The Psychological Well-Being of Nonhuman Primates

Committee on Well-Being of Nonhuman Primates

Institute for Laboratory Animal Research

Commission on Life Sciences

National Research Council

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.
1998



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
--> The Psychological Well-Being of Nonhuman Primates Committee on Well-Being of Nonhuman Primates Institute for Laboratory Animal Research Commission on Life Sciences National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. 1998

OCR for page R1
--> NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20418 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Contract No. NO1-RR-1-2114 between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Institutes of Health. The U.S. Department of Agriculture also supported the study with funds provided through the NIH contract. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data The psychological well-being of nonhuman primates : a report of the Committee on Well-Being of Nonhuman Primates, Institute for Laboratory Animal Research, National Research Council. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index. ISBN 0-309-05233-5 1. Primates as laboratory animals. 2. Primates—Psychology. 3. Animal welfare. I. Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (U.S.). Committee on Well-Being of Nonhuman Primates. QL737.P9 P776 1998 599.8′01′9—ddc21 98-40103 The Psychological Well-Being of Nonhuman Primates is available from National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, D.C. 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu Printed in the United States of America Copyright 1998 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

OCR for page R1
--> Committee on Well-Being of Nonhuman Primates Irwin S. Bernstein (Chair), Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia Christian R. Abee, Department of Comparative Medicine, University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama Kathryn A.L. Bayne, Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International, Rockville, Maryland Thomas M. Butler, Department of Laboratory Animal Medicine, Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research, San Antonio, Texas Judy L. Cameron, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Christopher L. Coe, Department of Psychology, Wisconsin Regional Primate Research Center, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin W. Richard Dukelow, Endocrine Research Center, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan Gisela Epple, Monell Chemical Senses Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Dorothy M. Fragaszy, Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia William A. Mason, California Primate Research Center, University of California, Davis, California Klaus A. Miczek, Department of Psychology, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts Melinda A. Novak, Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts Martin L. Reite, Department of Psychiatry, University of Colorado Health and Science Center, Denver, Colorado Duane M. Rumbaugh, Department of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia Paul W. Schilling, Charles River Laboratories, Summerland Key, Florida Elwyn L. Simons, Duke Primate Center, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina Charles T. Snowdon, Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin Staff Thomas L. Wolfle, Project Officer Kathleen Beil, Administrative Assistant Kevin Layman, Editorial Assistant/Senior Secretary Amanda E. Hull, Program Assistant Carol M. Rozmiarek, Project Assistant Susan S. Vaupel, Editor Norman Grossblatt, Editor

OCR for page R1
--> Institute for Laboratory Animal Research Council John VandeBerg (Chair), Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research, San Antonio, Texas Christian R. Abee, Department of Comparative Medicine, University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama Muriel T. Davisson, The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, Maine Bennett Dyke, Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research, San Antonio, Texas Gerald F. Gebhart, Department of Pharmacology, College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa James W. Glosser, Massillon, Ohio Margaret Landi, Department of Laboratory Animal Science, SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania Charles R. McCarthy, Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. Robert J. Russell, Harlan Sprague Dawley, Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana John G. Vandenbergh, Department of Zoology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina Richard C. Van Sluyters, School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley, California Peter A. Ward, Department of Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan Thomas D. Pollard, (ex officio), Chairman, Commission on Life Sciences, President, Salk Research Institute, La Jolla, California Staff Ralph B. Dell, Director Kathleen Beil, Administrative Assistant Kevin Layman, Editorial Assistant/Senior Secretary Susan Vaupel, Managing Editor, ILAR Journal The Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (ILAR) was founded in 1952 under the auspices of the National Research Council. A component of the Commission on Life Sciences, ILAR develops guidelines and positions and disseminates information on the scientific, technological, and ethical use of laboratory animals and related biological resources. ILAR promotes high-quality, humane care of laboratory animals and the appropriate use of laboratory animals and alternatives in research, testing, and education. ILAR serves as an adviser to the federal government, the biomedical research community, and the public.

OCR for page R1
--> Commission on Life Sciences Thomas D. Pollard (Chair), The Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, California Frederick R. Anderson, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, Washington, D.C. John C. Bailar III, University of Chicago, Illinois Paul Berg, Stanford University, Stanford, California Joanna Burger, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey Sharon L. Dunwoody, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin John L. Emmerson, Eli Lilly and Co. (Ret.), Indianapolis, Indiana Neal L. First, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin Ursula W. Goodenough, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri Henry W. Heikkinen, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado Hans J. Kende, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan Cynthia J. Kenyon, University of California, San Francisco, California David M. Livingston, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts Thomas E. Lovejoy, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Donald R. Mattison, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh Pennsylvania Joseph E. Murray, Harvard University, Wellesley Hills, Massachusetts Edward E. Penhoet, Chiron Corporation, Emeryville, California Malcolm C. Pike, Norris/USC Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, California Jonathan M. Samet, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland Charles F. Stevens, The Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, California John L. VandeBerg, Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research, San Antonio, Texas Staff Paul Gilman, Executive Director

OCR for page R1
--> The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

OCR for page R1
--> Preface Research with nonhuman primates leads to improvements in the health of humans and other animals. Because of their physiological and structural similarity to humans, nonhuman primates often constitute valuable models of human disease, provide conclusive evidence of safety and efficacy of new products and procedures, and serve biomedicine as surrogates for humans in many other important ways. In addition, they are a resource for learning about the order Primates and its many ecological adaptations through their exhibition, study, and enjoyment in the nation's zoos. For many years, attention has been given to their contribution to the health and well-being of humans; but little attention has been given to their well-being. Recently, behavioral scientists, investigators, veterinarians, and technicians have been studying the psychological well-being of nonhuman primates; this has resulted in a growing understanding of what is known about their well-being. The task of the Committee on Well-Being of Nonhuman Primates, in the National Research Council's Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (ILAR), originated in a 1985 amendment to the Animal Welfare Act (P.L. 99–198, the Food Security Act). The law states that standards shall be promulgated to include minimal requirements "for a physical environment adequate to promote the psychological well-being of primates," and that wording is incorporated into later Animal Welfare Regulations, Title 9, Animals and Animal Products, Subchapter A (Animal Welfare), Parts 1–4 (9 CFR 1–4). The period since publication of the standards has seen a great deal of activity seeking to provide and assess strategies that would address the psychological well-being of some 40 species of nonhuman primates used in biomedical research and of many more held in zoos. During this time, some funding became available for research into these issues. Although many called the language anthropomorphic and few, if any, methods existed for understanding and assessing the psychological well-being of other animals, the U.S.

OCR for page R1
--> Department of Agriculture (USDA) wisely left important details of implementation to be negotiated between the institutions and their animal welfare inspectors. Not unexpectedly, about as many different strategies emerged as there are institutions that have nonhuman primates. That is seen as highly desirable by scientists, for it will provide a range of beneficial options; but it has produced some confusion and lack of understanding among some members of Congress, the public, and animal protectionists. Whereas placing the responsibility of individual research institutions and zoos for providing psychological well-being necessarily stimulates inquiry, it also creates unease among those who would prefer that specific methods be spelled out, rather than leaving it up to the regulated community to achieve the desired goal. The committee agrees with the current approach and feels that to have written engineering or prescriptive specifications to accommodate the psychological well-being and individual needs of each type of nonhuman primate would have been short-sighted and would have risked compromising the welfare of many animals in the process of achieving easily administered regulations. Moreover, well-being can be achieved by a variety of techniques. For those reasons, this report supports performance-based standards but stresses the need for a scientific approach in establishing such standards so that the results can be measured and assessed. The use of professional judgment in interpreting and applying the recommendations in this report is crucial. Rote applications of the recommendations provided here, prescriptive translations of these recommendations, anthropomorphic interpretations of the needs of nonhuman primates, and generation of "cookbook" recipes for broad application across multiple colonies are unwarranted and likely to produce outcomes contrary to the intended goals. The ability to develop, apply, evaluate, and inspect institutional well-being plans depends, first and foremost, on the specific knowledge and skills of the personnel involved. The sponsors of this report asked that guidelines be developed that would assist institutions and inspectors alike. They requested recommendations regarding species-specific strategies for psychological well-being and an indication of the methods by which these strategies could be assessed. Specifically, the committee was asked to evaluate the environmental variables that are the most influential in affecting the well-being of nonhuman primates, evaluate behavioral and physiological measures that are objective indexes of the effects of these environmental variables, produce recommendations and procedures for use by institutions in developing plans consistent with federal law, and suggest priorities for future research. We anticipate that these guidelines will be of interest to institutions that house nonhuman primates; to the institutional animal care and use committees that oversee all programs in which such animals are used; to the researchers, veterinarians, and technicians that work with the animals; to federal inspectors that enforce the law from which this report derives; to private consultants that evaluate animal care and use programs and facilities; and to the public, which holds researchers and exhibitors accountable for the care and treatment of these highly evolved

OCR for page R1
--> species. We also hope that it will be seen by critics of the present regulations as an honest attempt to ensure the well-being of primates. This report is not the final word. Because it is intended for use by large and small biomedical research facilities and institutions ranging from state-of-the-art zoos to roadside exhibits, some will be disappointed by the length of some sections and the brevity of others and by the lack of concrete recommendations applicable to species of interest. The committee recognizes these deficiencies but feels that they reflect the state of the art: much is known about some species, very little about others. Where definitive recommendations are lacking, readers are encouraged to learn about closely related species, talk to other primatologists, and use their best professional judgment. With a clear focus on enhancing the well-being of each individual animal, we believe that the technologies and attitudes expressed in this report will provide a sound beginning. Throughout its deliberations and public forums, the assistance of numerous invited participants, and the vigorous peer-review process, the committee held tenaciously to one goal: to develop recommendations that would be good for the animals. To the extent that that goal was achieved, many people deserve recognition. The report's character grew from the discussions at two public meetings. The participants were Elizabeth Baldwin, American Psychological Association; Patricia Feeser, Duke University Primate Center; Roger Fouts, Central Washington University; Mary Geibe, Regulatory Enforcement and Animal Care, USDA; Heather Lange, representing Adelle Douglass, American Humane Association; Scott Line, Bowman Gray School of Medicine; Cathy Liss, Animal Welfare Institute; former senator John Melcher; Jan Moor-Jankowski, Laboratory for Experimental Medicine and Surgery in Primates, New York University Medical Center; Adrian Morrison, consultant to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS); Peggy O'Neill, National Institutes of Health; Martin Stephens, The Humane Society of the United States; Christine Stevens, Animal Welfare Institute (also representing Jane Goodall, Goodall Institute); and Betty Willis, American Psychological Society. Many others expressed an interest in the committee's work. The committee appreciates the written comments provided by Ursula Bartecki, University of Göttingen; John Boyce, American Veterinary Medical Association; Carolyn Crockett, Washington Regional Primate Research Center; Jo Fritz, Primate Foundation of Arizona; Frederick Goodwin, DHHS; Ronald Hunt, New England Regional Primate Research Center; Frank Loew, Tufts University; La Vonne Meunier and Sarah Campbell, SmithKline Beecham Pharmaceuticals; Charles Middleton, State University of New York at Stonybrook; Viktor Reinhardt, University of Wisconsin; Phillip Robinson, University of California, San Diego; Raye Rooney, The Gorilla Foundation; David Valerio, Hazleton Research Products, Inc.; and David Washburn, Georgia State University. As the committee delved into its task and reflected on the written and oral comments of contributors, it saw that additional expertise would be needed. We

OCR for page R1
--> express our gratitude to the following, who graciously responded to the committee's request and submitted materials on a wide variety of topics in the text: Nancy Ator, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions; Bruce Ewald, Ciba-Geigy Corporation; Tine Griede, National Foundation for Research in Zoological Gardens, Netherlands; James Woods, University of Michigan Medical School; and William Woolverton, University of Chicago. In recognition of the need for expertise from zoological institutions, we requested assistance from Benjamin Beck of the National Zoological Park in Washington, D.C. The committee appreciates Dr. Beck's outstanding assistance in expressing the views of public exhibitors and their recommendations. He and his colleague Lisa Stevens provided the committee with an informative visit to the National Zoological Park. We hope that those who keep nonhuman primates in zoos will find much of value in this report. If they do, it will be largely because of the input of their colleagues Ben and Lisa. This report has been reviewed by persons chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council's Report Review Committee. The purposes of this independent review are to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the authors and the National Research Council in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards of objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The content of the review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following persons for their participation in the review of this report: Mollie Anne Bloomsmith, University of Texas, Bastrop, Texas Sarah Till Boysen, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio Carolyn Crockett, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington Ernst Knobil, University of Texas, Houston, Texas Donald G. Lindburg, San Diego Zoo, San Diego, California Martin L. Morin, Private Consultant, Chestertown, Maryland Richard Brent Swenson, Private Consultant, Lilburn, Georgia The committee extends its appreciation to the contributors, sponsors, and reviewers of this volume and to Norman Grossblatt for editing the manuscript. We wish to commend Amanda Hull of ILAR for her steadfast assistance during the early phases of this study. Her professionalism, humor, and charm were greatly appreciated. And we are indebted to Tom Wolfle and the entire ILAR staff for their assistance throughout. Irwin S. Bernstein, Chair Committee on Well-Being of Nonhuman Primates

OCR for page R1
--> Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   1 INTRODUCTION   5 1. PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING OF NONHUMAN PRIMATES   10 2. ESSENTIALS OF A PROGRAM TO PROVIDE PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING   15     Social Companionship,   16     Opportunities to Engage in Species-Typical Activities,   18     Housing Design,   22     Personnel Interactions,   25     Documentation,   26     Checklist for a Plan to Promote the Psychological Well-Being of Nonhuman Primates,   26 3. GENERAL CARE AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING   31     Housing,   32     Sanitation,   38     Daily Care,   38     Nutrition,   39     Restraint and Training,   40     Mating Patterns,   42     Personnel,   43     Veterinary Care,   45

OCR for page R1
--> 4. EFFECT OF SPECIAL RESEARCH CONDITIONS ON PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING   47     Conditions Involving Infectious Diseases,   48     Conditions Involving Atypical Rearing Environments,   49     Conditions Involving Physical Restraint of Animals,   49     Conditions Involving Minimally Invasive Procedures,   51     Conditions Involving Surgery,   52     Multiple Research Use,   52     Conditions Involving Pain,   53     Animal Models of Substance Abuse,   54     Conditions Involving Aggression,   54 5. PROSIMIANS   55     Housing,   57     Nutrition,   60     Social Behavior,   62     Reproduction and Development,   63     Cognition,   64     Personnel,   65     Veterinary Care,   65     Special Consideration,   66 6. NEW WORLD MONKEYS: CALLITRICHIDS   68     Housing,   69     Nutrition,   72     Social Behavior,   73     Reproduction and Development,   74     Cognition,   77     Personnel,   77     Veterinary Care,   78 7. NEW WORLD MONKEYS: CEBIDS   80     Housing,   83     Nutrition,   84     Social Behavior,   85     Reproduction And Development,   86     Cognition,   87     Personnel,   87     Veterinary Care,   88 8. OLD WORLD MONKEYS: CERCOPITHECIDS   90     Housing,   94     Nutrition,   95

OCR for page R1
-->     Social Behavior,   95     Reproduction and Development,   97     Cognition,   98     Personnel,   99     Veterinary Care,   100 9. APES: HOMINOIDS   103     Housing,   104     Nutrition,   107     Social Behavior,   108     Reproduction and Development,   109     Cognition,   110     Personnel,   111     Veterinary Care,   112 10. RESEARCH NEEDS   113     Theory of Psychological Well-Being,   114     Indexes of Well-Being,   114     Natural History,   116     Individual Development,   116     Subject Characteristics,   117     Caging,   117     Social Groups,   118     Environmental Enrichment,   119     Cognition,   120     Husbandry Practices,   120     Animal Technician's and Caregiver's Role in Well-Being,   121     Research Innovations,   122 REFERENCES   123 APPENDIXES     A   SAMPLES OF NONHUMAN PRIMATE ENVIRONMENTAL-ENHANCEMENT PLANS   145 B   EXAMPLES OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES THAT PRECLUDE THE SAFE HOUSING OF MIXED GENERA OF NONHUMAN PRIMATES   156 C   BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES OF AUTHORING COMMITTEE   158 INDEX   161

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.