Regurgitation and reingestion in zoo-housed orangutans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regurgitation and reingestion (R/R) is when an animal voluntary moves food from the stomach and back to the mouth, hands, or floor. This is regarded as an abnormal behaviour in captive-housed orangutans. This type of behaviour is more extensively researched in gorillas and chimpanzees, there is however a paucity of studies on this topic in orangutans. This knowledge is important to improve health and welfare in captive orangutans and is therefore crucial to study and extend our understanding about this behaviour. This study aimed to find individual, dietary and stress related factor that may influence the amount of R/R seen in zoo-housed orangutans.\n\nThe methods applied included a combination of observations by me, the zookeepers at Kristiansand zoo and a survey sent out to multiple zoos around the globe. Direct observations were done in both Kristiansand zoo and in Toronto zoo over a live streaming. The results of this project show no association between age, species and R/R. Male orangutans did however exhibit a numerically higher amount of R/R than the females. Activity or foraging were not associated with occurrence of R/R either, similarly to browse. When the orangutans had access to the outside exhibit there were significantly less regurgitation, than when they only had access to the inside exhibit. The effect of diet is usually the most discussed trigger of R/R, my results did however indicate no association between the different diets and the number of R/R. This study did find a correlation between R/R and the number of visitors, where more visitors resulted in less R/R. In conclusion, during this study the only factors that seemed to influence R/R were individual preferences, sex, number of visitors and outside access.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".