Search for: All records

Abstract Wild animals brought into captivity frequently experience chronic stress and typically need a period of time to adjust to the conditions of captivity (restraint, artificial lighting, altered diet, human presence, etc.), to which they may never fully acclimate. Changes in mass, the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis and heart rate parameters have been observed over the first week in newly captive house sparrows (Passer domesticus). In this study, we tested the effects of two drugs, diazepam and mitotane, in preventing the chronic stress symptoms caused by captivity, compared with oil-injected control animals. Diazepam is an anxiolytic that is widely prescribed in humans and other animals and has been shown in some cases to reduce physiological stress. Mitotane is an agent that causes chemical adrenalectomy, reducing the body’s capacity to produce glucocorticoid hormones. Our mitotane treatment did not cause the expected change in corticosterone concentrations. Baseline corticosterone was higher after a week in captivity regardless of the treatment group, while stress-induced corticosterone did not significantly increase above baseline after a week in captivity in any treatment group. However, mitotane treatment did have some physiological effects, as it reduced the resting heart rate and the duration of the heart rate response to a sudden noise. It also prevented the increase in nighttime activity that we observed in control animals. There was no effect of diazepam on corticosterone, resting heart rate, activity or heart rate response to a sudden noise, and no effect of either treatment on the sympathetic vs parasympathetic control of the resting heart rate. Together, these data suggest that mitotane, but not diazepam, can have a modest impact on helping house sparrows adapt to captive conditions. Easing the transition to captivity will likely make conservation efforts, such as initiating captive breeding programs, more successful. 

Abstract Neophobia is a behavior characterized by a reluctance to approach novel objects. We measured neophobia in captive wild house sparrows (Passer domesticus) by comparing the time it took for hungry birds to approach their normal food dish compared to one that had been modified with a novel object. We tested the behavior of animals captured at different times of year to test for seasonal variation in neophobia. One group of birds tested in July approached their food dishes much more quickly than all other birds (a matter of seconds rather than minutes whether or not there was a novel object), a response that was not repeated in a subsequent July. When this possible outlier group was removed from the analysis, approach times to novel objects were not affected by season. However, animals captured and tested in October had a stronger motivation to feed (i.e., they approached unmodified food dishes faster) than birds captured at other times of the year. If we define “neophobia” as an increase in latency to approach a novel versus an unmodified food dish, then there is little evidence for underlying seasonal variation in risk assessment, although a general motivation to feed does show a seasonal pattern.