Challenges and Directions in Zoo and Aquarium Food Presentation Research: A Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Search Terms
3. Current Practices
4. Behavioral Impacts
5. Nutritional Effects
6. Microbiological Effects
7. Future Directions
7.1. Animal Behavior Directions
7.2. Nutrition and Microbial Directions
7.3. Keeper Directions
8. Conclusions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Das, A. Current trends in feeding and nutrition of zoo animals: A review. Indian J. Anim. Nutr. 2018, 35, 242–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hosey, G.; Melfi, V.; Pankhurst, S. Zoo Animals: Behaviour, Management, and Welfare, 2nd ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2013; pp. 418–454. [Google Scholar]
- Kononoff, P.J.; Heinrichs, A.J.; Lehman, H.A. The effect of corn silage particle size on eating behavior, chewing activities, and rumen fermentation in lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2003, 86, 3343–3353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Deswysen, A.; Vanbelle, M.; Focant, M. The effect of silage chop length on the voluntary intake and rumination behaviour of sheep. J. Brit. Grassl. Soc. 1978, 33, 107–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Webb, L.E.; Jensen, M.B.; Engel, B.; van Reenen, C.G.; Gerrits, W.J.; de Boer, I.; Bokkers, E.A.M. Chopped or long roughage: What do calves prefer? Using cross point analysis of double demand functions. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e88778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cabana, F.; Plowman, A.; Van Nguyen, T.; Chin, S.C.; Wu, S.L.; Lo, H.Y.; Watabe, H.; Yamamoto, F. Feeding Asian pangolins: An assessment of current diets fed in institutions worldwide. Zoo Biol. 2017, 36, 298–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Field, D.A.; Thomas, R. Environmental enrichment for psittacines at Edinburgh zoo. Int. Zoo Yearbook 2000, 37, 232–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Troxell-Smith, S.M.; Whelani, C.; Magle, S.B.; Brown, S. Zoo foraging ecology: Development and assessment of a welfare tool for. Anim. Welf. 2017, 26, 265–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Plowman, A.; Green, K.; Taylor, L. Should zoo food be chopped? In Animal Nutrition, 3rd ed.; Fidgett, A., Clauss, M., Eds.; Filander Verlag: Frankfurt, Germany, 2006; pp. 193–201. [Google Scholar]
- Sandri, C.; Regaiolli, B.; Vespiniani, A.; Spiezio, C. New food provision strategy for a colony of Barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus), effects on social hierarchy? Integr. Food Nutr. Metab. 2017, 4, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Young, R.J. The importance of food presentation for animal welfare and conservation. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 1997, 56, 1095–1104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Smith, A.; Lindburg, D.G.; Vehrencamp, S. Effect of food preparation on feeding behavior of lion-tailed macaques. Zoo Biol. 1989, 8, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nunes, A.J.; Parsons, G.J. Food handling efficiency and particle size selectivity by the southern brown shrimp Penaeus subtilis fed a dry pelleted feed. Mar. Freshw. Behav. Physiol. 1998, 31, 193–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mathy, J.W.; Isbell, L.A. The relative importance of size of food and interfood distance in eliciting aggression in captive rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). Folia Primatol. 2001, 72, 268–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shora, J.A.; Myhill, M.G.N.; Brereton, J.E. Should zoo foods be coati chopped? J. Zoo Aquar. Res. 2018, 6, 22–25. [Google Scholar]
- Brecht, J.K. Physiology of lightly processed fruits and vegetables. Hort. Sci. 1995, 30, 18–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hodges, D.M.; Toivonen, P.M. Quality of fresh-cut fruits and vegetables as affected by exposure to abiotic stress. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2008, 48, 155–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Britt, S.; Cowlard, K.; Baker, K.; Plowman, A. Aggression and self-directed behaviour of captive lemurs (Lemur catta, Varecia variegata, V. rubra and Eulemur coronatus) is reduced by feeding fruit-free diets. J. Zoo Aquar. Res. 2015, 3, 52–60. [Google Scholar]
- Bhardwaj, R.L.; Pandey, S. Juice blends—A way of utilization of under-utilized fruits, vegetables, and spices: A review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2011, 51, 563–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rozek, J.C.; Danner, L.M.; Stucky, P.A.; Millam, J.R. Over-sized pellets naturalize foraging time of captive Orange-winged Amazon parrots (Amazona amazonica). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2010, 125, 80–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Plowman, A. Diet review and change for monkeys at Paignton Zoo Environmental Park. J. Zoo Aquar. Res. 2013, 1, 73–77. [Google Scholar]
- Knights, B. Food particle-size preferences and feeding behaviour in warmwater aquaculture of European eel, Anguilla anguilla (L.). Aquaculture 1983, 30, 173–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edge, H.L.; Dalby, J.A.; Rowlinson, P.; Varley, M.A. The effect of pellet diameter on the performance of young pigs. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2005, 97, 203–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kammes, K.L.; Allen, M.S. Nutrient demand interacts with grass particle length to affect digestion responses and chewing activity in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2012, 95, 807–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kenney, P.A.; Black, J.L.; Colebrook, W.F. Factors affecting diet selection by sheep. 3. Dry matter content and particle length of forage. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 1984, 35, 831–838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Couderc, J.J.; Rearte, D.H.; Schroeder, G.F.; Ronchi, J.I.; Santini, F.J. Silage chop length and hay supplementation on milk yield, chewing activity, and ruminal digestion by dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 2006, 89, 3599–3608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Smith, I.P.; Metcalfe, N.B.; Huntingford, F.A. The effects of food pellet dimensions on feeding responses by Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) in a marine net pen. Aquaculture 1995, 130, 167–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Obaldo, L.G.; Masuda, R. Effect of diet size on feeding behavior and growth of Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei. J. Appl. Aqua 2006, 18, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cocci, E.; Rocculi, P.; Romani, S.; Dalla Rosa, M. Changes in nutritional properties of minimally processed apples during storage. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2006, 39, 265–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keenan, D.F.; Rößle, C.; Gormley, R.; Butler, F.; Brunton, N.P. Effect of high hydrostatic pressure and thermal processing on the nutritional quality and enzyme activity of fruit smoothies. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2012, 45, 50–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sasaki, F.F.C.; del Aguila, J.S.; Gallo, C.R.; Jacomino, A.P.; Kluge, R.A. Physiological, qualitative and microbiological changes of minimally processed squash stored at different temperatures. Rev. Iberoam. 2014, 15, 210–220. [Google Scholar]
- Lemmens, L.; Colle, I.J.; Van Buggenhout, S.; Van Loey, A.M.; Hendrickx, M.E. Quantifying the influence of thermal process parameters on in vitro β-carotene bioaccessibility: A case study on carrots. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2011, 59, 3162–3167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sothornvit, R.; Rodsamran, P. Effect of a mango film on quality of whole and minimally processed mangoes. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2008, 47, 407–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pyo, Y.H.; Jin, Y.J.; Hwang, J.Y. Comparison of the effects of blending and juicing on the phytochemicals contents and antioxidant capacity of typical Korean kernel fruit juices. Prev. Nutr. Food Sci. 2014, 19, 108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Castillejo, N.; Martínez-Hernández, G.B.; Monaco, K.; Gómez, P.A.; Aguayo, E.; Artés, F.; Artés-Hernández, F. Preservation of bioactive compounds of a green vegetable smoothie using short time–high temperature mild thermal treatment. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 2017, 23, 46–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Picouet, P.A.; Hurtado, A.; Jofré, A.; Bañon, S.; Ros, J.M.; Guàrdia, M.D. Effects of thermal and high-pressure treatments on the microbiological, nutritional and sensory quality of a multi-fruit smoothie. Food Bioproc. Technol. 2016, 9, 1219–1232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Watada, A.E.; Ko, N.P.; Minott, D.A. Factors affecting quality of fresh-cut horticultural products. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 1996, 9, 115–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McDonald, P. Animal Nutrition; Pearson Education: London, UK, 2002; pp. 154–158. [Google Scholar]
- Ahvenainen, R. New approaches in improving the shelf life of minimally processed fruit and vegetables. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 1996, 7, 179–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brackett, R.E. Microbiological consequences of minimally processed fruits and vegetables. J. Food Qual. 1987, 10, 195–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kieft, T.L.; Simmons, K.A. Allometry of animal–microbe interactions and global census of animal-associated microbes. Proc. R. Soc. B 2015, 282, 20150702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Heaton, J.C.; Jones, K. Microbial contamination of fruit and vegetables and the behaviour of enteropathogens in the phyllosphere: A review. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2008, 104, 613–626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Svobodová, J.; Tůmová, E. Factors affecting microbial contamination of market eggs: A review. Sci. Agric. 2015, 45, 226–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nguyen-the, C.; Carlin, F. The microbiology of minimally processed fresh fruits and vegetables. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. 1994, 34, 371–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Epriliati, I.; D’Arcy, B.; Gidley, M. Nutriomic analysis of fresh and processed fruit products. 2. During in vitro simultaneous molecular passages using Caco-2 cell monolayers. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2009, 57, 3377–3388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lehto, M.; Kuisma, R.; Määttä, J.; Kymäläinen, H.R.; Mäki, M. Hygienic level and surface contamination in fresh-cut vegetable production plants. Food Control 2011, 22, 469–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Purvis, U.; Sharpe, A.N.; Bergener, D.M.; Lachapelle, G.; Milling, M.; Spiring, F. Comparison of bacterial counts obtained from naturally contaminated foods by means of stomacher and blender. Can. J. Microbiol. 1987, 33, 52–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Broderick, N.A. Friend, foe or food? Recognition and the role of antimicrobial peptides in gut immunity and Drosophila–microbe interactions. Proc. R. Soc. B 2016, 371, 20150295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dänicke, S.; Meyer, U.; Kersten, S.; Frahm, J. Animal models to study the impact of nutrition on the immune system of the transition cow. Res. Vet. Sci. 2018, 116, 15–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Melfi, V.A. 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, 574–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hammerton, R.; Hunt, K.A.; Riley, L.M. An investigation into keeper opinions of great ape diets and abnormal behaviour. J. Zoo Aquar. Res. 2019, 7, 170–178. [Google Scholar]
- Brereton, S.R.; Brereton, J.E. Sixty years of collection planning: What species do zoos and aquariums keep? Int. Zoo Yearbook 2020, 53, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Food Presentation Style | Description | Food Types | Preparation/Presentation | Authors |
---|---|---|---|---|
Chopped items | Items are chopped into cubes of varying size (depending on the animal species and husbandry protocol). | Fruits, vegetables, carcasses, browse, and hay | Preparation | Plowman et al., Shora et al. [9,15] |
Whole food items | Food items are provided in their entire format. Skins and peels are not removed from the food. Food is sometimes used as a vehicle to administer medication. | Fruits, vegetables, carcasses, browse, and hay | Preparation | Plowman et al., Shora et al. [9,15] |
Blended | Items are processed in a blender into a liquid format. Blended food is used for certain age groups (e.g., neonates) and species (e.g., anteaters (Myrmecopaga tridactyla)). | Fruits, vegetables, meats, nuts, seeds, and pellets | Preparation | Bhardwaj and Pandey [19] |
In container | Food is placed in a bowl or trough. | Fruits, vegetables, meats, seeds, nuts, and pellets | Presentation | Hosey and Melfi [2] |
Scatter feed | Food is thrown across enclosures or mixed into a substrate so that individual items take time to find and process. Scatter feeds are typically used with small food items (chopped foods or nuts and seeds). | Fruits, vegetables, meats, seeds, nuts, and pellets | Presentation | Plowman et al., Britt et al. [9,18] |
Impaled | Enclosure furnishings such as spikes or branches are used to suspend food items. Whole food items are typically used. | Fruits, vegetables, and carcasses | Presentation | Young [11] |
Puzzle feeder | Small food items are inserted into a puzzle feeder that requires problem solving or persistence to solve. | Fruits, vegetables, seeds, and pellets | Presentation | Field and Thomas [7] |
Buried | Food items are hidden in substrates such as sand or soil. | Fruits, vegetables, meats, seeds, nuts, and pellets | Presentation | Young [11] |
On enclosure roof | Larger food items are thrown onto exhibit mesh, requiring animals to climb and manipulate their meal. | Fruits, vegetables, meats, and pellets | Presentation | Britt et al. [18] |
Order | Species | Preparation | Effects | Authors |
---|---|---|---|---|
Carnivora | Coati (Nasua nasua) | Chopped vs. whole | Reduced aggression when whole food was given. Increased food manipulation when whole food was given. | Shora et al. [15] |
Primates | Barbary macaque (Macaca sylvanus) | Chopped vs. whole | Reduced aggression when whole food was provided. Increased grooming when whole food was provided. | Sandri et al. [10] |
Lion tailed macaque (Macaca silenus) | Chopped vs. whole | Total amount of food eaten increased when whole foods were provided. Dietary diversity increased when whole foods were provided. | Plowman [21] | |
Rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) | Varying food particle size | Positive correlation was identified between food particle size and aggression. | Mathy and Isbell [14] | |
Sulawesi macaque (Macaca nigra) | Chopped vs. whole | Subordinate ate significantly more food when whole food was provided. No other changes in behavior. | Plowman et al. [9] | |
Perissodactyla | Tapir (Tapirus terrestris) | Chopped vs. whole | Significantly less foraging when whole food was provided in clumps. | Plowman et al. [9] |
Artiodactyla | Pig (Sus scrofa) | Effect of pellet size | Pigs spent significantly more time interacting with their troughs when larger pellets were given. | Edge et al. [23] |
Cattle (Bos tauros) | Chopped vs. long roughage | Calves preferred long hay to chopped hay. There was no preference when offered either long or chopped straw. | Webb et al. [5] | |
Cattle (Bos tauros) | Chopped vs. long grass | Dry matter intake increased when short grass particle lengths were offered. | Kammes, and Allen [24] | |
Cattle (Bos tauros) | Chopped vs. long hay | Hay intake was reduced when long hay stalk lengths were provided. | Couderc et al. [26] | |
Sheep (Ovis aries) | Chopped vs. long silage | Sheep ate greater quantities of short stemmed silage. | Deswysen et al. [4] | |
Sheep (Ovis aries) | Chopped vs. long grass | Dry matter intake increased when short, chopped kikuyu grass was offered. | Kenney et al. [25] | |
Psittaciformes | Orange winged Amazon parrots (Amazona amazona) | Effect of pellet size | Parrots showed significant preference for oversized pellets despite the food manipulation and chewing time increasing when large pellets were offered. | Rozek et al. [20] |
Anguilliformes | European eel (Anguilla anguilla) | Effect of pellet size | No preference shown for smaller or larger pellets. | Knights [22] |
Salmoniiformes | Salmon (Salmo salar) | Effect of pellet size | Large pellet sizes were more likely to be seized. Large pellets were more likely than small pellets to be rejected once they had been seized. | Smith and Metcalfe [27] |
Clupeiformes | Pilchard (Sardinops sagax) | Effect of prey size | Pilchards showed preference for larger prey sizes. | Obaldo, and Masuda [28] |
Decapoda | Southern brown shrimp (Penaeus subtilis) | Effect of pellet size | Shrimp showed preference for smaller pellet sizes. Shrimp were more successful at catching small pellets. | Nunes and Parsons [13] |
Pacific white shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) | Effect of pellet size | Shrimp were more likely to monopolize large pellets. | Obaldo and Masuda [28] |
Preparation Type | Effect | Explanation | Food Item | Authors |
---|---|---|---|---|
Chopping | Increased respiration | After slicing, carbon dioxide production increased. | Strawberry (Fragaria ananassa) and pear (Pyrus communis) | Brecht [16] |
Starch breakdown | Starch breakdown increased following cutting. | Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum), mangoes (Mangifera indica) | Brecht and Sothornvit and Rodsamran [16,33] | |
Ascorbic acid | Ascorbic acid (vitamin C content) reduced after cutting. | Squash (Cucurbita moschata) | Sasaki et al. [31] | |
Ethylene production | Ethylene production rapidly increased shortly after cutting. | Squash (Cucurbita moschata), tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum), cantaloupe melon (Cucumis melo) | Brecht, Sasaki et al. [16,31] | |
Desiccation | Smaller particle sizes lost water moisture more rapidly. | Squash (Cucurbita moschata) | Sasaki et al. [31] | |
All-E-β-carotene bioavailability | All-E-β-carotene was more bioavailable at smaller particle sizes. | Carrot (Daucus carota) | Lemmens et al. [32] | |
Blending | Ascorbic acid | Ascorbic acid levels were lower when drinks were prepared using blending. | Apple (Malus domestica), pear, (Pyrus communis), mandarin orange (Citrus reticulata) and persimmon (Diospyros kaki) | Pyoet al, Castillejo et al. [34,35] |
Antioxidants | Antioxidant capacity decreased (in comparison to thermally treated smoothie samples) | Cucumber (Cucumis sativus), spinach (Spinacia oleracea) | Castillejo et al., Picouet et al. [35,36] |
© 2020 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Brereton, J.E. Challenges and Directions in Zoo and Aquarium Food Presentation Research: A Review. J. Zool. Bot. Gard. 2020, 1, 13-23. https://doi.org/10.3390/jzbg1010002
Brereton JE. Challenges and Directions in Zoo and Aquarium Food Presentation Research: A Review. Journal of Zoological and Botanical Gardens. 2020; 1(1):13-23. https://doi.org/10.3390/jzbg1010002
Chicago/Turabian StyleBrereton, James Edward. 2020. "Challenges and Directions in Zoo and Aquarium Food Presentation Research: A Review" Journal of Zoological and Botanical Gardens 1, no. 1: 13-23. https://doi.org/10.3390/jzbg1010002