton, J., Bowley, H., Davies, S., Thompson, S., & Justice, W. S. M. (2018) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani8070110 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
An animal welfare risk assessment process for zoos
Sherwen, S. L., Hemsworth, L. M., Beausoleil, N. J., Embury, A., & Mellor, D. J. (2018) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani8080130 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
Bashaw, M. J., Gibson, M. D., Schowe, D. M., & Kucher, A. S. (2016) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2016.08.003 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Behaviour-based husbandry—a holistic approach to the management of abnormal repetitive behaviors
Bacon, H. (2018) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani8070103 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Justice, W. S. M., O'Brien, M. F., Szyszka, O., Shotton, J., Gilmour, J. E. M., Riordan, P., & Wolfensohn, S. (2017) · Veterinary Record · doi:10.1136/vr.104309 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Welfare assessment tools in zoos: from theory to practice
Jones, N., Sherwen, S. L., Robbins, R., McLelland, D. J., & Whittaker, A. L. (2022) · Veterinary Sciences · doi:10.3390/vetsci9040170 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
O’Brien, S. L., & Cronin, K. A. (2023) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2023.105965 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Ghimire, R., Brown, J. L., Thitaram, C., & Bansiddhi, P. (2024) · Frontiers in Veterinary Science · doi:10.3389/fvets.2024.1370909 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
- Authors
- Benn, A. L., McLelland, D. J., & Whittaker, A. L.
- Affiliations
- The University of Adelaide (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Whittaker, Alexandra L.
- Venue
- Animals
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2019-01-17
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 27
- ISSN
- 2076-2615 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6356264
- OpenAlex
- W2909324323
- Cited by
- 98
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 1.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- dx.doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Animals (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Amphibian and Reptile Biology
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Veterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
- Keywords
- reptile welfare, animal-based welfare indicators, Welfare Quality protocol, Tiliqua adelaidensis, captive reptiles, positive welfare, affective 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
