Cited by 14Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesWildlife Ecology and ConservationPrimate Behavior and Ecology

Validating methods to determine walking rates of elephants within a zoological institution

Miller, LJ, Andrews, J, Anderson, M·2012·Animal Welfare

Abstract

Much controversy surrounds the welfare of elephants within zoological institutions. Among the many concerns are lack of exercise and the prevention of sedentary health and welfare issues due to smaller exhibits in comparison to the home-range sizes for elephants in Africa and Asia. While many scientists have used GPS to examine distances travelled by wild elephants, there is currently little information on distance travelled by elephants within zoological institutions. In the wild, it is necessary to chemically immobilise elephants using a dart gun in order to put on or take off collars which are used to acquire GPS data. Within a zoological institution, elephants can be trained to wear a collar with a GPS device but this training can be time consuming and also dangerous depending on the level of expertise of animal care staff. However, training an elephant within a zoological institution to wear an anklet outfitted with a GPS device can be much safer and less time consuming. The purpose of the current research was to validate methods for examining the walking rates of elephants in a zoological facility. This included testing GPS units, examining walking rates of eight elephants at the San Diego Zoo Safari Park using collars and conducting trials on a subset of elephants wearing both a collar and anklet outfitted with GPS devices to determine reliability. The average distance travelled by eight African elephants(Loxodonta africana)within a 24-h period was 8.65 (± 0.64) km whi…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7120/09627286.21.4.577

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

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • At the San Diego Zoo Safari Park, average walking distance for African elephants was estimated at 8.65-9.82 km/day.

    “At the San Diego Zoo Safari Park, Miller, Andrews & Anderson (2012) and Miller, Hogan & Meehan (2016) estimated an average walking distance of 8.65-9.82km/day for African elephants.”
  • The natural, sociobiological characteristics of elephants predict the welfare challenges summarized above.

    “Moreover, the natural, sociobiological characteristics of elephants (e.g., the need for space, cognitive and social complexity, and dietary practices) predict the welfare challenges summarized above (Clubb & Mason, 2007;Miller, Andrews & Anderson, 2012;Pomerantz, Meir & Terkel, 2013;Hosey, Melfi & Ward, 2020;Mellor et al., 2021”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Miller, L., Andrews, J., & Anderson, M.
Affiliations
Zoological Society of San Diego (US)
Venue
Animal Welfare
Published
2012-11
Volume
21
Issue
4
Pages
577-582
ISSN
  • 0962-7286 (ISSN-L)
  • 2054-1538
OpenAlex
W2333292366
Cited by
14
References
1
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
2.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Animal Welfare (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
Keywords
elephants, GPS tracking, Loxodonta africana, zoo animal welfare, physical activity, distance travelled, method validation

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