Comparing the relative benefits of grooming-contact and full-contact pairing for laboratory-housed adult female Macaca fascicularis
Publication Type: |
Journal Article |
Year of Publication: |
2012 |
Authors: |
G.H. Lee, J.P. Thom, K.L. Chu, C.M. Crockett |
Publication/Journal: |
Applied Animal Behaviour Science |
Keywords: |
abnormal behavior, environmental enrichment, laboratory macaques, pair housing, psychological well-being, social housing |
ISBN: |
01681591 |
Abstract:
Tactile social contact is the most effective form of environmental enrichment for promoting
normal behavior in captive primates. For laboratory macaques housed indoors, pair housing
is the most common method for socialization. Pairs can be housed either in full contact
(FC), or in protected contact (PC). At Washington National Primate Research Center, PC is
provided by grooming-contact (GC) cages whereby two partners are housed individually in
adjacent cages with access to each other through widely spaced vertical bars. Groomingcontact
has been used to accommodate research protocol restrictions and improve the
likelihood of compatibility for various pairings, in part by enabling male–female pairs. This
study compares the benefits between the two housing types by video recording 14 pairs
of adult female Macaca fascicularis in four sequential housing phases following an ABBA
design: baseline grooming-contact, full contact shortly after introduction, 1-month-later
full contact, and after reversion to grooming-contact. Prior to this study, pairs had been
housed compatibly in GC. Twelve of the 14 long-term pairs transitioned successfully to
full contact and data presented exclude the two failed pairs. Allogrooming increased significantly
when pairs first switched from GC to FC (P = 0.018), but the effect did not last through
1-month-later FC phase suggesting that the initial improvement in affiliative behavior was
a transitory novelty response that did not persist. Self-grooming significantly decreased
between the first GC and first FC phases (P = 0.016), likely due to redirected allogrooming.
Non-contact affiliative behavior towards partner or other conspecifics in the room did not
differ, nor did agonism towards partner or others in the room. Occurrence of abnormal, tension,
manipulation, miscellaneous active, and inactive behaviors did not differ significantly
across housing phases. Proximity measurements indicated that pairs were significantly out
of arm’s reach more often in protected contact than when in full contact (P
≤
0.02). Proportion
of time spent in physical contact significantly increased between the first GC and
first FC phases (P = 0.002), but subsequently declined. For both FC phases, partners chose to
spend about 50% of their time in the same cage. Few behavioral improvements were seen
after pairs switched to full contact and no negative effects came of reversion to grooming
contact. This study suggests that tactile contact provided through widely spaced bars
(grooming-contact) is a viable alternative to full contact housing for adult female longtailed
macaques. It provides a degree of social housing while allowing both partners choice and
control, key concepts in contemporary animal welfare guidelines.