RECENT ARTICLES

Ashley, S.: Jess free. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 190–192. [Training raptors without use of jesses; Tracy Aviary, Salt Lake City, Utah.]

Bagley, K., and Watkinson, C.: Setting up a picture perfect success. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 206–208. [Zoo Atlanta; training two ground hornbills to paint pictures.]

Bercovitch, F.B., and Andrews, J.: Developmental milestones among African elephant calves on their first day of life. Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 120–126. [A recurrent issue confronted by zoos is the extent to which animals living ex situ have life history profiles representative of those living in situ. The lengthy lifespan of African elephants hinders collecting proper comparative data, but enough information has been published to conduct preliminary analyses comparing the developmental profile of zoo and wild African elephants on their first day of life. The authors show that calves born in a zoo stand and walk on their own for the first time at the same age as those born in the wild. Calves born in the zoo take a little longer until first successful nursing, but the difference in age between wild and zoo is not statistically significant. Male and female calves born in zoos develop at the same pace, with data insufficient to compare with wild-born calves. The authors conclude that maternal parity has an effect on the age of first nursing, but not on first standing or walking, because the initiation of suckling requires coordination between two animals. They suggest that available evidence indicates that calves born in the wild and in zoos develop at comparable rates.]

Berlepsch, L.: Frogmouth management at Sea World Orlando and Discovery Cove. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 164–168. [Podargus strigoides.]

Blinco, L., and Schille, B.: Greater flamingo (Phoenicopterus roseus) with capture myopathy: specialized care and husbandry. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 193–195. [Disney’s Animal Kingdom, Lake Buena Vista, Florida.]

Boritt, D.: Supplemental feedings to aid a parent-reared African pygmy falcon (Polihierax semitorquatus) chick. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 209–212. [Smithsonian’s National Zoo, Washington, D.C.]

Brink, J.: Development of an aviary training program: enhancing the daily management of Zoo Atlanta’s bird collection. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 140–144.

Brown, J.L., Kersey, D.C., Freeman, E.W., and Wagener, T.: Assessment of diurnal urinary cortisol excretion in Asian and African elephants using different endocrine methods. Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 274–283. [Longitudinal urine samples were collected from Asian and African elephants to assess sample processing and immunoassay techniques for monitoring adrenal activity. Temporal profiles of urinary cortisol measured by RIA and EIA, with and without dichloromethane extraction, were similar; all correlation coefficients were > 0.90. However, based on regression analyses, cortisol immunoactivity in extracted samples was only 72–81% of that of unextracted values. Within assay technique, RIA values were only 74–81% of EIA values. Collection of 24-hour urine samples demonstrated a clear diurnal pattern of glucocorticoid excretion, with the lowest concentrations observed just before midnight and peak concentrations occurring around 0600–0800 hr. These results indicate that elephants fit the pattern of a diurnal species, and that glucocorticoid production is affected by a sleep–wake cycle similar to that described for other terrestrial mammals. Cortisol can be measured in both extracted and unextracted urine using RIA and EIA methodologies. However, unexplained differences in quantitative results suggest there may be sample matrix effects and that data generated using different techniques may not be directly comparable or interchangeable.]

Brusilow, E., Emrich, T., Lee, T., and McKay, K.: Sessions for all seasons: lappet-faced vulture training. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 234–237. [Disney’s Animal Kingdom, Lake Buena Vista, Florida.]

Crowe, C.: Artificially inseminating white-naped cranes. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 176–182. [Grus vipio.]

Dale, R.H.I.: Birth statistics for African (Loxodonta africana) and Asian (Elephas maximus) elephants in human care: history and implications for elephant welfare. Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 87–103. [African and Asian elephants have lived in the care of humans for many years, yet there is no consensus concerning some basic parameters describing their newborn calves. This study provides a broad empirical basis for generalizations about the birth heights, birth weights, birth times and gestation periods of elephant calves born in captivity. The author obtained data concerning at least one of these four characteristics for 218 newborn calves from 74 institutions. Over the past 30 years, newborn Asian elephants have been taller and heavier than newborn African elephants. Neonatal African elephants exhibited sex differences in both weight and height, whereas neonatal Asian elephants have exhibited sex differences only in height. Primiparous dams ex situ are at least as old as their in situ counterparts, whereas ex situ sires appear to be younger than sires in range countries. Confirming earlier anecdotal evidence, both African and Asian dams gave birth most often at night.]

Derousie, M.: The management and breeding program for roseate spoonbills at the Palm Beach Zoo at Dreher Park. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 220–224. [Ajaia ajaja.]

Evans, J.: Designing a keeper- and bird-friendly enrichment program. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 155–157. [Tracy Aviary, Salt Lake City, Utah.]

Freeman, E.W., Schulte, B.A., and Brown, J.L.: Investigating the impact of rank and ovarian activity on the social behavior of captive female African elephants. Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 154–167. [Over a third of captive female African elephants in North America fail to exhibit normal estrous cycles based on long-term serum progestagen analyses. Why acyclicity occurs is unknown; however, the majority of noncycling females are ranked by keepers as the dominant individual within the group. To investigate the relationship between ovarian cyclicity status and keeper-determined social rank, observations were conducted on 33 female African elephants (18 cycling, 15 noncycling). Based on keeper evaluations, five cycling elephants were ranked dominant, seven in the middle and six as subordinate. In contrast, ten noncycling elephants were ranked as dominant and five as subordinate, with none ranked as middle. When comparing the behavior of the elephants by their keeper-determined rank, the dominant females were significantly more likely to approach, displace and push. Similarly, keeper-determined subordinate females more frequently presented their hind end and held their ears erect. Behaviors initiated by one elephant toward another did not vary between cycling and noncycling females, except when the interaction with social rank was tested. Dominant, noncycling females initiated a higher percentage of ‘approach’ and ‘displace’ behaviors than both cycling and noncycling, subordinate elephants. Subordinate, noncycling elephants displayed the highest percentage of ‘ears erect’. Social rank drives the interactions of ex situ female African elephants more than ovarian cyclicity status. Thus, behavioral interactions cannot be used to predict which cycling elephants are most likely to become acyclic.]

Freeman, E.W., Schulte, B.A., and Brown, J.L.: Using behavioral observations and keeper questionnaires to assess social relationships among captive female African elephants. Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 140–153. [Free-ranging African elephants are highly social animals that live in a society where age, size, kinship, and disposition all contribute to social rank. Although captive elephant herds are small and largely composed of unrelated females, dominance hierarchies are common. The goal of this study, based on a combination of keeper questionnaires and behavioral observations, was to delineate how the behavior of captive female African elephants varies with respect to age and social rank. ‘Body movements’ and ‘trunk to’ behaviors of 33 non-pregnant females housed at 14 North American zoos were recorded over eight hours. Keepers at each facility also rated each elephant based on a series of questions about interactions with herd mates. The assessment of social rank based on observations correlated strongly with ranks assigned by keepers via the questionnaires. Observations and questionnaire responses indicated that body weight of the female, and to a lesser extent age, were significantly related to rates and types of ‘body movements’ and that these demographic factors dictate the captive elephant hierarchy, similar to that observed in the wild. Many of the observed body movements, such as ‘back away’, ‘displace’, ‘push’, and ‘present’, were correlated with keeper questionnaire responses about elephant interactions. However, none of the ‘trunk to’ behaviors were related to age, size, or questionnaire responses, even though they occurred frequently. In conclusion, the study demonstrated that short-term behavioral observations and keeper questionnaires provided similar behavioral profiles for the animals.]

Giuffre, G., Thornton, B., and Lynch, C.: Puppets: construction and use for the hand-rearing of birds. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 225–230. [Lincoln Park Zoo, Chicago.]

Harbitter, R.: Successfully raising parent-reared chicks from elegant-crested tinamou (Eudromia elegans). Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 158–160. [Smithsonian’s National Zoo, Washington, D.C.]

Harteman, J.: Redding nabij voor de Madagaskar-witoogeend? (Is the Madagascar pochard soon to be saved?) De Harpij Vol.29, No. 1 (2010), pp. 18–20. [Dutch, with English summary. The Madagascar pochard (Aythya innotata) was probably common in the past but by 1991 was thought to be extinct due to habitat destruction, hunting and introduction of invasive alien fish. However in 2006 Peregrine Fund staff sighted 20 of these pochards in northern Madagascar while searching for the Madagascar harrier-hawk. Further investigation indicated that the ducks were only to be found on one lake, and that there were just six females in the population. The Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust, Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust and the Peregrine Fund developed a plan to save the species which includes building a breeding center close by the lake in 2010. The vulnerability of this small single population and the fact that none of the chicks hatched in 2008 appeared to have survived led to more drastic action in 2009, which was supported by the Madagascar government and the local people. Observers in Madagascar reported in the fall of 2009 that three of the females were ready to lay eggs. With many difficulties, staff from Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust and Durrell were on time to collect eggs, and the first clutch hatched on the way to a temporary rearing station that had been set up at a hotel (see IZN 56/8, 476–477). Several other clutches were removed in the fall and winter of 2009, with 24 chicks in total reared. Sixteen (5.11) ducklings have been sexed and ringed so far. Goals for 2010 are to rear more ducklings and possibly to release some of the hand-reared birds onto the lake.]

Hickman, J.C.: The use of vocal playback as a tool for breeding in captive birds – collaborators sought. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), p. 153. [Tulsa Zoo, Oklahoma.]

Kirkpatrick, R.C., and Emerton, L.: Killing tigers to save them: fallacies of the farming argument. Conservation Biology Vol. 24, No. 3 (2010), pp. 655–659. [The lucrative, illegal trade in tigers remains a major conservation problem. Tiger farming has been proposed as a potential solution, with farmed tigers substituting for wild tigers. At first glance, this argument’s logic seems simple: farming will increase the supply of tigers, prices will fall, and poaching will no longer be profitable. The authors contend, however, that this supply-side argument relies on mistaken assumptions. First, tiger markets are imperfect, meaning they are dominated by a few producers who control price. Second, consumers prefer wild tigers to farmed tigers and therefore the two are not pure substitutes. In economic terms, products from wild tigers are luxury goods, commanding a price premium. Third, there is no evidence that farmed tigers can be produced or sold more cheaply than wild tigers. In sum, it is unlikely that farming will drive down the price of wild-caught tigers or decrease profitability for tiger poachers. Rather, tiger farming is more likely to increase aggregate demand for tiger products and stimulate higher levels of poaching.]

Kolvig, P., Leeson, H., McDowell, J., and St Romain, C.: Successfully managing a mixed-species free-flight aviary. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 238–246. [Moody Gardens, Galveston, Texas.]

Kowalski, N.L., Dale, R.H.I., and Mazur, C.L.H.: A survey of the management and development of captive African elephant (Loxodonta africana) calves: birth to three months of age. Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 104–119. [The authors used four surveys to collect information about the birth, physical growth, and behavioral development of 12 African elephant calves born in captivity. The management of the birth process and neonatal care involved a variety of standard procedures. All of the calves were born at night, between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. The calves showed a systematic progression in behavioral and physical development, attaining developmental milestones at least as quickly as calves in situ. This study emphasized birth-related events, changes in the ways that calves used their trunks, first instances of behaviors, and interactions of the calves with other, usually adult, elephants. Several behaviors, such as the dam covering her calf with hay and the calf sucking its own trunk, were common in the captive situation and have been observed in situ. Overall, the behaviors of the calves resembled those observed for African elephant calves in situ. These data should help in the management of African elephants under human care by providing systematic reference values for the birth and development of elephant calves.]

Krueger, S.: First time breeding of captive Sulawesi knobbed hornbills (Aceros cassidix) at St Augustine Alligator Farm Zoological Park. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 173–175.

Leighty, K.A., Soltis, J., and Savage, A.: GPS assessment of the use of exhibit space and resources by African elephants (Loxodonta africana). Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 210–220. [In public discussions of animal rights and welfare, members and proponents of zoological institutions often face significant challenges addressing the concerns of their detractors due to an unfortunate deficiency in systematically collected and published data on the animals in zoo collections. In the case of elephants, there has been a paucity of information describing their use of space within captive environments. Using collar-mounted GPS recording devices, the authors documented the use of exhibit space and resources by a herd of five adult female African elephants at Disney’s Animal Kingdom. They found that dominant animals within the herd used a greater percentage of the available space and subordinate females avoided narrow or enclosed regions of the enclosure that they termed ‘restricted flow areas’. In their use of other resources, dominant females demonstrated increased occupation of the watering hole over subordinate females, but all females demonstrated relatively equivalent use of the mud wallow. Overall, the results provide preliminary evidence that position within the dominancy hierarchy impacts the percentage of space occupied in a captive setting and may contribute to resource accessibility. These findings can be applied to future decisions on exhibit design and resource distribution for this species.]

Lenhart, W., and Bartuska, E.: Ratite behavioral husbandry at the Philadelphia Zoo. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 161–163.

Lewis, K.D., Shepherdson, D.J., Owens, T.M., and Keele, M.: A survey of elephant husbandry and foot health in North American zoos. Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 221–236. [The foot health of elephants in human care is a long-standing concern. In 2001, the AZA Standards for Elephant Management and Care were published recommending husbandry to improve foot health. This article reports the results of a 2006 survey: basic statistics describing facility, husbandry, and foot health attributes are reported and relationships among variables are investigated. Median area available to elephants exceeded standard recommendations (755 ft2 [70 m2] per elephant indoors and 10,000 ft2 [930 m2] outdoors). Concrete makes up 69% of indoor area and natural substrates account for 85% of outdoor area. Elephants in AZA facilities received an average of 45.5 min/day of exercise, and facilities with a structured exercise plan provided significantly more exercise than did facilities without one. Enrichment is important to psychological health and may also stimulate activity beneficial to foot health; 95% of institutions had a structured enrichment program. Preventative foot care was nearly universal, and all facilities performed routine nail and pad trimming. However, foot pathology has not been eradicated; 33% of institutions reported at least one pathology in the previous year. This study found a strong inverse relationship between foot pathology and exercise. Younger herds were less likely to have a member diagnosed with arthritis. Lameness was unrelated to age or pathology, and only the presence of arthritis explained it. African elephants seemed to experience lower rates of foot pathology and arthritis than Asian elephants; however, this was explained by differences in age. Changes planned over the next ten years, if enacted, will result in continued moves towards more natural herd size and composition, larger exhibits, more exercise, and softer substrates. The findings of this survey suggest that this will result in reduced foot pathology in the future.]

Mason, G.J., and Veasey, J.S.: How should the psychological well-being of zoo elephants be objectively investigated? Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 237–255. [Animal welfare (sometimes termed ‘well-being’) is about feelings – states such as ‘suffering’ or ‘contentment’ that we can infer but cannot measure directly. Welfare indices have been developed from two main sources: studies of suffering humans, and of research animals deliberately subjected to challenges known to affect emotional state. The authors briefly review the resulting indices and discuss how well they are understood for elephants, since objective welfare assessment should play a central role in evidence-based elephant management. They cover behavioral and cognitive responses (approach/avoidance; intention, redirected and displacement activities; vigilance/startle; warning signals; cognitive biases, apathy and depression-like changes; stereotypic behavior); physiological responses (sympathetic responses; corticosteroid output – often assayed non-invasively via urine, feces or even hair; other aspects of HPA function, e.g. adrenal hypertrophy); and the potential negative effects of prolonged stress on reproduction (e.g. reduced gametogenesis; low libido; elevated still-birth rates; poor maternal care) and health (e.g. poor wound-healing; enhanced disease rates; shortened lifespans). The best validated, most used welfare indices for elephants are corticosteroid outputs and stereotypic behavior. Indices suggested as valid, partially validated, and/or validated but not yet applied within zoos include: measures of preference/avoidance; displacement movements; vocal/postural signals of affective (emotional) state; startle/vigilance; apathy; salivary and urinary epinephrine; female acyclity; infant mortality rates; skin/foot infections; cardio-vascular disease; and premature adult death. Potentially useful indices that have not yet attracted any validation work in elephants include: operant responding and place preference tests; intention and vacuum movements; fear/stress pheromone release; cognitive biases; heart rate, pupil dilation and blood pressure; corticosteroid assay from hair, especially tail-hairs (to access endocrine events up to a year ago); adrenal hypertrophy; male infertility; prolactinemia; and immunological changes.]

Mason, G.J., and Veasey, J.S.: What do population-level welfare indices suggest about the well-being of zoo elephants? Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 256–273. [To assess zoo elephants’ welfare using objective population-level indices, the authors sought data from zoos and other protected populations (potential ‘benchmarks’) on variables affected by poor well-being. Such data were available on fecundity, potential fertility, stillbirths, infant mortality, adult survivorship, and stereotypic behavior. Most of these can also be affected by factors unrelated to well-being; therefore, for each, they analyzed the potential role of these other factors. Population-level comparisons generally indicate poor reproduction, and poor infant and adult survivorship in zoos compared with benchmark populations (with some differences between zoo regions and over time). Stereotypic behavior also occurs in c. 60% of zoo elephants; as the population-level welfare index least open to alternative interpretations, this represents the strongest evidence that well-being is/has been widely compromised. Poor well-being is a parsimonious explanation for the diverse range of population-level effects seen, but to test this hypothesis properly, data are now needed on, for example, potential confounds that can affect these indices (to partition out effects of factors unrelated to well-being), and causes of the observed temporal effects, and differences between species and zoo regions. Regardless of whether such additional data implicate poor well-being, the authors’ findings suggest that elephant management has generally been sub-optimal. They also discuss the selection and utilization of benchmark data, as a useful future approach for evaluating such issues.]

Morgan, L.: Raising red-vented bulbuls (Pycnonotus cafer) in Tropic World Asia bird holding. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 231–233. [Brookfield Zoo, Illinois.]

Neptune, D., Olsen, D., Root, T., Shewokis, R., Vine, C., and Walz, D.: Enrichment and training. . . . It’s for the birds. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 183–189. [Utah’s Hogle Zoo, Moody Gardens (Salt Lake City, Utah), Indianapolis Zoo, Philadelphia Zoo and Living Planet Aquarium (Sandy, Utah).]

Plotnik, J.M., de Waal, F.B.M., Moore, D., and Reiss, D.: Self-recognition in the Asian elephant and future directions for cognitive research with elephants in zoological settings. Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 179–191. [The field of animal cognition has grown steadily for nearly four decades, but the primary focus has centered on easily-kept laboratory animals of varying cognitive capacity, including rodents, birds and primates. Elephants (animals not easily kept in a laboratory) are generally thought of as highly social, cooperative, intelligent animals, yet few studies – with the exception of long-term behavioral field studies – have been conducted to directly support this assumption. In fact, there has been remarkably little cognitive research conducted on Asian or African elephants. The authors discuss the opportunity and rationale for conducting such research on elephants in zoological facilities, and review some of the recent developments in the field of elephant cognition, including their recent study on mirror self-recognition in E. maximus.]

Proctor, C.M., Freeman, E.W., and Brown, J.L.: Influence of dominance status on adrenal activity and ovarian cyclicity status in captive African elephants. Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 168–178. [The North American African elephant population is not self-sustaining, in part because of a high rate of abnormal ovarian activity. About 12% of adult females exhibit irregular cycles and 31% do not cycle at all. The authors’ earlier work revealed a relationship between dominance status and ovarian acyclicity, with dominant females being more likely to not cycle normally. One theory is that dominant females may be expending more energy in maintaining peace within the captive herd than in supporting reproduction. The goal of this study was to determine if there was a relationship among dominance status, serum cortisol concentrations, and ovarian acyclicity. The authors hypothesized that adrenal glucocorticoid activity would be increased in dominant, noncycling elephants as compared with subdominant individuals. Blood samples were collected weekly over a two-year period in 81 females of known dominance and cyclicity status, and analyzed for cortisol. It was found that noncycling, dominant females did not have higher mean serum cortisol concentrations, or exhibit more variability in cortisol secretion. This suggests that alterations in adrenal activity are not related to dominance status and do not contribute directly to acyclicity in captive African elephants.]

Proctor, C.M., Freeman, E.W., and Brown, J.L.: Results of a second survey to assess the reproductive status of female Asian and African elephants in North America. Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 127–139. [Surveys are being conducted to monitor the reproductive health of elephants managed by the TAG/SSP. This study summarizes results of a 2005 survey and compares data to one conducted in 2002. Surveys were returned for 100% and 79% of Asian and African elephants, respectively. Of those, 79.3% of Asian and 92.1% of African elephants had weekly progestagen data to assess ovarian cyclicity. For Asian elephants, acyclicity rates were similar between the 2002 and 2005 surveys (13.3% v. 10.9%), whereas irregular cycling increased in 2005 (2.6% v. 7.6%), respectively. For African elephants, the percentages of both acyclicity (22.0% v. 31.2%) and irregular cycling females (5.2% v. 11.8%) increased. In both species, ovarian inactivity was more prevalent in the older age categories (> 30 years of age), but for African elephants also occurred in the reproductive-aged groups. Reproductive tract pathologies did not account for the majority of acyclicity problems. Several females changed cyclicity status between the two surveys, including from noncycling to cycling, suggesting this is not an irreversible condition. However, seven African females went from cycling to abnormal or no cyclic activity. In summary, the incidence of ovarian acyclicity is low and stable in Asian elephants, but appears to be increasing in African females. These findings reinforce the need for long-term reproductive monitoring programs and continuous reproductive surveys, even for females not being considered for breeding. With more data the authors hope to determine what factors are related to changes in ovarian status and how to reverse the trend towards acyclicity.]

Root, T., and Waldoch, J.: Semen collection on rockhopper penguins at the Indianapolis Zoo. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 201–205. [Eudyptes chrysocome.]

Sampson, C., and Jorgensen, H.: Incubation and hand-rearing of a greater rhea (Rhea americana) at the Great Plains Zoo. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 169–172. [Sioux Falls, South Dakota.]

Smith, P., Pribble, J., and Pinger, C.: Hand-rearing Caribbean and Chilean flamingo chicks at the Birmingham Zoo. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 145–148.

Soltis, J.: Vocal communication in African elephants (Loxodonta africana). Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), pp. 192–209. [Research on vocal communication in African elephants has increased in recent years, both in the wild and in captivity, providing an opportunity to present a comprehensive review of research related to their vocal behavior. Current data indicate that the vocal repertoire consists of perhaps nine acoustically distinct call types, ‘rumbles’ being the most common and acoustically variable. Large vocal production anatomy is responsible for the low-frequency nature of rumbles, with fundamental frequencies in the infrasonic range. Additionally, resonant frequencies of rumbles implicate the trunk in addition to the oral cavity in shaping the acoustic structure of rumbles. Long-distance communication is thought possible because low-frequency sounds propagate more faithfully than high-frequency ones, and elephants respond to rumbles at distances of up to 2.5 km. Elephant ear anatomy appears designed for detecting low frequencies, and experiments demonstrate that elephants can detect infrasonic tones and discriminate small frequency differences. Two vocal communication functions in the African elephant now have reasonable empirical support. First, closely bonded but spatially separated females engage in rumble exchanges, or ‘contact calls’, that function to coordinate movement or reunite animals. Second, both males and females produce ‘mate attraction’ rumbles that may advertise reproductive states to the opposite sex. Additionally, there is evidence that the structural variation in rumbles reflects the individual identity, reproductive state, and emotional state of callers. Growth in knowledge about the communication system of the African elephant has occurred from a rich combination of research on wild elephants in national parks and captive elephants in zoological parks.]

Torchetti, L., and Guthrie, C.: Successful rearing of an African sacred ibis (Threskiornis aethiopicus) chick at the Toronto Zoo. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 196–200.

Wicker, D.: Breeding cinereous vultures (Aegypius monachus) at the Milwaukee County Zoo. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 149–153.

Wlaz, B.: Learning to walk again: paralysis in an African penguin. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 134–138. [Maryland Zoo, Baltimore.]

Yester, A., Pribble, J., and Pinger, C.: Breeding white-crested laughing thrush (Garrulax leucolophus) at the Birmingham Zoo. Animal Keepers’ Forum Vol. 37, No. 4/5 (2010), pp. 213–219.

Publishers of the periodicals listed:

Conservation Biology, c/o Gary K. Meffer, Editor, Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, Newins-Ziegler 303, Box 110430, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611–0430, U.S.A.

De Harpij, P.O. Box 532, 3000 AM Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Zoo Biology, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158, U.S.A. [Zoo Biology Vol. 29, No. 2 (2010), is a special issue on the care and welfare of elephants in AZA institutions.]