Next Article in Journal
Vitamin D3 Metabolic Enzymes in Plateau Zokor (Myospalax baileyi) and Plateau Pika (Ochotona curzoniae): Expression and Response to Hypoxia
Previous Article in Journal
Early Locomotor Training in Tetraplegic Post-Surgical Dogs with Cervical Intervertebral Disc Disease
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Animals
Volume 12
Issue 18
10.3390/ani12182367
animals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Diurnal and Nocturnal Behaviour of Cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) and Lions (Panthera leo) in Zoos

by
Isabel Seyrling
*,
Paul Wilhelm Dierkes
and
Anna Lena Burger
Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe-University Frankfurt, 60438 Frankfurt, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2022, 12(18), 2367; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12182367
Submission received: 31 July 2022 / Revised: 30 August 2022 / Accepted: 8 September 2022 / Published: 11 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Zoo Animals)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

To date, few studies have examined both night-time and daytime behaviour of lions and cheetahs in zoos. To gain a deeper understanding of behavioural rhythms, this knowledge needs to be expanded. In our study, light was a strong influencing factor leading to different diurnal and nocturnal activity budgets. During the day, both species were significantly more active than during the night. These daily activity peaks correlated with feeding time. At night, lions showed increased resting behaviour with long sleep phases averaging more than 75 min per sleep event. Sleep phases are defined as minutes per sleep event with the animal’s body and head lying on the ground. The number of sleep phases, however, dropped slightly compared to the day. Cheetahs also had a higher length of sleep phases at night than during the day, although the increase was smaller than in lions. However, the number of sleep phases was significantly higher than during the day in all animals. Our results show that the behavioural rhythms of lions and cheetahs differ significantly during the day and night. The results show that studies that take into account 24-h rhythms are well suited to measure diurnal rhythms and, based on this, possibly derive statements on management and husbandry.

Abstract

Mammals are constantly exposed to exogenous and endogenous influences that affect their behaviour and daily activity. Light and temperature, as well as anthropogenic factors such as husbandry routines, visitors, and feeding schedules are potential influences on animals in zoological gardens. In order to investigate the effects of some of these factors on animal behaviour, observational studies based on the analyses of activity budgets can be used. In this study, the daily and nightly activity budgets of six lions (Panthera leo) and five cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) from four EAZA institutions were investigated. Focused on the influencing factor light and feeding, we analysed these activity budgets descriptively. Behaviour was recorded and analysed during the winter months over an observation period of 14 days and 14 nights using infrared-sensitive cameras. Our results show that lions and cheetahs exhibit activity peaks at crepuscular and feeding times, regardless of husbandry. Thus, lions in captivity shift nocturnal behaviour familiar from the wild to crepuscular and diurnal times. In cheetahs, in contrast, captive and wild individuals show similar 24 h behavioural rhythms. The resting behaviour of both species is more pronounced at night, with cheetahs having a shorter overall sleep duration than lions. This study describes the results of the examined animals and is not predictive. Nevertheless, the results of this study make an important contribution to gaining knowledge about possible factors influencing the behaviour of lions and cheetahs in zoos and offer implications that could be useful for improving husbandry and management.

1. Introduction

Physiological processes such as sleep and wakefulness determine the circadian rhythm of an animal. However, these physiological processes are continuously influenced by external stimuli also known as zeitgeber [1]. Synchronising the inner clock to such zeitgebers as light and food availability is defined as entrainment [2]. In particular, the stimuli such as light and food are reported to influence activity and resting behaviour [1,3,4]. Based on these adaptations, animal behaviour can be divided into two levels with the animal either being physically active or resting [5,6]. Activity is crucial to life and requires more energy than resting [6]. Resting is seen as a state of regeneration in which the organism can gain new strength for the coming challenges of activity. Life is therefore a circadian sequence of rest and activity, oscillating daily (around 24 h), seasonally or circannually [1,7,8]. To better understand the biology and natural needs of a species, these rest-activity cycles have recently been increasingly studied in various mammals (for example, by [9,10,11,12]). The depiction of activity budgets of species to analyse circadian rhythms or deviation from those, are one of the most commonly used chronobiological method to improve animal welfare [13,14]. However, how these activity budgets are influenced by external variables is poorly understood compared to what is known about molecular and genetic mechanisms [15]. This finding can be attributed to methodological difficulties of activity measurements in free-living animals, without influencing the animals behaviour [16,17]. Behavioural observations, including the analysis and construction of activity budgets, can be used to fill these knowledge gaps [18,19].
Depending on their rest-activity cycle, mammal species can be classified as diurnal, nocturnal, cathemeral or crepuscular [20]. In the Felidae and Canidae, the main predators of ungulates, about 72% of the species extant are nocturnal [21]. Nevertheless, there are different activity patterns during the night among the Felidae, depending on their hunting strategies. Lions (Panthera leo), for example, usually hunt at night and therefore show a significantly higher nocturnal activity level than cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) which tend to hunt during dusk and dawn to avoid top predators [3,9,22]. Accordingly, cheetahs show more pronounced resting behaviour at night than lions [16]. Resting behaviour can be broken down into different stages of intensity, with sleep as the most intense form of rest. Sleep hereby is a state of immobility with greatly reduced responsiveness that is homeostatically regulated [23]. This behaviour state may also be defined by a specific body posture accompanied by arbitrary muscle twitches [23]. Various factors can lead to a change in the sensitive phases of sleep. Previous studies revealed that not only endogenous factors such as age and sex show an effect on the duration of sleep behaviour across phylogeny [16,24,25,26,27,28,29], but also exogenous factors seem to play a major role in the classification of sleep durations in mammals [15,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38].
Diet has been shown to be one such exogenous factor [23,39]. Depending on the type of food, different sleep patterns can be identified: carnivores show the highest, omnivores a lower and herbivores the lowest sleep duration over 24 h [36,40]. In the field, hunting opportunities and the presence of competitors can influence predator activity [21,22]. Accordingly, feeding routines in zoos can also lead to circadian rhythm adjustment in mammals [4,41,42,43,44]. Captive felids therefore often spend the hours immediately before scheduled feeding times with increased activity [45]. In the wild, carnivores require more time and energy to search for, process and ingest food [45,46]. Furthermore, not only the feeding time, but also the feeding rate and the number of fasting days seem to have an impact on the resting and active behaviour of captive felids [43]. For example, lions in zoos have been reported to have lower activity levels on feeding days than on fasting days due to satiety [43]. Besides the availability of food of food [10,43], light [3,32,35] also has a decisive influence on the rest and activity behaviour of carnivores. In zoos, artificial light sources are often used in addition to natural light. This can lead to a temporal shift of the twilight and thus to a shift in the daily activity and rest behaviour [35,47]. Accordingly, the impact of light must be considered when analysing the activity budget of a captive species.
Different methods are used for time-resolved recording of diurnal behaviour in the field and in zoos. In the field, behaviour and movement recordings are often carried out with GPS collars often combined with motion sensors [48,49,50]. However, potential issues have to be considered when using these techniques, including sensor placement orientation and power supply [51]. In long-term studies, a high recording rate often cannot be guaranteed due to a weak energy supply [34,52]. In addition, animals need to be captured and immobilised in order to attach the sensors. Camera traps as non-invasive tools serve as a cheaper alternative to determine wildlife activity patterns in the field [22,53]. Moreover, camera traps can only provide information on the distribution of different animal species in a given area [54]. However, a continuous recording of an animal’s behaviour is not possible, as the camera traps are fixed and thus location-dependent [55]. As the behaviour of resting animals is more difficult to capture by this method, it is usually used to focus on activity patterns within a specific area of interest (e.g., water holes) [56,57,58]. Even though Breretron et al. [59] have shown that pinpoint sampling methods are very accurate, only continuous video recording allows time-resolved observation of wildlife, even during resting phases [59,60]. However, this observation method is of limited practicality in the wild, especially for recording nocturnal behaviour [61]. In contrast, zoos offer ideal opportunities to observe wildlife 24/7 via video recordings. The previously time-consuming analysis of video data will be simplified in the near future by suitable deep learning software solutions [62,63,64], so that longer periods and more individuals can be included in behavioural analyses. In a second step, the daily and nocturnal activity budgets for individual species can be drawn from these analyses.
The investigation of activity budgets of endangered species plays an important role in ex-situ management aspects [65]. As such, lions and cheetahs were classified as vulnerable by the IUCN in 2015 and 2016 [66,67]. Although both species are kept in many zoos, very little is known about their nocturnal resting behaviour, especially their sleep behaviour, and about the effect of feeding on resting behaviour. This study therefore investigated the diurnal and nocturnal behavioural rhythms of endangered lions and cheetahs. Particular attention focused on the influence of light and feeding on activity and resting behaviour over 24 h. Since changes in the animals’ welfare are often accompanied by changes in behaviour and circadian rhythms [14,18,68,69,70], results of this study can make an important contribution to a better understanding of the behavioural rhythms of lions and cheetahs in human care.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Data Collection and Behavioural States

Data for this study were collected during winter seasons 2019–2021 from five cheetahs and six lions housed at four EAZA (European Association of Zoos and Aquaria) institutions in Germany: cheetahs at Opel-Zoo Kronberg, Allwetterzoo Muenster and Cologne Zoo and lions at Zoo Neuwied, Cologne Zoo and Allwetterzoo Muenster. The age of the cheetahs varied between four and twelve years, that of the lions between four and twenty-two years (see Supplementary Table S1). In total, one female and four male cheetahs were studied as well as four female and two male lions. The behaviour was monitored and recorded via infrared-sensitive cameras (Lupus Geodome LE338) generating 1 frame per second with high-definition resolution. These camera settings were used for indoor and outdoor enclosures. The 24/7 recordings were carried out over a period of two weeks without interruption. Due to potential seasonal influences the recordings were only made during winter season. BORIS 7.7.3 software was used to analyse the video data [71]. The recorded data was analysed by applying continuous sampling for eight behaviour states (Table 1) [10]. Behaviour patterns were clustered into whether an animal was showing active or rest behaviour. The classification made for this purpose is based on a validated ethogram [10]. Continuous sampling allows for an accurate record of the behaviours with a time-resolved assignment of each individual behaviour pattern. The daytime recordings were defined from 7a.m.–7p.m., the night-time recordings from 7p.m.–7a.m. (during winter season). The recording and evaluation period refers to 14 days and nights per individual and was analysed to create a 24-h activity budget, based on the mean resting behaviour per second. The zookeepers filled out a detailed daily log to record special events, feeding times and the daily routine. In addition, the zookeepers completed a questionnaire on husbandry and management (e.g., enclosure size, food types and social relationship).

2.2. Data Analyses

To examine the diurnal and nocturnal activity budget of cheetahs and lions, behavioural data were aggregated per day (7a.m.–7p.m.) and night (7p.m.–7a.m.) for each individual. The Shapiro-Wilk normality test was used for normal distribution analyses. Afterwards t-test was used for unpaired samples, to test interspecific differences (between cheetahs and lions). In addition, a t-test was conducted to test for species-specific differences between day and night. To compare the different husbandry systems, depending on the normal distribution Kruskal–Wallis or Welch’s ANOVA were performed. For significant results, this was followed by post-hoc tests (Bonferroni test and Dunn–Bonferroni test). Additionally we made a descriptive analysis of the influence of the factors of light and feeding on the activity budgets. Statistical analyses and figures were performed in SPSS Version 27 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) and Microsoft Excel 365 (Redmond, Microsoft, WA, USA).

3. Results

In this study, a total of 3696 h of video footage of cheetahs and lions from four different zoos was analysed. During the 14-day observation period, both cheetahs and lions spent significantly more time on active behaviours during the day than during the night (Table 2 and Figure 1). However, compared to lions, cheetahs showed significantly more active behaviour overall, both during the day (t-test: T = 21.2, p < 0.001, df = 27) and the night (t-test: T = 16.3, p = 0.041, df = 27). Cheetahs were locomoting about twice as much as lions during the day (cheetahs: 43.6%, lions: 18.4%). Interestingly, locomoting behaviour was nearly the same in both species during the night (cheetahs: 5.4%, lions: 3.1%). Not only locomotion but also the overall activity decreased significantly in cheetahs (6.4%) as well as in lions (4.2%) during the night. Accordingly, sleeping was the dominant behaviour pattern with cheetahs sleeping on average 75.1% of the night and lions 87.8%.
Our analyses of behavioural rhythms showed that light had an impact on the behaviour of lions and cheetahs in all zoos. With the onset of dusk, resting behaviour increased strongly and remained constant until the early morning hours (around 5 a.m.) (Figure 2). During the light period, the behaviour of both species changed more frequently than during the dark phase. However, during the dark phase, cheetahs switched more often between active and resting behaviour than lions did.
To investigate whether the behaviour of two individuals within an enclosure influences each other, they were descriptively compared (Figure 2A–C,F). The results show that the behavioural patterns of both individuals within one enclosure were strongly synchronised over the 24 h. In cases when two cats were kept together in the same enclosure, no differences in behavioural rhythmicity were observed between the two individuals.
Lions showed active behaviour mostly during diurnal and crepuscular hours, with a consistently high amount of resting behaviour during the night. A subsequent increase in activity was identified briefly before and after sunrise. During the day, lions showed various resting phases that were interrupted by feeding events (Figure 2A–C). Daily differences between zoos were tested with Welch’s ANOVA (Welch’s ANOVA: F = 29.06, df = 2, p < 0.001) followed by a post-hoc test with Bonferroni correction. Lions in zoo1 showed a significant lower amount of daily resting behaviour than lions in zoo2 (z1-z2day p < 0.001) and zoo3 (z1-z3day p < 0.001).
Nocturnal differences were tested with Kruskal–Wallis (Kruskal–Wallis: χ2 = 31.44, df = 2, p < 0.001) followed by a Dunn–Bonferroni post-hoc test. Lions in zoo1 showed a significant lower amount of nocturnal resting behaviour than lions in zoo2 (z1-z2night p < 0.001) and zoo 3 (z1-z3night p = 0.003) over 24 h; Furthermore, lions in zoo2 showed significant differences in the total time of resting behaviour during the night compared to zoo3 (z2-z3night p < 0.001).
As lions, cheetahs showed lower resting during the day and twilight. At night, in contrast, the cheetahs rested most of the time. Except for one cheetah (zoo1), the resting behaviours decreased again about one hour before sunrise.
Moreover, different diurnal and nocturnal activity levels have been observed depending on zoos for the cheetahs. Daily differences between zoos were tested with Welch’s ANOVA (Welch’s ANOVA: F = 33.51, df = 2, p < 0.001) followed by a post-hoc test with Bonferroni correction. The cheetah in zoo1 showed significantly more daily activity compared to cheetahs in zoo2 (z1-z2day p < 0.001) and zoo3 (z1-z3day p < 0.001). Nocturnal differences were tested with Kruskal–Wallis (Kruskal–Wallis: χ2 = 30.65, df = 2, p < 0.001) followed by a Dunn–Bonferroni post-hoc test. Cheetah in zoo1 showed significantly more nocturnal activity compared to cheetahs in zoo2 (z1-z2night p < 0.001) and zoo3 (z1-z3night p < 0.001). Despite the overall higher activity level of C1Z1, it showed a distinct resting phase at midday, similar to the cheetahs from zoo3 (Figure 2D–F). Cheetahs in zoo3 were fed irregularly throughout the day, whereas cheetahs in zoo1 and zoo2 got only food in the afternoon. From sunset onwards, all cheetahs showed an increasing resting behaviour, with high and constant proportions during the night, interrupted only by short periods of activity.
The mean resting time over 24 h for lions was 21.1 ± 1.54 h and for cheetahs 18.36 ± 2.93 h. Significant differences between diurnal and nocturnal sleep behaviour were found for all individuals of the two species. In the lions, the length of sleep phases increases strongly during the night, whereas the number of sleep phases is significantly reduced in four individuals (Figure 3). Only one individual (L1Z2) showed an increase in the number of sleep phases and another individual (L2Z2) showed no change. The cheetahs showed a different picture. The length of sleep phases increased moderately but significantly in all individuals. In contrast to the lions, the number of sleep phases was significantly increased in all cheetahs (Figure 4).
Between both species, the daily duration per sleep event (t-test: T = 14.79, p < 0.001, df = 27) and the nocturnal duration per sleep event (t-test: T = 9.79, p < 0.001, df = 27) differed significantly. Lions spent more time per sleep event than cheetahs, both during the day and the night (Table 3). With regard to the number of sleep events, there were significant differences between the two species during the day and the night. Compared to lions, cheetahs showed significantly more sleep events during the day (t-test: T = 22.60, p < 0.001, df = 27) and the night (t-test: T = 10.76, p < 0.001, df = 27).

4. Discussion

4.1. Behavioural Rhythmicity over 24 Hours

This study presents a holistic 24-h activity budget of captive cheetahs and lions with special focus on their resting and sleep behaviour. Only the consistent observations over 24 h and many days and nights enabled us to determine a species-specific 24-h behavioural rhythm. So far, behavioural studies in zoos have mainly focused on the analysis of diurnal behaviour within narrow time windows [73,74,75]. Due to time constraints, scan sampling is a method commonly used to study stereotypic behaviour or the effect of enrichment [73,76,77,78]. This is often the case when analysing the daily moving behaviour of carnivores [73,79]. However, these studies do not check for a species’ behaviour profile over 24 hr. Even more, the analysis of behaviour observed only for a few hours a day might lead to misinterpretations such as generalisation, over- or underestimation [80,81]. In order to avoid misleading interpretation of observed behaviour patterns and rhythms and to study the influence of anthropogenic as well as individual biological factors on behaviour, the species-specific rhythm must be known first [30,82]. These 24-h activity budgets have to be based on continuous recordings around the clock and a second-by-second analysis [83].
Therefore, our study investigated the diurnal and nocturnal behavioural rhythms of captive lions and cheetahs and analysed potential influencing factors. Our results show a striking behavioural rhythm in lions and cheetahs over 24 h. During the day, periods of high activity were observed around feeding times. Later on, a further activity peak at dusk has been detected for both species. Similar to their wild conspecifics, captive lions also showed a high level of resting behaviour (72.8 ± 7.4%) during the day [3,84,85,86]. In contrast, the cheetahs in our study were found to rest only half of the day (48.2 ± 11.5%). These results are consistent with the daily activity budget observed in wild cheetahs [3,9,34].

4.2. Sleep Behaviour

Especially at night, we found inter- and intraspecific differences in nocturnal behavioural rhythms for the two species. Our results show cheetahs and lions mostly sleeping at night. However, we found large differences between lions and cheetahs regarding the number and length of sleep phases (Table 3). Lions slept most of the night, with sleep divided into few but long sleep phases. The results obtained on sleep behaviour are consistent with previous studies on captive lions [73,74,87]. In contrast to lions, cheetahs slept slightly less overall at night, with sleep divided into many short sleep phases. However, to our knowledge, so far there have been no studies on the nocturnal behaviour of captive cheetahs. Overall, we found some differences between the nocturnal behaviour of captive lions and their wild conspecifics. As wild carnivores are very difficult to observe, especially during the night, information on the sleep behaviour of wild cheetahs and lions is extremely rare. Most of the information on nocturnal behaviour has been gathered so far by using GPS-collars additionally equipped with accelerometers [50,88]. While wild lions are known to hunt during the night [85,86], captive lions were mostly inactive during the night [87]. This difference is most likely due to the fact that lions in zoos do not need to hunt for food and feeding in zoos takes place during the day [43,89,90]. Captive cheetahs interestingly show almost the same nocturnal behavioural rhythms as wild cheetahs [3,9,21,34]. In particular, the cheetahs in this study are active in the early morning hours (see Figure 2), which are used for hunting in the wild [91,92], although feeding does not occur at these times.

4.3. Food as Decisive Factor for the Behavioural Rhythm

In the wild, ecological factors such as activity of prey and predation risk potentially lead to different activity and hunting peaks between lions and cheetahs [93,94,95]. In zoos, obviously, hunting became obsolete for cheetahs and lions. However, in our study we determined feeding events to have a high impact on their behavioural rhythms. Various studies have already shown that feeding, access to food and hunger have an influence on the circadian rhythm [1,4,10,96]. In addition, an influence on this rhythm could be demonstrated in felids through carcass feeding [97]. Furthermore, fasting days with a low feeding frequency (1 time per week) may lead to higher activity levels in lions [46]. Individual differences between the animals of the different zoos could also be observed for this study. It is possible that these differences in daily activity and resting behaviour are due to different feeding times and numbers of feeding events [43]. To make further statements about this, the influence of the feeding schedule on the behaviour of these animals would have to be observed over a longer period than 14 days and nights. Consequently, feeding may have a strong influence on the activity budget of carnivores as shown by studies on leopards and lions [10,43,74]. Especially with scheduled feeding times, delayed feeding has been shown to result in a change in behaviour [41,44,98]. In our study, the daily activity patterns of the studied individuals were highly influenced by feeding routines. Animals anticipated scheduled feeding times and got active around these assumed periods of time. Accordingly, previous research also showed that lions in zoos exhibit activity peaks during the day around feeding times [43,74]. Nevertheless, lions also showed a high percentage of resting behaviour during the day which is in line with observations on the diurnal resting behaviour of their wild conspecifics [3,84,85,86]. In cheetahs, however, no fundamental differences to wild cheetahs could be found in the daily activity budget [9,22,32]. For example, wild cheetahs hunt mostly in the dawn and dusk hours [91,92] and feeding may extend beyond these time periods [32]. The cheetahs in this study are partially active during these periods.

4.4. Light and Season Shape Activity and Rest Behaviour

As already mentioned, the behavioural and physiological processes of animals are constantly influenced by endogenous and exogenous stimuli. Besides feeding, another stimulus is light [30,39]. As one of the strongest zeitgebers, light has a major impact on animal activity [1,27,70]. Results of our study confirm such an effect of light on behaviour by observing drastic differences in activity during the day and the night as well as during dusk. From dusk on lions and cheetahs were mainly resting and sleeping for the rest of the night. In the early morning hours, both species became more active again from two hours before sunset on. Besides light, the season has been shown to influence activity and resting behaviour of carnivores [34,99,100]. For instance, at high temperatures, main activity in cheetahs shifted from day to night [34]. Lions also adapted their activity and resting behaviour to the temperature by being more active on cooler days [100]. Compared to summer, in autumn months, lions were observed to be active later in the morning and earlier in the evening [86]. This leads to a natural variation in the day–night rhythm from summer to winter. Due to these potential seasonal influences and to ensure comparability between zoos, the study design was restricted to recordings during one season (winter).

5. Conclusions

This study presents a detailed 24-h activity budget of lions and cheetahs in zoos. The results show that their circadian rhythms are significantly influenced by external factors, which include light and feeding. Through 24/7 analysis, this study also provides insights into nocturnal behaviour, a time of day that has received less attention in behavioural studies [47]. The continuous behavioural recording offers ideal opportunities to make statements about biological rhythms, which can possibly be used in a next step to review and improve animal welfare or husbandry conditions [47]. In this context, zoos offer a unique potential for behavioural research. To conclude, the results of this study expand our knowledge of the 24-h behavioural rhythms of lions and cheetahs, highlight factors that influence them and enable for a further development of welfare assessments and management guidelines.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ani12182367/s1, Table S1: Metadata of analysed individuals.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.S., P.W.D. and A.L.B.; Data curation, I.S. and A.L.B.; Formal analysis, I.S.; Funding acquisition, P.W.D.; Methodology, I.S. and A.L.B.; Project administration, P.W.D.; Supervision, P.W.D.; Visualization, I.S.; Writing—original draft, I.S.; Writing—review and editing, I.S., P.W.D. and A.L.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The study was supported by Opel-Zoo Foundation Professorship in Zoo Biology from the “von Opel Hessische Zoostiftung”.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study complied with the EAZA Code of Ethics and the recommendations for keeping zoo and wild animal species in captivity. No further ethical approval was required for this study as video cameras were used for behaviour recording. This non-invasive recording method eliminates possible disturbance by observers. Furthermore, no changes were made to the environment or housing conditions of the animals. Consent was obtained from the zoos for their animals to participate in this study.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to the fact that the video recordings may contain pictures of zoo visitors or zoo staff whose consent for publication we do not have.

Acknowledgments

We thank the Opel-Zoo Foundation Professorship in Zoo Biology of the “von Opel Hessische Zoostiftung” who funded the research leading to the results. The authors gained great support from directors and curators of the participating zoos (in alphabetical order): Allwetterzoo Muenster, Cologne Zoo, Opel-Zoo Kronberg and Zoo Neuwied. In addition, the animal keepers of these zoos promoted this study mainly by assisting and allowing the data collection and providing information about the animals. Jennifer Gübert and Franziska Zölzer assisted in the installation of the cameras.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Mistlberger, R.E. Neurobiology of food anticipatory circadian rhythms. Physiol. Behav. 2011, 104, 535–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Aschoff, J.; Pohl, H. Phase relations between a circadian rhythm and its zeitgeber within the range of entrainment. Naturwissenschaften 1978, 65, 80–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Cozzi, G.; Broekhuis, F.; McNutt, J.W.; Turnbull, L.A.; MacDonald, D.W.; Schmid, B. Fear of the dark or dinner by moonlight? Reduced temporal partitioning among Africa’s large carnivores. Ecology 2012, 93, 2590–2599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Gillman, A.G.; Rebec, G.V.; Pecoraro, N.C.; Kosobud, A.E.K. Circadian entrainment by food and drugs of abuse. Behav. Process. 2019, 165, 23–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Merrow, M.; Spoelstra, K.; Roenneberg, T. The circadian cycle: Daily rhythms from behaviour to genes. EMBO Rep. 2005, 6, 930–935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Rowcliffe, J.M.; Kays, R.; Kranstauber, B.; Carbone, C.; Jansen, P.A. Quantifying levels of animal activity using camera trap data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2014, 5, 1170–1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Partch, C.L.; Green, C.B.; Takahashi, J.S. Molecular architecture of the mammalian circadian clock. Trends Cell Biol. 2014, 24, 90–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Fernandez, E.J.; Yoakum, E.; Andrews, N. Seasonal and Daily Activity of Two Zoo-Housed Grizzly Bears (Ursus arctos horribilis). JZBG 2020, 1, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hayward, M.W.; Slotow, R. Temporal partitioning of activity in large African carnivores: Tests of multiple hypotheses. S. Afr. J. Wildl. Res. 2009, 39, 109–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Mallapur, A.; Chellam, R. Environmental influences on stereotypy and the activity budget of Indian leopards (Panthera pardus) in four zoos in Southern India. Zoo Biol. 2002, 21, 585–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Rees, P.A. Activity budgets and the relationship between feeding and stereotypic behaviors in Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) in a Zoo. Zoo Biol. 2009, 28, 79–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Rose, P.; Robert, R. Evaluating the activity patterns and enclosure usage of a little-studied zoo species, the sitatunga (Tragelaphus spekii). JZAR 2013, 1, 14–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ancoli-Israel, S.; Cole, R.; Alessi, C.; Chambers, M.; Moorcroft, W.; Pollak, C.P. The role of actigraphy in the study of sleep and circadian rhythms. Sleep 2003, 26, 342–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Berger, A. Activity patterns, chronobiology and the assessment of stress and welfare in zoo and wild animals. Int. Zoo Yearb. 2011, 45, 80–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Favreau, A.; Richard-Yris, M.-A.; Bertin, A.; Houdelier, C.; Lumineau, S. Social influences on circadian behavioural rhythms in vertebrates. Anim. Behav. 2009, 77, 983–989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Rattenborg, N.C.; de La Iglesia, H.O.; Kempenaers, B.; Lesku, J.A.; Meerlo, P.; Scriba, M.F. Sleep research goes wild: New methods and approaches to investigate the ecology, evolution and functions of sleep. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2017, 372, 20160251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Veasey, J.S.; Waran, N.K.; Young, R.J. On comparing the behaviour of zoo housed animals with the wild conspecifics as a welfare indicator. Anim. Welf. 1996, 5, 13–24. [Google Scholar]
  18. Dawkins, M.S. Using behaviour to assess animal welfare. Anim. Welf. 2004, 13, 3–7. [Google Scholar]
  19. Hutchins, M.; Wiese, R.J.; Smith, B. Introduction. In Scientific Foundations of Zoos and Aquariums; Kaufman, A.B., Bashaw, M.J., Maple, T.L., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2018; pp. 1–42. [Google Scholar]
  20. Bennie, J.J.; Duffy, J.P.; Inger, R.; Gaston, K.J. Biogeography of time partitioning in mammals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 13727–13732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wu, Y.; Wang, H.; Wang, H.; Feng, J. Arms race of temporal partitioning between carnivorous and herbivorous mammals. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 1713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Swanson, A.; Arnold, T.; Kosmala, M.; Forester, J.; Packer, C. In the absence of a “landscape of fear”: How lions, hyenas, and cheetahs coexist. Ecol. Evol. 2016, 6, 8534–8545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Siegel, J.M. Do all animals sleep? Trends Neurosci. 2008, 31, 208–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Bissett, C.; Parker, D.M.; Bernard, R.T.; Perry, T.W. Management-induced niche shift? The activity of cheetahs in the presence of lions. Afr. J. Wildl. Res. 2015, 45, 197–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Cajochen, C.; Münch, M.; Knoblauch, V.; Blatter, K.; Wirz-Justice, A. Age-related changes in the circadian and homeostatic regulation of human sleep. Chronobiol. Int. 2006, 23, 461–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Houser, A.; Somers, M.J.; Boast, L.K. Home range use of free-ranging cheetah on farm and conservation land in Botswana. S. Afr. J. Wildl. Res. 2009, 39, 11–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Lesku, J.A.; Roth, T.C.; Amlaner, C.J.; Lima, S.L. A phylogenetic analysis of sleep architecture in mammals: The integration of anatomy, physiology, and ecology. Am. Nat. 2006, 168, 441–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Steinmeyer, C.; Kempenaers, B.; Mueller, J.C. Testing for associations between candidate genes for circadian rhythms and individual variation in sleep behaviour in blue tits. Genetica 2012, 140, 219–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Stuber, E.F.; Dingemanse, N.J.; Kempenaers, B.; Mueller, J.C. Sources of intraspecific variation in sleep behaviour of wild great tits. Anim. Behav. 2015, 106, 201–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Berger, A.; Scheibe, K.-M.; Michaelis, S.; Streich, W.J. Evaluation of living conditions of free-ranging animals by automated chronobiological analysis of behavior. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 2003, 35, 458–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Breton, G.; Barrot, S. Influence of enclosure size on the distances covered and paced by captive tigers (Panthera tigris). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2014, 154, 66–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Broekhuis, F.; Grünewälder, S.; McNutt, J.W.; Macdonald, D.W. Optimal hunting conditions drive circalunar behavior of a diurnal carnivore. Behav. Ecol. 2014, 25, 1268–1275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Croft, D.P.; Darden, S.K.; Wey, T.W. Current directions in animal social networks. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 2016, 12, 52–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hetem, R.S.; Mitchell, D.; De Witt, B.A.; Fick, L.G.; Maloney, S.K.; Meyer, L.C.R.; Fuller, A. Body temperature, activity patterns and hunting in free-living cheetah: Biologging reveals new insights. Integr. Zool. 2019, 14, 30–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Nouvellet, P.; Rasmussen, G.S.A.; MacDonald, D.W.; Courchamp, F. Noisy clocks and silent sunrises: Measurement methods of daily activity pattern. J. Zool. 2012, 286, 179–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Siegel, J.M. Clues to the functions of mammalian sleep. Nature 2005, 437, 1264–1271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Siegel, J.M. Sleep in mammals: A state of adaptive inactivity. In Principles and Practice of Sleep Medicine, 6th ed.; Kryger, M.H., Roth, T., Dement, W.C., Eds.; Elsevier Health Sciences: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2016; pp. 103–114. [Google Scholar]
  38. Wey, T.; Blumstein, D.T.; Shen, W.; Jordán, F. Social network analysis of animal behaviour: A promising tool for the study of sociality. Anim. Behav. 2008, 75, 333–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Mistlberger, R.E. Circadian food-anticipatory activity: Formal models and physiological mechanisms. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 1994, 12, 171–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Campbell, S.S.; Tobler, I. Animal sleep a review of sleep duration across phylogeny. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 1984, 8, 269–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bloomsmith, M.A.; Lambeth, S.P. Effects of predictable versus unpredictable feeding schedules on chimpanzee behavior. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1995, 44, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Fernandez, E.J.; Timberlake, W. Mutual benefits of research collaborations between zoos and academic institutions. Zoo Biol. 2008, 27, 470–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Höttges, N.; Hjelm, M.; Hard, T.; Laska, M. How does feeding regime affect behaviour and activity in captive African lions (Panthera leo). JZAR 2019, 7, 117–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Waitt, C.; Buchanan-Smith, H.M. What time is feeding? How delays and anticipation of feeding schedules affect stump-tailed macaque behavior. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2001, 75, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Shepherdson, D.J.; Carlstead, K.; Mellen, J.D.; Seidensticker, J. The influence of food presentation on the behavior of small cats in confined environments. Zoo Biol. 1993, 12, 203–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lyons, J.; Young, R.J.; Deag, J.M. The effects of physical characteristics of the environment and feeding regime on the behavior of captive felids. Zoo Biol. 1997, 16, 71–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Brando, S.; Buchanan-Smith, H.M. The 24/7 approach to promoting optimal welfare for captive wild animals. Behav. Process. 2018, 156, 83–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Cagnacci, F.; Boitani, L.; Powell, R.A.; Boyce, M.S. Animal ecology meets GPS-based radiotelemetry: A perfect storm of opportunities and challenges. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2010, 365, 2157–2162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Gunner, R.M.; Wilson, R.P.; Holton, M.D.; Hopkins, P.; Bell, S.H.; Marks, N.J.; Bennett, N.C.; Ferreira, S.; Govender, D.; Viljoen, P.; et al. Decision rules for determining terrestrial movement and the consequences for filtering high-resolution global positioning system tracks: A case study using the African lion (Panthera leo). J. R. Soc. Interface 2022, 19, 20210692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wijers, M.; Trethowan, P.; Markham, A.; Du Preez, B.; Chamaillé-Jammes, S.; Loveridge, A.; Macdonald, D. Listening to lions: Animal-borne acoustic sensors improve bio-logger calibration and behaviour classification performance. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2018, 6, 171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. D’Eon, R.G.; Delparte, D. Effects of radio-collar position and orientation on GPS radio-collar performance, and the implications of PDOP in data screening. J. Appl. Ecol. 2005, 42, 383–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Brink, H.; Smith, R.J.; Skinner, K. Methods for lion monitoring: A comparison from the Selous Game Reserve, Tanzania. Afr. J. Ecol. 2013, 51, 366–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Caravaggi, A.; Banks, P.B.; Burton, A.C.; Finlay, C.M.V.; Haswell, P.M.; Hayward, M.W.; Rowcliffe, M.J.; Wood, M.D. A review of camera trapping for conservation behaviour research. Remote Sens. Ecol. Conserv. 2017, 3, 109–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Silveira, L.; Jácomo, A.T.; Diniz-Filho, J.A.F. Camera trap, line transect census and track surveys: A comparative evaluation. Biol. Conserv. 2003, 114, 351–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Rovero, F.; Zimmermann, F. Camera Trapping for Wildlife Research; Pelagic Publishing: Exeter, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  56. Azlan, J.M.; Sharma, D.S.K. The diversity and activity patterns of wild felids in a secondary forest in Peninsular Malaysia. Oryx 2006, 40, 36–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Johnson, A.; Vongkhamheng, C.; Hedemark, M.; Saithongdam, T. Effects of human? Carnivore conflict on tiger (Panthera tigris) and prey populations in Lao PDR. Anim. Conserv. 2006, 9, 421–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Vogt, K.; Zimmermann, F.; Kölliker, M.; Breitenmoser, U. Scent-marking behaviour and social dynamics in a wild population of Eurasian lynx Lynx lynx. Behav. Process. 2014, 106, 98–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Brereton, J.E.; Tuke, J.; Fernandez, E.J. A simulated comparison of behavioural observation sampling methods. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 3096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Altmann, J. Observational Study of Behavior: Sampling Methods. Behaviour 1974, 49, 227–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Burger, A.L.; Fennessy, J.; Fennessy, S.; Dierkes, P.W. Nightly selection of resting sites and group behavior reveal antipredator strategies in giraffe. Ecol. Evol. 2020, 10, 2917–2927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Gübert, J.; Hahn-Klimroth, M.; Dierkes, P.W. BOVIDS: A deep learning-based software package for pose estimation to evaluate nightly behavior and its application to common elands (Tragelaphus oryx) in zoos. Ecol. Evol. 2022, 12, e8701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Marks, M.; Qiuhan, J.; Sturman, O.; Von Ziegler, L.; Kollmorgen, S.; von der Behrens, W.; Mante, V.; Bohacek, J.; Yanik, M.F. Deep-learning based identification, tracking, pose estimation, and behavior classification of interacting primates and mice in complex environments. Nat. Mach. Intell. 2022, 4, 331–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Fazio, J.M.; Barthel, T.; Freeman, E.W.; Garlick-Ott, K.; Scholle, A.; Brown, J.L. Utilizing camera traps, closed circuit cameras and behavior observation software to monitor activity budgets, habitat use, and social interactions of zoo-housed asian elephants (Elephus maximus). Animals 2020, 10, 2026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. European Association of Zoos and Aquaria. EAZA Standards for the Accommodation and Care of Animals in Zoos and Aquaria; EAZA: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  66. Bauer, H.; Packer, C.; Funston, P.F.; Henschel, P.; Nowell, K. Panthera leo. 2016, p. e.T15951A115130419. Available online: https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-3.RLTS.T15951A107265605.en (accessed on 20 April 2022).
  67. Durant, S.; Mitchell, N.; Ipavec, A.; Groom, R. Acinonyx jubatus. 2015, p. e.T219A50649567. Available online: https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-4.RLTS.T219A50649567.en (accessed on 20 April 2022).
  68. Burger, A.L.; Hartig, J.; Dierkes, P.W. Shedding light into the dark: Age and light shape nocturnal activity and sleep behaviour of giraffe. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2020, 229, 105012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Hill, S.P.; Broom, D.M. Measuring zoo animal welfare: Theory and practice. Zoo Biol. 2009, 28, 531–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Watters, J.V.; Margulis, S.W.; Atsalis, S. Behavioral monitoring in zoos and aquariums: A tool for guiding husbandry and directing research. Zoo Biol. 2009, 28, 35–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Friard, O.; Gamba, M. BORIS: A free, versatile open-source event-logging software for video/audio coding and live observations. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2016, 7, 1325–1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Regaiolli, B.; Rizzo, A.; Ottolini, G.; Miletto Petrazzini, M.E.; Spiezio, C.; Agrillo, C. Motion Illusions as Environmental Enrichment for Zoo Animals: A Preliminary Investigation on Lions (Panthera leo). Front. Psychol. 2019, 10, 2220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Bashaw, M.J.; Kelling, A.S.; Bloomsmith, M.A.; Maple, T.L. Environmental effects on the behavior of zoo-housed lions and tigers with a case study of the effects of a visual barrier on pacing. J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 2007, 10, 95–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Siahaan, D.A.S.; Berliani, K.; Hartanto, A.; Tanjung, H.M.M.; Nurbayti. Study on daily activity pattern of captive lion (Panthera leo) in Siantar Zoo, North Sumatra, Indonesia. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1462, 12049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Fink, L.B.; Scarlata, C.D.; VanBeek, B.; Bodner, T.E.; Wielebnowski, N.C. Applying behavioral and physiological measures to assess the relative impact of the prolonged COVID-19 pandemic closure on two mammal species at the Oregon Zoo: Cheetah (A. jubatus) and giraffe (G. c. reticulata and G. c. tippelskirchii). Animals 2021, 11, 3526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Quirke, T.; O’Riordan, R.M.; Zuur, A. Factors influencing the prevalence of stereotypical behaviour in captive cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2012, 142, 189–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Quirke, T.; O’Riordan, R.M. The effect of different types of enrichment on the behaviour of cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) in captivity. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2011, 133, 87–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Skibiel, A.L.; Trevino, H.S.; Naugher, K. Comparison of several types of enrichment for captive felids. Zoo Biol. 2007, 26, 371–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Clubb, R.; Mason, G.J. Natural behavioural biology as a risk factor in carnivore welfare: How analysing species differences could help zoos improve enclosures. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2007, 102, 303–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Munita, C.; Tadich, T.A.; Briceño, C. Comparison of 2 behavioral sampling methods to establish a time budget in a captive female cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus). J. Vet. Behav. 2016, 13, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Rose, P.E.; Riley, L.M. Conducting behavioural research in the zoo: A guide to ten important methods, concepts and theories. JZBG 2021, 2, 421–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Halle, S.; Stenseth, N. Activity Patterns in Small Mammals: An ecological Approach; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2000; ISBN 978-3-642-62128-4. [Google Scholar]
  83. Burger, A.L.; Hartig, J.; Dierkes, P.W. Biological and environmental factors as sources of variation in nocturnal behavior of giraffe. Zoo Biol. 2021, 40, 171–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Cavallini, P.; Dragoo, J.; Garshelis, D.; Gaubert, P.; Gilchrist, J.; Goodmann, S.; Holekamp, K. Carnivores; Lynx: Barcelona, Spain, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  85. Haas, S.K.; Hayssen, V.; Krausman, P.R. Panthera leo. Mamm. Species 2005, 762, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Hayward, M.W.; Hayward, G.J. Activity patterns of reintroduced lion Panthera leo and spotted hyaena Crocuta crocuta in the Addo Elephant National Park, South Africa. Afr. J. Ecol. 2006, 45, 135–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Kohari, D.; Sunada, A.; Matsui, Y.; Ootaki, A.; Hori, H. Behavioral restriction effects on activity motivation of a captive lion (Panthera leo persica). J. Vet. Behav. 2017, 17, 14–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Suraci, J.P.; Frank, L.G.; Oriol-Cotterill, A.; Ekwanga, S.; Williams, T.M.; Wilmers, C.C. Behavior-specific habitat selection by African lions may promote their persistence in a human-dominated landscape. Ecology 2019, 100, e02644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Bashaw, M.J.; Bloomsmith, M.A.; Marr, M.J.; Maple, T.L. To hunt or not to hunt? A feeding enrichment experiment with captive large felids. Zoo Biol. 2003, 22, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Altman, J.D.; Gross, K.L.; Lowry, S.R. Nutritional and behavioral effects of gorge and fast feeding in captive lions. J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 2005, 8, 47–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  91. Bissett, C.; Bernard, R.T.F. Habitat selection and feeding ecology of the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) in thicket vegetation: Is the cheetah a savanna specialist? J. Zool. 2007, 271, 310–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Wilson, A.M.; Lowe, J.C.; Roskilly, K.; Hudson, P.E.; Golabek, K.A.; McNutt, J.W. Locomotion dynamics of hunting in wild cheetahs. Nature 2013, 498, 185–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Funston, P.J.; Mills, M.G.L.; Biggs, H.C. Factors affecting the hunting success of male and female lions in the Kruger National Park. J. Zool. 2001, 253, 419–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Rigoudy, N.L.A.; Clinchy, M.; Peel, M.J.S.; Huebner, S.; Packer, C.; Zanette, L.Y. Hierarchy of fear: Experimentally testing ungulate reactions to lion, African wild dog and cheetah. Behav. Ecol. 2022, 33, 789–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Wilson, A.M.; Hubel, T.Y.; Wilshin, S.D.; Lowe, J.C.; Lorenc, M.; Dewhirst, O.P.; Bartlam-Brooks, H.L.A.; Diack, R.; Bennitt, E.; Golabek, K.A.; et al. Biomechanics of predator–prey arms race in lion, zebra, cheetah and impala. Nature 2018, 554, 183–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Hilborn, A.; Pettorelli, N.; Caro, T.; Kelly, M.J.; Laurenson, M.K.; Durant, S.M. Cheetahs modify their prey handling behavior depending on risks from top predators. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2018, 72, 74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. McPhee, M.E. Intact carcasses as enrichment for large felids: Effects on on- and off-exhibit behaviors. Zoo Biol. 2002, 21, 37–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Sengenberger, K.; Bus, H.; Versteege, L. EAZA-Best practice guidelines cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus). Recuper. El 2018, 1, 28–29. [Google Scholar]
  99. Kiffner, C.; Kioko, J.; Leweri, C.; Krause, S. Seasonal patterns of mixed species groups in large East African mammals. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e113446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Young, T.; Finegan, E.; Brown, R.D. Effects of summer microclimates on behavior of lions and tigers in zoos. Int. J. Biometeorol. 2013, 57, 381–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Animals 12 02367 g001 550
Figure 1. Diurnal (7a.m.–7p.m.) and nocturnal (7p.m.–7a.m.) activity budget across individuals and zoos: Percentages of behaviour states for lions (A,B) and cheetahs (C,D). The day phase is shown in the left column (A,C) and the night phase in the right column (B,D). For identification, individuals were categorised as follows: species/individual/zoo.
Figure 1. Diurnal (7a.m.–7p.m.) and nocturnal (7p.m.–7a.m.) activity budget across individuals and zoos: Percentages of behaviour states for lions (A,B) and cheetahs (C,D). The day phase is shown in the left column (A,C) and the night phase in the right column (B,D). For identification, individuals were categorised as follows: species/individual/zoo.
Animals 12 02367 g001
Animals 12 02367 g002 550
Figure 2. Time course of resting behaviour over 24 h: Resting behaviour of lions (A–C) and cheetahs (D–F) over a study period of 14 days (7a.m.–7p.m.) and nights (7p.m.–7a.m.). For identification purposes, individuals were categorised as follows: species/individual/zoo. Arrows mark feeding events throughout the observation period. Grey areas show dark periods. In zoo3 (E) dark periods vary between individuals due to different observation periods.
Figure 2. Time course of resting behaviour over 24 h: Resting behaviour of lions (A–C) and cheetahs (D–F) over a study period of 14 days (7a.m.–7p.m.) and nights (7p.m.–7a.m.). For identification purposes, individuals were categorised as follows: species/individual/zoo. Arrows mark feeding events throughout the observation period. Grey areas show dark periods. In zoo3 (E) dark periods vary between individuals due to different observation periods.
Animals 12 02367 g002
Animals 12 02367 g003 550
Figure 3. Diurnal (7 a.m.–7 p.m.) and nocturnal (7 p.m.–7 a.m.) sleep patterns of lions. (A) Duration per sleep event and (B) Number of sleep events per day (white boxes) and per night (grey boxes); n.s. > 0.05; ★ p < 0.05; ★★ p < 0.01; ★★★ p < 0.001) over the total observation period.
Figure 3. Diurnal (7 a.m.–7 p.m.) and nocturnal (7 p.m.–7 a.m.) sleep patterns of lions. (A) Duration per sleep event and (B) Number of sleep events per day (white boxes) and per night (grey boxes); n.s. > 0.05; ★ p < 0.05; ★★ p < 0.01; ★★★ p < 0.001) over the total observation period.
Animals 12 02367 g003
Animals 12 02367 g004 550
Figure 4. Diurnal (7 a.m.–7 p.m.) and nocturnal (7 p.m.–7 a.m.) sleep patterns of cheetahs. (A) Duration per sleep event and (B) Number of sleep events per day (white boxes) and per night (grey boxes); n.s. > 0.05; ★ p < 0.05; ★★ p < 0.01; ★★★ p < 0.001) over the total observation period.
Figure 4. Diurnal (7 a.m.–7 p.m.) and nocturnal (7 p.m.–7 a.m.) sleep patterns of cheetahs. (A) Duration per sleep event and (B) Number of sleep events per day (white boxes) and per night (grey boxes); n.s. > 0.05; ★ p < 0.05; ★★ p < 0.01; ★★★ p < 0.001) over the total observation period.
Animals 12 02367 g004
Table
Table 1. Ethogram of captive Felidae. The classification of behaviours into resting and activity was done according to Regaiolli et al. [72].
Table 1. Ethogram of captive Felidae. The classification of behaviours into resting and activity was done according to Regaiolli et al. [72].
Behaviour StateDefinitionBehaviour
Image
Active
Feeding/DrinkingCat searches for food, ingests food by means of chewing or ingests water.Animals 12 02367 i001
LocomotionWalking, running or jumping with a forward locomotion.Animals 12 02367 i002
StandingCat is in an upright position, immobile, with all four paws on the ground and legs extended, supporting the body.Animals 12 02367 i003
SittingBody is in an upright position, with the hind legs flexed and touching the ground, while front legs are extended and straight.Animals 12 02367 i004
Rest
LyingCat’s body is on the ground in a horizontal position, including on its side, back, belly or curled in a circular formation.Animals 12 02367 i005
SleepingCat is lying on the ground with its head down, performing minimal head or leg movement and is not easily disturbed.Animals 12 02367 i006
OutThe animal is not visible on recordsAnimals 12 02367 i007
Table
Table 2. Percentages of individual behaviour states of cheetahs and lions during day and night. Differences between day and night were tested for significance (right column).
Table 2. Percentages of individual behaviour states of cheetahs and lions during day and night. Differences between day and night were tested for significance (right column).
Lion (n = 6)Cheetah (n = 5)
Behaviour StateDay (%)Night (%)p-ValueTdfDay (%)Night (%)p-ValueTdf
Active26.8 ± 7.44.1 ± 3.4<0.00122.292651.2 ± 11.56.3 ± 6.2<0.00138.3826
Locomote18.4 ± 4.83.1 ± 3.2<0.00118.112643.6 ± 10.75.4 ± 5.7<0.00128.6226
Standing4.9 ± 2.10.8 ± 0.6<0.00114.38261.9 ± 0.70.2 ± 0.1<0.0019.2726
Feeding/Drinking2.4 ± 1.90.2 ± 0.4<0.0014.78263.1 ± 1.20.0 ± 0.0<0.00114.0526
Sitting1.1 ± 0.60.0 ± 0.0<0.0015.65262.6 ± 1.30.7 ± 0.7<0.0017.9226
Rest72.8 ± 7.495.8 ± 3.4<0.001−22.292648.2 ± 11.593.4 ± 6.2<0.001−38.2426
Lying44.6 ± 10.77.9 ± 2.3<0.00132.172631.0 ± 10.218.3 ± 5.3<0.00110.3726
Sleeping28.2 ± 5.287.9 ± 4.7<0.001−43.302617.2 ± 6.875.1 ± 6.9<0.001−50.5526
Out0.4 ± 0.40.1 ± 0.2n.s.3.16260.6 ± 1.30.3 ± 0.5n.s.1.0326
Table
Table 3. Sleep behaviour of lions and cheetahs.
Table 3. Sleep behaviour of lions and cheetahs.
CheetahLionp-ValueTdf
Total sleep time [hr]Day2.05 ± 0.233.38 ± 0.43<0.0017.48127
Night9.01 ± 0.6510.57 ± 1.5<0.00112.2727
Sleep behaviour [%]Day17.1 ± 6.828.2 ± 5.2<0.00116.3427
Night75.1 ± 6.987.9 ± 4.7<0.00159.0427
Duration per sleep event [min]Day11.0 ± 13.818.6 ± 25.4<0.00114.7927
Night28.6 ± 38.978.9 ± 87.7<0.0019.7927
Sleep events (no.)Day11.2 ± 5.310.9 ± 4.6<0.00122.6027
Night18.9 ± 5.78.0 ± 4.4<0.00110.7627
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Seyrling, I.; Dierkes, P.W.; Burger, A.L. Diurnal and Nocturnal Behaviour of Cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) and Lions (Panthera leo) in Zoos. Animals 2022, 12, 2367. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12182367

AMA Style

Seyrling I, Dierkes PW, Burger AL. Diurnal and Nocturnal Behaviour of Cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) and Lions (Panthera leo) in Zoos. Animals. 2022; 12(18):2367. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12182367

Chicago/Turabian Style

Seyrling, Isabel, Paul Wilhelm Dierkes, and Anna Lena Burger. 2022. "Diurnal and Nocturnal Behaviour of Cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) and Lions (Panthera leo) in Zoos" Animals 12, no. 18: 2367. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12182367

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop