Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRose, P
dc.contributor.authorRoper, A
dc.contributor.authorBanks, S
dc.contributor.authorGiorgio, C
dc.contributor.authorTimms, M
dc.contributor.authorVaughan, P
dc.contributor.authorHatch, S
dc.contributor.authorHalpin, S
dc.contributor.authorThomas, J
dc.contributor.authorO’Brien, M
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-10T13:50:13Z
dc.date.issued2022-04-13
dc.date.updated2022-10-10T11:37:39Z
dc.description.abstractDucks are commonly housed in captive environments where their abilities for flight are constrained, either temporarily or permanently. The use of flight restraint in modern animal management is contentious and ethically questioned yet any associated impacts on behaviour remain poorly documented and evaluated. Comparison of information on wild ecology and activity of free-living individuals with information from the same species when captive-housed can reliably inform on “naturalness” of behaviour patterns if standardised methods are used. This research aimed to compare the activity of several species of ducks (Order Anseriformes) with information contained in the literature, and that collected from direct observation, to identify differences between the behaviours of captive and wild ducks. Observational data on the state behaviours for 17 duck species were collected at three Wildfowl & Wetland Trust (WWT) centres in the UK from 2015 to 2018, with behavioural data on two species of wild duck also collected via direct observation. A meta-analysis of time spent on key state behaviours (papers published up until 2018) was performed to provide comparison with the information provided on time-activity budgets of the captive birds. Results showed a multitude of factors influenced captive duck behaviour, but resting, maintenance and locomotion behaviours were most commonly observed. Wild birds differed significantly in their time-activity budgets compared to captive individuals and data from the meta-analysis revealed that foraging rates were higher in the wild than in captivity. Records of abnormal behaviour in captive birds were non-existent to very low in performance, suggesting that flight restrained ducks do not fill part of their time budget with stereotypic behaviour. Human presence may potentially influence of the behaviour of both wild and captive ducks living in wetland areas that attract human visitors. Seasonal, temporal and sex differences significantly also affected wild and captive duck behaviour. Further study should continue to investigate behavioural responses of these species to a range of captive housing to determine the most optimal way of providing for good welfare under human care. Research that investigates the behaviour of fully winged captive ducks to extend our evaluation of behaviour patterns in flight restrained birds (and to provide further review against wild data) is recommended.en_GB
dc.format.extent105626-
dc.identifier.citationVol. 251, article 105626en_GB
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2022.105626
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/131179
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0002-5375-8267 (Rose, Paul)
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherElsevieren_GB
dc.rights© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).en_GB
dc.subjectBehaviouren_GB
dc.subjectWildfowlen_GB
dc.subjectWaterfowlen_GB
dc.subjectWelfareen_GB
dc.subjectActivityen_GB
dc.subjectPinioningen_GB
dc.subjectEvidence-based husbandryen_GB
dc.titleEvaluation of the time-activity budgets of captive ducks (Anatidae) compared to wild counterpartsen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2022-10-10T13:50:13Z
dc.identifier.issn0168-1591
exeter.article-number105626
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from Elsevier via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.identifier.eissn1872-9045
dc.identifier.journalApplied Animal Behaviour Scienceen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofApplied Animal Behaviour Science, 251
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2022-04-09
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2022-04-13
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2022-10-10T13:48:55Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2022-10-10T13:50:19Z
refterms.panelAen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).