Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T23:51:13.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nest provision influences reproductive success in breeding blue fox vixens: a preliminary study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

T Pyykönen ,
L Ahola ,
S Hänninen  and
J Mononen
T Pyykönen
Affiliation:
University of Kuopio, Department of Biosciences, PO 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
L Ahola*
Affiliation:
University of Kuopio, Department of Biosciences, PO 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
S Hänninen
Affiliation:
University of Kuopio, Department of Biosciences, PO 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
J Mononen
Affiliation:
University of Kuopio, Department of Biosciences, PO 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: Leena.Ahola@uef.fi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of an unfamiliar nest and environmental enrichment, ie provision of an additional nest, on farmed blue fox (Alopex lagopus) vixens’ reproductive performance. Two experimental groups were evaluated in the study: i) a single nest (SN) group where vixens had an unfamiliar top nest only, and ii) a group with two nests (TN), an unfamiliar top nest and a familiar floor nest. Since reproductive performance is typically lower in young blue fox vixens, half of the experimental animals consisted of primiparous vixens, to examine whether an unfamiliar and an additional nest affected primiparous and multiparous vixens’ reproduction differently. No significant differences were found in reproductive performance between the experimental groups or between the primiparous and the multiparous vixens with the number of weaned cubs per inseminated vixen 4.8 (± 4.0) and 4.9 (± 4.5) for the primiparous and 5.6 (± 4.9) and 5.5 (± 4.6) for the multiparous vixens in SN and TN groups, respectively. In the multiparous vixens, the cub losses were higher in SN than in TN groups. The higher cub loss in the SN group may have been due to the lack of a familiar nest. In the TN group, where vixens had the opportunity to choose between two nest types, the majority (86%) of the primiparous vixens whelped in the floor nest, whereas the majority (73%) of the multiparous vixens favoured the unfamiliar top nest for whelping. Both nests were used by 43% of all TN vixens, a finding that indicates that an additional nest may have an enrichment value for blue fox vixens. The potential welfare consequences of providing blue fox vixens with an additional nest box should be investigated in future studies.

Keywords

Alopex lagopusanimal welfarefox farmingreproductiontop nestVulpes spp
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , February 2010 , pp. 101 - 105
Copyright
© 2010 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Audet, AM, Robbins, CB and Larivière, S 2002 Alopex lagopus. Mammalian Species 713: 1–10Google Scholar
Braastad, BO 1994 Reproduction in silver fox vixens in breeding boxes with and without an entrance tunnel. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 44: 38–42Google Scholar
Broom, DM and Johnson, KG 1993 Stress and Animal Welfare, First Edition. Chapman & Hall: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberhardt, LE, Garrott, RA and Hanson, WC 1983 Den use by arctic foxes in Northern Alaska. Journal of Mammalogy 64: 97–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission 2001 The Welfare of Animals Kept for Fur Production. Report of the Scientific Committee of Animal Health and Animal Welfare. Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Finnish Fur Breeders’ Association 2008 Ravintoainesuositukset 2007. http://www.stkl-fpf.fi/modules/system/stdreq.aspx?P=59&VID=default&SID=213921969388321&S=0&C=24861. [Title translation: Recommendations for fur animal feeding]Google Scholar
Frafjord, K 1991 Adult arctic foxes Alopex lagopus (L) in the denning area; numbers and behaviour. Fauna Norvegica, Series A12: 41–48Google Scholar
Frafjord, K 1992 Denning behaviour and activity of arctic fox Alopex lagopus pups: Implications of food availability. Polar Biology 12: 707–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrot, RA and Eberhardt, LE 1982 Mortality of arctic fox pups in northern Alaska. Journal of Mammalogy 63: 173–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrot, RA, Eberhardt, LE and Hanson, WC 1983 Arctic fox den identification and characteristics in northern Alaska. Canadian Journal of Zoology 61: 423–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haapanen, K, Harri, M, Mononen, J, Korhonen, H, Niemelä, P, Rouvinen, K and Fors, F 1990 Lymodellens och andra miljö-faktorers inverka på blårävens valpresultat. In: Proceedings from the NJF-Seminar No 185 pp 10. 19-21 September 1990, Copenhagen, Denmark. [Title translation: Effect of nest types and other environmental factors on the reproduction of farmed blue foxes]Google Scholar
Jeppesen, LL and Pedersen, V 1990 Improvement of management routines and cage systems in fox production. Scientifur 14: 237–242Google Scholar
Korhonen, H and Niemelä, P 1996 Effect of environmental and social enrichment on some welfare variables in farm blue foxes (Alopex lagopus). Scientifur 20: 26–34Google Scholar
Mononen, J 1996 Resting platforms and nest boxes for farmed blue foxes (Alopex lagopus) and silver foxes (Vulpes vulpes). The extent of use, reasons for use and welfare effects. Kuopio University Publications C. Natural and Environmental Sciences 52: 62Google Scholar
Mononen, J, Harri, M, Sepponen, J, Korhonen, H, Rekilä, T and Ahola, L 1999 A top box and a floor box as breeding nest boxes in farmed blue foxes (Alopex lagopus): reproductive performance, use of the boxes and cub carrying. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 49: 206–210Google Scholar
Moss, S and Östberg, G 1985 Lyförsök med blåräv 1984. Finsk Pälstidskrift 19: 120–121. [Title translation: Nest experiment in the blue fox 1984]Google Scholar
Pedersen, V and Jeppesen, LL 1993 Daytime use of various types of whole-year shelters in farmed silver foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and blue foxes (Alopex lagopus). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 36: 259–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prestrud, P 1992 Physical characteristics of arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) dens in Svalbard. Arctic 45: 154–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyykönen, T, Ahola, L, Jalkanen, L and Harri, M 1997 Behaviour of silver foxes (Vulpes vulpes) in ground floor enclosures. Proceedings from the Nordic Association of Agricultural Scientists pp 125–131. 6-8 October 1997, Helsinki, FinlandGoogle Scholar
Pyykönen, T, Ahola, L, Mononen, J, Mohaibes, M and Kasanen, S 2002a Parental behaviour of group-housed farmed silver foxes in semi-natural environment. In: Koene, P (ed) Proceedings of the 36th International Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology pp 214. 6-10 August 2002, Egmond aan Zee, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Pyykönen, T, Asikainen, J, Miettinen, M, Mononen, J, Sepponen, J and Ahola, L 2002b Breeding success of farmed silver foxes with top boxes. Proceedings from the Nordic Association of Agricultural Scientists, Fur pp 127–132. 2-4 October, 2002, Vuokatti, FinlandGoogle Scholar
Pyykönen, T, Mononen, J, Ahola, L and Rekilä, T 2005 Periparturient behaviour in farmed blue foxes (Alopex lagopus). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 94: 133–147Google Scholar
Pyykönen, T 2008 Environmental factors and reproduction in farmed blue fox (Alopex lagopus) vixens. Kuopio University Publications C. Natural and Environmental Sciences 242: 78Google Scholar
Pyykönen, T, Ahola, L and Mononen, J 2009 A note on the reproduction of primiparous blue fox vixens in social groups. Animal Reproduction Science 112: 409–414CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanson, GH and Farstad, W 2003 Perinatal pup loss in the blue fox (Alopex lagopus), Review and historical data. Proceedings from the Nordic Association of Agricultural Scientists pp 6. 8-10 October 2003, Lillehammer, NorwayGoogle Scholar