Visitor effects on the welfare of captive Sumatran orangutans (<i>Pongo abelii</i>) during the pandemic lockdowns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented lockdowns with rippling impacts on the lives of humans and animals alike. Since zoos were among the first institutions to close during the pandemic, the lockdowns presented the opportunity to conduct a natural experiment examining the relationship between visitor presence and the welfare of zoo-housed animals. In this study, we assessed the welfare of six Sumatran orangutans ( Pongo abelii ) at Toronto Zoo both during and following the pandemic lockdowns. We compared behavioural and physiological indicators of welfare during a lockdown and after visitors were reintroduced. Specifically, if the orangutans’ welfare was affected by the visitor re-introduction phase we predicted there would be an increase in the following measures: (1) use of exhibit areas away from visitors; (2) behavioural measures (hiding, self-directed behaviours, agonistic behaviours, agitated movement, and idiosyncratic object-directed behaviours [head slamming, and fabric tearing]); and (3) physiological measures (faecal consistency and glucocorticoid metabolites) when compared to the lockdown. We also measured changes in activity levels such as foraging and inactivity. We found that orangutan exhibit space use did not change when visitors were reintroduced. In fact, the orangutans hid less when visitors were introduced than during the lockdown. Foraging, inactivity, and other behavioural indicators of stress did not change when visitors were introduced. Similarly, neither faecal consistency nor glucocorticoid metabolites changed across the study phases. Our data show that visitor re-introduction did not negatively affect the welfare of the Toronto Zoo orangutans. However, the presence of keepers was found to affect the behaviour of the orangutans and warrants further study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".