Impact of an enclosure rotation on the activity budgets of two zoo-housed giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca): An observational case study


Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Eat, Sleep, Work

Subject: Education, Multidisciplinary - Social Sciences


ISSN: 2205-0612
eISSN: 2206-5369





Volume / Issue / page

Volume 2 (2017)
Volume 1 (2016)
Related articles

VOLUME 1 , ISSUE 1 (December 2016) > List of articles

Impact of an enclosure rotation on the activity budgets of two zoo-housed giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca): An observational case study

Jillian Claire Ryan * / Carla A Litchfield

Keywords : Giant pandas; enclosure rotation; exhibit use; activity budget; enrichment

Citation Information : Eat, Sleep, Work. Volume 1, Issue 1, Pages 26-38, DOI:

License : (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Published Online: 10-September-2020



Captive giant pandas are reported in the literature to perform stereotypic behaviours which are considered to be a behavioural indicator of stress. Although environmental enrichment techniques are commonly used to prevent and/or mitigate performance of stereotypic behaviour in captive giant pandas, evaluation of such techniques is rarely undertaken or reported. This study used behavioural observation methodologies to evaluate the impact of an enclosure rotation as enrichment on the activity budgets of two captive giant pandas, Funi and Wang Wang, housed at the Adelaide Zoo in South Australia. Instantaneous time sampling methods were used to record the giant pandas’ behaviour and location in each enclosure at 180-second intervals over a total of 180 hours (132 baseline hours, 48 post-intervention hours). Following the enclosure rotation, Funi demonstrated a reduction in performance of stereotypic pacing (from 11% of scans at baseline to 4% of scans post-intervention), as well as a notable decrease in frequency of performance of stereotypic somersaults with this aberrant behaviour ceasing completely on the 8th day of data collection post-enclosure rotation. Whilst Wang Wang’s performance of stereotypic pacing remained comparably stable across the study period (about 6 – 7% of scans), the enclosure rotation led to a marked increase in sexual communication behaviours and moderate increases in overall activity. Findings from this case study indicate that enclosure rotations may be an effective behavioural enrichment technique for reducing performance of stereotypic behaviours and increasing behavioural repertoire and activity in zoo-housed giant pandas.

Content not available PDF Share



1. Mason G, Clubb R, Latham N, Vickery S. Why and how should we use environmental enrichment to tackle stereotypic behaviour? Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2007;102(3):163-188.
2. Powell DM, Carlstead K, Tarou R, Brown JL, Monfort SL. Effects of construction noise on behavior and cortisol levels in a pair of captive giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). Zoo Biol. 2006;25(5):391-408.
3. Mainka SA, Zhang H. Daily activity of captive giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) at the Wolong Reserve. Zoo Biol. 1994;13(1):13-20.
4. Liu D, Wang Z, Tian H, Yu C, Zhang G, Wei R, Zhang H. Behavior of giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) in captive conditions: gender differences and enclosure effects. Zoo Biol. 2003;22(1):77-82.
5. Peng J, Jiang Z, Qin G, Huang Q, Li Y, Jiao Z, Zhang, F, Li, Z, Zhang, J, Lu Y, Liu, X, Liu, J. Impact of activity space on the reproductive behaviour of giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) in captivity. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2007; 104(1):151-161.
6. Sandhaus EA. Variation of feeding regimes: Eefect on Giant Panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) behavior. (Unpublished masters dissertation), Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia, 2004. Retrieved from http://smartech. estelle_a_200412_mast.pdf.txt?sequence=2
7. Liu J, Chen Y, Guo L, Gu B, Liu H, Hou A, Liu, X, Sun L, Liu D. Stereotypic behaviour and fecal cortisol level in captive giant pandas in relation to environmental enrichment. Zoo Biol. 2006;25:445-459.
8. Swaisgood RR, Ellis S, Forthman DL, Shepherdson DJ. Commentary: improving well-being for captive giant pandas: theoretical and practical issues. Zoo Biol. 2003;22(4):347-354.
9. Nie Y, Speakman JR, Wu Q, Zhang C, Hu Y, Xia M, Yan L, Hambly C, Wang L, Wei W, Zhang J, Wei F. Exceptionally low daily energy expenditure in the bamboo-eating giant panda. Science. 2015;349(6244):171-174.
10. Swaisgood RR, White AM, Zhou X, Zhang G, Lindburg DG. How do giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) respond to varying properties of enrichments? A comparison of behavioral profiles among five enrichment items. J Comp Psychol. 2005;119:325-344.
11. Shyne A. Meta-analytic review of the effects of enrichment on stereotypic behavior in zoo mammals. Zoo Biol. 2006;25(4):317-337.
12. Powell DM, Svoke JT. Novel environmental enrichment may provide a tool for rapid assessment of animal personality: a case study with giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2008;11:301-318.
13. Swaisgood RR, White AM, Zhou X, Zhang H, Zhang G, Wei R., Hare VJ, Tepper EM, Lindburg, DG. A quantitative assessment of the efficacy of an environmental enrichment programme for giant pandas. Anim Behav. 2001;61:447-457.
14. Zhang G, Swaisgood RR, Zhang H. Evaluation of behavioral factors influencing reproductive success and failure in captive giant pandas. Zoo Biol. 2004;23(1):15-31.
15. Melfi VA. There are big gaps in our knowledge, and thus approach, to zoo animal welfare: a case for evidence‐based zoo animal management. Zoo Biol. 2009;28(6):574-588.
16. Lukas KE, Hoff MP, Maple TL. Gorilla behavior in response to systematic alternation between zoo enclosures. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2003;81(4):367-386.
17. Swaisgood RR. Giant Panda behaviour research methods. 2004. Retrieved from research/protocol_articles/behaviourethogram.htm
18. Altmann J. Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behaviour. 1975;49(3):227-267.
19. Marsh DM, Hanlon TJ. Seeing what we want to see: confirmation bias in animal behaviour research. Ethology. 2007;113:1089-1098.
20. Balph DF, Balph MH. On the psychology of watching birds: the problem of observer-expectancy bias. The Auk. 1983;100:755-758.
21. Plowman A. A note on a modification of the spread of participation index allowing for unequal zones. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2003;83(4):331-336.
22. Skinner BF. ‘Superstition’ in the pigeon. J Exp Psychol. 1948;38(2):168.
23. Timberlake W, Lucas GA. Behavior systems and learning: from misbehavior to general principles. In: Klein SB, Mowrer RR, editors. Contemporary learning theories: instrumental conditioning theory and the impact of biological constraints on learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1989.
24. Hagey L, MacDonald E. Chemical cues identify gender and individuality in giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca).  J Chem Ecol. 2003;29(6):1479-1488.