Baker Kate C
Division of Veterinary Medicine, Tulane National Primate Research Center, Covington, Louisiana.
Am J Primatol. 2016 Jul;78(7):780-96. doi: 10.1002/ajp.22543. Epub 2016 Mar 11.
The behavioral management of laboratory nonhuman primates in the United States has not been thoroughly characterized since 2003. This article presents the results of a survey behavioral management programs at 27 facilities and covering a total of 59,636 primates, 27,916 housed in indoor cages and 31,720 in group enclosures. The survey included questions regarding program structure, implementation, and methodology associated with social housing, positive reinforcement training, positive human interaction, exercise enclosures, and several categories of inanimate enrichment. The vast majority of laboratory primates are housed socially (83%). Since 2003, the proportion of indoor-housed primates reported to be housed singly has fallen considerably, from 59% to 35% in the facilities surveyed. The use of social housing remains significantly constrained by: 1) research protocol requirements, highlighting the value of closely involved IACUCs for harmonizing research and behavioral management; and 2) the unavailability of compatible social partners, underscoring the necessity of objective analysis of the methods used to foster and maintain compatibility. Positive reinforcement training appears to have expanded and is now used at all facilities responding to the survey. The use of enrichment devices has also increased in the participating facilities. For most behavioral management techniques, concerns over the possibility of negative consequences to animals are expressed most frequently for social housing and destructible enrichment, while skepticism regarding efficacy is limited almost exclusively to sensory enrichment. Behavioral management program staffing has expanded over time in the facilities surveyed, due not only to increased numbers of dedicated behavioral management technicians but also to greater involvement of animal care technicians, suggesting an increase in the integration of behavioral care into animal husbandry. Broad awareness of common practice may assist facilities with program evaluation and assessment of progress in the field can generate recommendations for continuing the advancement of primate behavioral management programs. Am. J. Primatol. 78:780-796, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
自2003年以来,美国实验室非人灵长类动物的行为管理尚未得到全面描述。本文介绍了对27个设施中的行为管理项目的调查结果,这些设施总共饲养了59,636只灵长类动物,其中27,916只饲养在室内笼子里,31,720只饲养在群居围栏中。该调查包括有关项目结构、实施以及与群居饲养、正强化训练、积极的人际互动、运动围栏和几类无生命强化物相关方法的问题。绝大多数实验室灵长类动物群居饲养(83%)。自2003年以来,据报告单独饲养的室内灵长类动物比例大幅下降,在所调查的设施中从59%降至35%。群居饲养的使用仍然受到显著限制:1)研究方案要求,这突出了密切参与的机构动物护理与使用委员会(IACUC)在协调研究和行为管理方面的价值;2)缺乏相容的社会伙伴,这强调了客观分析用于促进和维持相容性的方法的必要性。正强化训练似乎有所扩展,现在所有回应调查的设施都在使用。参与调查的设施中强化装置的使用也有所增加。对于大多数行为管理技术,对动物产生负面后果可能性的担忧在群居饲养和可破坏的强化物方面最为常见,而对功效的怀疑几乎完全局限于感官强化物。在所调查的设施中,行为管理项目的人员配备随着时间的推移有所增加,这不仅是因为专门的行为管理技术人员数量增加,还因为动物护理技术人员的参与度提高,这表明行为护理在动物饲养中的整合有所增加。对常见做法的广泛了解可能有助于设施进行项目评估,而对该领域进展的评估可以为继续推进灵长类动物行为管理项目提出建议。《美国灵长类学杂志》78:780 - 796,2016年。© 2016威利期刊公司