Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Faith Hensley, Caitlin Gerke, and Dr. Jodee HuntBiology Department, Grand Valley State University
Introduction
Results
Acknowledgments
Methods
We thank the John Ball Zoo for the use of their animals, exhibits, and resources, the GVSU Office of Undergraduate Research & Scholarship, and our team of volunteers for making this research possible. Photos taken by the John Ball Zoo on Instagram (@johnballzoogr). This protocol was approved by the JBZ Animal Care Committee and the GVSU Institutional Animal Care & Use Committee.
Discussion and Conclusions
Changes in Behavior of Male Amur Tigers Following Introduction
to John Ball Zoo
• Observed two young male siblings
introduced in May 2018
• 30 minute observation sessions done
using ZooMonitor
• State behaviors quantified in 30
second intervals
• All occurrences of event behaviors
were recorded
• Data from 2018 (introduction)
compared to 2019 (1 year post-intro)
• Developed heat maps to examine
use of enclosure features
Fig. 4. Locomotive behaviors
(walk, patrol & pace) of adult
male 2 in 2018 (a) and 2019
(b). Focused on paths along
the back of the enclosure in
2018, but utilized nearly the
entire enclosure in 2019,
including more of the interior
area. Like his brother, overall
activity was greater in 2019
compared to 2018.
• Monitored the behavior of two
young Amur tigers (Panthera
tigris altaica) introduced to John
Ball Zoo, MI in May of 2018 to the
summer of 2019 (one year post
introduction)
• Focused on changes in activity
patterns and pacing behavior
Explored the spatial use of their
enclosure and enclosure features
• Compared differences in their
behavior patterns
Fig. 3. Locomotive
behaviors (walk, patrol &
pace) of adult male 1 in
2018 (a) and 2019 (b).
Paths focused on the
perimeter, observation
window (bottom) and
near the enclosure entry
(top). Overall, he was
more active in 2019
compared to 2018.
• The two males were often found in close proximity
which was interesting as tigers are generally not
social except during mating and parental activities.
• During 2018, both tigers used similar areas in their
enclosure that allowed them to hide from visitors. By
2019, they were more often observed in full view, or
moving along paths that brought them closer to
visitors.
• Both males used a greater proportion of the
enclosure space and features in 2019 compared to
2018. This is likely due to an increase in confidence
and familiarity with their surroundings. Both tigers
utilized nearly all the space and features provided.
• Both males became more active from 2018 to 2019,
male tiger 2 being more active overall
• Pacing behavior increased for both male tigers but to
varying degrees.
• Male tiger 2 had a much greater percentage of
pacing behavior.
a) b) a) b)PC: @johnballzoogr
PC: @johnballzoogr
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Tiger 1: 2018 Tiger 1: 2019 Tiger 2: 2018 Tiger 2: 2019
% T
ime
Bu
dge
t
Amur Tiger 1 and 2: Activity Patterns 2018 and 2019Locomotion
Pacing
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Tiger 1: 2018 Tiger 1: 2019 Tiger 2: 2018 Tiger 2: 2019
% T
ime
Bu
dge
t
Amur Tiger 1 and 2: 2018 and 2019 Behavior Patterns
Inactive Behavior
Active Behavior
Fig. 1. Pacing and
locomotion from 2018
to 2019 for male tiger
1 and 2. Locomotive
behavior for male
tiger 1 was
dominated by non-
pacing, while pacing
dominated the
locomotor behavior of
male tiger 2
Fig. 2. Active behaviors
(e.g. walking, pacing,
patrolling) and inactive
behaviors (e.g. lying
down, sleeping, sitting)
in 2018 and 2019 for
male tiger 1 and 2. Both
tigers had an increase
in active behavior,
however male tiger 2
was more active overall
for both years.