Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30505635›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2018

Changing trends in elephant camp management in northern Thailand and implications for welfare.

Pakkanut Bansiddhi, Janine L Brown, Chatchote Thitaram, Veerasak Punyapornwithaya, Chaleamchat Somgird, Katie L Edwards, Korakot Nganvongpanit

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Welfare Assessment and Activities of Captive Elephants in Thailand.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Pakkanut Bansiddhi *Center of Excellence in Elephant and Wildlife Research, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Janine L Brown *Center of Excellence in Elephant and Wildlife Research, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-3898-7755
Chatchote ThitaramCenter of Excellence in Elephant and Wildlife Research, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Veerasak PunyapornwithayaDepartment of Food Animal Clinic, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Chaleamchat SomgirdCenter of Excellence in Elephant and Wildlife Research, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Katie L EdwardsCenter for Species Survival, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Front Royal, VA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6736-1183
Korakot NganvongpanitCenter of Excellence in Elephant and Wildlife Research, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-7617-5507

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElephant camps are among the most attractive destinations in Thailand for tourists from many countries. A wide range of management strategies are used by these camps, which can have varied impacts on health and welfare of elephants.

methodsThis study surveyed 33 camps with 627 elephants in northern Thailand to quantify the types of management practices and work activities experienced by captive elephants. The survey consisted of an interview with camp owners, and direct observations of camp operations.

resultsData revealed considerable variation in elephant demographics, work activities, elephant care (i.e., housing, restraint, nutrition, health care, and breeding), and mahout management among the camps. In general, older camps (those in existence for >16 years) were involved in more intensive activities, like riding with saddles and shows. By contrast, newer camps provided more one-on-one activities for tourists and elephants, and emphasized more intimate, relaxing experiences (e.g., feeding, bathing, walking) than entertainment. A demographic shift also was observed, with elephants 20 years of age and younger having a sex ratio closer to 1:1 compared to elephants in older age categories (1:4.1-1:9.8). DISCUSSION: Shifts in elephant management to less intensive activities were observed, which could have positive implications for elephant welfare. The shifting sex ratio suggests successful captive breeding is resulting in the birth of more males, which could present new welfare challenges in the future, because bulls can be more difficult to manage and socialize, and are more likely to be kept isolated during musth. Ultimately, the goal is to understand how camp activities affect welfare, and to develop science-based guidelines and standards to aid in the management of both male and female elephants used in tourism.

Indexed as

Asian elephantElephant campManagementThailandTourismWelfare

Identifiers

PMID30505635
PMCPMC6254247

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.