Effect of sleep loss on executive function and plasma corticosterone levels in an arctic-breeding songbird, the Lapland longspur (Calcarius lapponicus)

Casting the Net Widely for Change in Animal Welfare: The Plight of Birds in Zoos, Ex Situ Conservation, and Conservation Fieldwork

Simple Summary

Animal welfare measures have been designed to improve the health and environmental conditions of animals living under human control, for whatever reason. Welfare regulations have evolved also in line with new research insights into the cognitive, affective, and physiological domain of birds, as this paper discusses. This paper casts a critical eye on areas that Animal Welfare regulations have not reached at all, have not gone far enough, or are not regulated or supervised. It identifies the plight of birds living in captivity or being studied in the field, which either by neglect, ignorance, or design are subject to practices and procedures that may not meet basic welfare standards. The paper discusses some profound contradictions in the way we think about birds and their plight in today’s world: marked for extinction on one hand and highly admired as pets on the other; damaging fieldwork on one hand and the aims of conservation on the other. It highlights some common and distressing examples of poor welfare in birds. It also offers some solutions involving simple legislative changes and ways to eliminate some unacceptably low ethical standards in the handling and management of birds.

Abstract

This paper discusses paradoxes in our relationship to and treatment of birds in captive and conservation contexts. The paper identifies modern and new challenges that arise from declining bird numbers worldwide. Such challenges have partly changed zoos into providers of insurance populations specifically for species at risk of extinction. They have also accelerated fieldwork projects, but by using advanced technological tools and in increasing numbers, contradictorily, they may cause serious harm to the very birds studied for conservation purposes. In practice, very few avian species have any notable protection or guarantee of good treatment. The paper first deals with shortcomings of identifying problematic avian behavior in captive birds. It then brings together specific cases of field studies and captive breeding for conservation in which major welfare deficits are identified. Indeed, the paper argues that avian welfare is now an urgent task. This is not just because of declining bird numbers but because of investment in new technologies in field studies that may have introduced additional stressors and put at risk bird survival. While the paper documents a substantial number of peer-reviewed papers criticizing practices counter to modern welfare standards, they have by and large not led to changes in some practices. Some solutions are suggested that could be readily implemented and, to my knowledge, have never been considered under a welfare model before.

An anti-narcolepsy drug reveals behavioral and fitness costs of extreme activity cycles in arctic-breeding songbirds

Sleep loss impairs cognitive function, immunological responses and general well-being in humans. However, sleep requirements in mammals and birds vary dramatically. In circumpolar regions with continuous summer light, daily sleep duration is reduced, particularly in breeding birds. The effect of an anti-narcolepsy drug (modafinil) to putatively extend wakefulness was examined in two species of closely related arctic-breeding passerine birds: Lapland longspurs (Calcarius lapponicus) and snow buntings (Plectrophenax nivalis). Free-living adult males were implanted during the nestling phase on day 4 (D4; 4 days post-hatching) with osmotic pumps containing either vehicle or modafinil to extend the active period for 72 h. Nestlings were weighed on D2 and D7 to measure growth rates. Additionally, focal observations were conducted on D6. Male longspurs receiving modafinil made fewer feeding visits and spent less time at the nest but tended to spend more time near the nest than controls. We observed no change in longspur nestling growth rates, but fledging occurred significantly later when males received modafinil, suggesting a fitness cost. In contrast, modafinil had no measurable impact on male or female snow bunting behavior, nestling growth rates or time to fledging. We suggest male longspurs compromise and maintain vigilance at their nests in lieu of sleeping because of the increased predation risk that is characteristic of their tundra nesting habitat. Snow buntings are cavity nesters, and their nests do not require the same vigilance, allowing males to presumably rest following provisioning. These life-history differences between species highlight the role of predation risk in mediating behavioral modifications to prolonged wakefulness in arctic-breeding songbirds.