Faith Hensley, Caitlin Gerke, and Dr. Jodee HuntBiology Department, Grand Valley State University

Introduction

Results

Acknowledgments

Methods

We thank the John Ball Zoo for the use of their animals, exhibits, and resources, the GVSU Office of Undergraduate Research & Scholarship, and our team of volunteers for making this research possible. Photos taken by the John Ball Zoo on Instagram (@johnballzoogr). This protocol was approved by the JBZ Animal Care Committee and the GVSU Institutional Animal Care & Use Committee.

Discussion and Conclusions

Changes in Behavior of Male Amur Tigers Following Introduction

to John Ball Zoo

• Observed two young male siblings

introduced in May 2018

• 30 minute observation sessions done

using ZooMonitor

• State behaviors quantified in 30

second intervals

• All occurrences of event behaviors

were recorded

• Data from 2018 (introduction)

compared to 2019 (1 year post-intro)

• Developed heat maps to examine

use of enclosure features

Fig. 4. Locomotive behaviors

(walk, patrol & pace) of adult

male 2 in 2018 (a) and 2019

(b). Focused on paths along

the back of the enclosure in

2018, but utilized nearly the

entire enclosure in 2019,

including more of the interior

area. Like his brother, overall

activity was greater in 2019

compared to 2018.

• Monitored the behavior of two

young Amur tigers (Panthera

tigris altaica) introduced to John

Ball Zoo, MI in May of 2018 to the

summer of 2019 (one year post

introduction)

• Focused on changes in activity

patterns and pacing behavior

Explored the spatial use of their

enclosure and enclosure features

• Compared differences in their

behavior patterns

Fig. 3. Locomotive

behaviors (walk, patrol &

pace) of adult male 1 in

2018 (a) and 2019 (b).

Paths focused on the

perimeter, observation

window (bottom) and

near the enclosure entry

(top). Overall, he was

more active in 2019

compared to 2018.

• The two males were often found in close proximity

which was interesting as tigers are generally not

social except during mating and parental activities.

• During 2018, both tigers used similar areas in their

enclosure that allowed them to hide from visitors. By

2019, they were more often observed in full view, or

moving along paths that brought them closer to

visitors.

• Both males used a greater proportion of the

enclosure space and features in 2019 compared to

2018. This is likely due to an increase in confidence

and familiarity with their surroundings. Both tigers

utilized nearly all the space and features provided.

• Both males became more active from 2018 to 2019,

male tiger 2 being more active overall

• Pacing behavior increased for both male tigers but to

varying degrees.

• Male tiger 2 had a much greater percentage of

pacing behavior.

a) b) a) b)PC: @johnballzoogr

PC: @johnballzoogr

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Tiger 1: 2018 Tiger 1: 2019 Tiger 2: 2018 Tiger 2: 2019

% T

ime

Bu

dge

t

Amur Tiger 1 and 2: Activity Patterns 2018 and 2019Locomotion

Pacing

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Tiger 1: 2018 Tiger 1: 2019 Tiger 2: 2018 Tiger 2: 2019

% T

ime

Bu

dge

t

Amur Tiger 1 and 2: 2018 and 2019 Behavior Patterns

Inactive Behavior

Active Behavior

Fig. 1. Pacing and

locomotion from 2018

to 2019 for male tiger

1 and 2. Locomotive

behavior for male

tiger 1 was

dominated by non-

pacing, while pacing

dominated the

locomotor behavior of

male tiger 2

Fig. 2. Active behaviors

(e.g. walking, pacing,

patrolling) and inactive

behaviors (e.g. lying

down, sleeping, sitting)

in 2018 and 2019 for

male tiger 1 and 2. Both

tigers had an increase

in active behavior,

however male tiger 2

was more active overall

for both years.