Cited by 59Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesWildlife Ecology and ConservationVeterinary Equine Medical Research

A review of current indicators of welfare in captive elephants (Loxodonta africana and Elephas maximus)

Open access
Williams, E, Chadwick, CL, Yon, L, Asher, L·2018·Animal Welfare

Abstract

Abstract Concerns over elephant welfare in UK zoos have implications for their future in captivity. To monitor improvements made to elephant welfare in UK zoos, non-invasive, valid and reliable indicators of welfare are needed. Using a rapid review strategy and critical appraisal tool, we aimed to appraise evidence from peer-reviewed literature on potential welfare indicators for captive elephants. Scopus, Web of Knowledge and Ovid were searched in January 2014 using terms relevant to captive elephants and welfare assessment. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied and remaining articles were critically appraised against a specially designed welfare indicator appraisal tool. Thirty-seven unique indicators of welfare were extracted from 30 peer-reviewed papers which met the inclusion criteria. Behavioural measures of welfare (n = 21) were more common than either physical (n = 11) or physiological (n = 5) measures. Stereotypies were the most frequently used behavioural measure, glucocorticoids were the most frequently used physiological measure and body condition scores were the most frequently used physical measure. There was most support for the following indicators of improved welfare state: reduced stereotypies, reduced glucocorticoids and improved body condition scores. Additional measures which require further validation but had strong associations with the most supported measures, and thus have potential use in welfare assessment, were: increased lying rest and positive social interactions. Further validation of the described measures is needed, but this information forms a crucial part of the knowledge required to efficiently monitor and improve the welfare of elephants in captivity.

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 · 10.7120/09627286.27.3.235

Cites

65 of 65 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?

  • Tools are increasingly using behavioral indicators associated with comfort, play, affiliation, foraging, and sociality to evaluate mental and overall welfare states, in addition to commonly used and validated negative welfare indicators like stereotypies, poor health and reproduction, and high mortality and morbidity.

    “Tools are increasingly using behavioral indicators associated with comfort, play, affiliation, foraging, and sociality to evaluate mental and overall welfare states, in addition to commonly used and validated negative welfare indicators like stereotypies, poor health and reproduction, and high mortality and morbidity (23, 44, 101, 102).”

    From Comparison of animal welfare assessment tools and methodologies: need for an effective approach for captive elephants in Asia (2024) · cites this paper as [101]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Previously established behavioral measures for captive elephants and welfare factors associated with tourist camps can be integrated and adapted for further testing.

    “Previously established behavioral measures for captive elephants (23, 101, 102) and welfare factors associated with tourist camps can be integrated and adapted for further testing.”

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: 4

  1. Clubb R and Mason G 2002 A review of the welfare of zoo elephants in Europe . Horsham, UK: 671
  2. Sharp T and Saunders G 2011 A model for assessing the relative humaness of pest animal 806 control methods (Second edition). Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries 807 and Forestry, Canberra, ACT. 808
  3. Walter O 2010 Management guidelines for the welfare of zoo animals: elephants. 3rd edition. 820
  4. Wemelsfelder F and Mullan S 2014 Applying ethological and health indicators to practical 824 animal welfare assessment. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l'OIE 33(1):111-120 825

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Williams, E., Chadwick, C., Yon, L., & Asher, L.
Affiliations
  • Nottingham Trent University (GB)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
Corresponding author
Williams, E
Venue
Animal Welfare
Published
2018-08
Volume
27
Issue
3
Pages
235-249
ISSN
  • 0962-7286 (ISSN-L)
  • 2054-1538
OpenAlex
W2885377365
Cited by
59
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 7
FWCI
11.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • Animal Welfare (publishedVersion)
  • Nottingham Trent University's Institutional Repository (Nottingham Trent Repository) (acceptedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK Government
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, welfare indicators, zoo animals, stereotypy, glucocorticoids, body condition score, social interaction, welfare analysis, Loxodonta africana, Asian elephant

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