Course:CONS200/2024WT1/Animal funerals: How different animal species mourn their dead

From UBC Wiki


Introduction

Animal mourning is defined by contemporary scientists as happening when an animal from a group of animals that spends time together for more than survival purposes (foraging, mating, defence, etc) dies and the survivor(s) alter their normal routines and behaviour.[1] This could include eating and sleeping less, adopting sullen body language or generally failing to thrive compared to before the death occurred. [1]

Scientific understanding of death related behaviours in animals is still relatively new, however, there is already evidence that animals not only mourn death but also have particular funeral practices for how to care for and dispose of their dead.[2] Funeral practices can be seen in species very closely related to humans such as primates but also more distant species such as elephants and scrub jays. [3] The presence of funeral arrangements in animals is evidence of animal sentience and their ability to suffer in the face of death. The ability of humans to distinguish themselves from animals on the basis of sentience, specifically sentience around death have been an important part of justifying practices like animal agriculture which is harmful to animals and devastating to the environment. [4]

Western Beliefs about Animal Sentience

Renaissance

Portrait of René Descartes by Frans Hals[5]

While during the Renaissance there were thinkers in more secular circles such as Erasmus, Thomas More and Kevin Bacon who accepted animals as sentient beings, the prevailing beliefs of the Renaissance came from the philosopher Renee Descartes.[6] Descartes published many of his most famous works in the first half of the 17th century, including Discourses on Method in 1637, Meditations on First Philosophy in 1641 and The Passions of the Soul in 1649.[7] Descartes believed in a separation, a dualism between the mind and the body where the mind is what makes a person sentient and the body is simply what executes the goals of the mind.[8] For Descartes, animals lacked the features of the mind required to be considered sentient cognitive beings, they are only body and thus any signs of pain or suffering are unconscious emotions that animals do not actually feel. [8] Rod Preece suggests that the reason this perspective was so widely accepted by the scientific community was it justified the very prevalent practice of vivisection, of which Descartes regularly engaged in.[9]

Enlightenment

During the Enlightenment a belief in the unconsciousness of animals had fallen out of favour with thinkers like Jeremy Bentham and David Hume both arguing that contrary to the claims of Descartes it is specifically an animal's capacity to suffer and express suffering that is evidence of their sentience.[6] These arguments culminated in Charles Darwin's The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872) where he concludes that if humans and animals have evolved physically in such similar ways they may have also evolved similarly emotionally.[10] This gave the emotional capacity of animals (which had previously been studied from more of a philosophical perspective) a scientific basis where emotions are another set of adaptations to natural selection, just as likely to appear in animal evolution as they are in humans.[6]

Behaviourism

Despite the growing acceptance of animal sentience during the enlightenment, the first 70 years of the 20th century science largely left this consideration for animal emotionality behind with the rise of behaviouralism. [6] Behaviouralism was founded by John Broadus Watson who sought to refocus science by removing any consideration for the subjective concepts of perception, desire and emotion which he concluded were unknowable.[6] Watson argued that instead scientists should focus on studying purely empirically observable phenomena.[6] This side-stepping of animal suffering in scientific study has only recently begun to be addressed, with discussions of sentience resurging after the publication of works such as Ruth Harrison's Animal Machines in 1964 which addresses the cruelty of the animal production industry raising animal as machines to be slaughtered for parts.[11] In this book Harrison argues that this cruelty is wrong not just because it inflicts intense suffering on animals but because animals are sentient experiencers of suffering and death.[6] This alongside general advancements in science during the time has lead to intensified study of animals and their awareness of death over the past forty years.[6]

Overview of Observed Occurrences

Birds

Black-billed Magpies (Pica hudsonia)[12]Pica nuttalli 254607090.jpgYellow-billed Magpies (Pica nuttalli)[13]
Magpies

Research in the 1980s exploring the possibility of ceremonies in other species included observations of Black-billed Magpies gathering at the site of a dead conspecific.[14] In one case, an individual died and within 5 minutes 13-14 others had gathered around the dead individual.[14] The flock stayed around the carcass acting in a non-aggressive way, for around 5 minutes before departing.[14] As the gathering occurred within 24 hours of the death, it is consistent with ‘ceremonial’ gatherings, where the surviving member of the dead individual’s pair may leave the gathering with a new mate.[14] A more dramatic example was observed in Yellow-billed Magpies, where magpies gathered around a magpie just killed by a hawk, vocalizing while watching the hawk eating it.[15] Afterwards, the magpies approached the remains of the dead bird, picked up feathers and stuck them in the trees. All the magpies left after 15-20 minutes, except the dead bird's mate, who took a feather and carry it for several days afterwards.[15]

Western Scrub-Jay (Aphelocoma californica)[16]
Scrub Jays

Western Scrub Jays, upon discovering a dead conspecific, give long range vocalization signals to others leading to a cacophonous aggregation.[17] This reaction was provoked when presented with a prostrate jay, while a jay-skin mounted upright was reacted to with aggression, instead being treated as alive.[17] The cacophonous aggregation is speculated to be used for sharing information among conspecifics of elevated risk in the vicinity, as after the aggregation a decrease in foraging is observed in that area.[17]

Mallard Ducks

In How Animals Grieve, Barbara King explores the cognition and emotional capacity of animals by looking at cases of animals responding to death.[10] One of these cases studied two Mallard ducks who were brought to a sanctuary after being rescued from the foie gras industry, from which they were in poor physical condition.[10] They became inseparable for the four years they were at the sanctuary, and when the health of one deteriorated, the sanctuary staff performed his euthanasia in view of the other to for clarity.[10] After staying with the body for hours, the surviving duck displayed nervousness around people, and didn't bond with another duck before dying two months afterwards.[10] This fits some measures used for recognizing the presence of grief, including significant changes in behaviours of the survivor, such as socializing, eating, sleeping, and emotional expression, lasting for hours, days, or weeks after the death of another individual they displayed a relationship to.[10]

Elephants

Overview

Elephants are known to be one of the most emotionally intelligent animals on planet, whose social structures are built on strong lasting relationships.[18] These relationships differ in strength amongst their population, creating complex social relationships throughout the community.[19] Elephant social structure are largely based on the frequency of interactions between strongly bonded core groups with less closely affiliated bonds and clan groups.[19] Additionally, elephants' ability to recognize an array of individuals of their species is crucial to maintaining the complexity of their fluctuating relationships.[19] Elephants’ complex social relationships and advanced intelligence have led to numerous field studies on the patterns of their behaviour when encountering conspecific carcasses.

Observational Study

Victoria's offspring (Noor) feeding next to her[19]

Goldenberg and Wittemyer reviewed the literature on field observations of elephant behaviour and thanatology.[19] They focused on a long-term project by the nonprofit organization Save the Elephants that examined interactions of elephants with a dead matriarch named Victoria in the Samburu National Reserve in 2013. Victoria was the matriarch from one of the core family groups of the larger Royals bond group.[19] On the first day of observation, approximately 36 elephants were found around Victoria – at least five distinct core groups and five elephant bulls.[19] When the core group began to move north, Victoria’s two offspring remained feeding next to her before continuing north in the direction the other elephants had left. While standing near her, one of Victoria’s offspring, Noor, began to stream from her temporal glands.[19] The next day, a group of elephants were found standing around Victoria’s body – some had returned from the first day and others were members of the Royals core group.[19] After nearly a month, the number of elephants around Victoria had reduced greatly.[19] None of those still remaining were from the Royals family.[19]

Results

Elephants unrelated to Victoria investigates her carcass which has been reduced by predation and decomposition[20]

Overall, observations of how the elephants behaved when encountering the dead matriarch involved investigation, stationary behaviour, temporal gland streaming, and heightened social interactions with other elephants.[19] These behaviours were exhibited at various stages of Victoria's decomposition, from fresh carcasses to scattered bones, which is uncommon among other species.[19] The reason for this uncommon behaviour even after several years may be due to their unique ability to identify the dead via smell.[19] Their advanced olfactory senses allow them to identify carcasses even when visual cues are gone.[19] Moreover, the spatial dynamics of dominance near Victoria indicated competition over the carcass.[19] Thus, research suggests the exhibited behaviours towards the carcass allow elephants to understand the change in social context in their society following the death of the matriarch.[19] This is important for the population as the changes affect their survival, reproductive opportunities, and ability to navigate and utilize landscapes effectively.[19]

However, non-investigative behaviour exhibited such as standing nearby with trunks inactive and temporal gland streaming indicates possible increased emotional states.[19] Such behaviours are similar to those of primates when expressing grief.[19] Thus, it should be understood that there are more reasons behind these interactive behaviours with the carcasses than simply identifying the dead individual.[19]

Chimpanzees

Genome sequencing on chimpanzees and humans discovered that the two species share approximately 98.8% of their DNA.[21] This genetic similarity supports the idea that many behavioural and emotional traits in great apes may mirror those in humans due to common ancestry.[21] Jane Goodall famously recounted the grief of chimpanzee Flint at his mother Flo's death in 1972, at Gombe Stream in Tanzania. Since then further evidence has accumulated of emotional responses to death in other wild chimpanzee groups.[22]

(a) An adult female gelada at Guassa holding her mummified infant on its tenth day after death. She finally abandoned the infant 13 days after it died. (b) A close-up view of a mummified infant. (c) An adult female gelada and her mummified infant which she carried for ≥48 days after its death. The arrow indicates where the skin had rotted away from the infant's skull. (d) Adult female grooming her dead infant. Like several other females who cared for dead infants, she directed considerable attention to (grooming and picking at) the infant's eyes. (e) Juvenile female carrying the dead infant of another female in her group. (f) Juvenile female grooming the dead infant of another female in her group.
(a) Adult female gelada holding her mummified infant on its tenth day after death. (b) Close-up of a mummified infant. (c) An adult female gelada and her mummified infant which she carried for ≥48 days after its death. (d) Adult female grooming her dead infant, focusing on picking at the infant's eyes.(e) Juvenile female carrying the dead infant of another female in her group. (f) Juvenile female grooming the dead infant of another female in her group.[23]

James R. Anderson reviews how the apes respond to cues related to dying and death at long term chimpanzee study sites and found that chimpanzee group members' responded to the corpses in highly similar ways. Mothers carried the bodies during travel, groomed them regularly, and chased away flies that circled the corpses, all of which enable mummification of the corpses.[24] Chimpanzee respond to conspecific deaths with a variety of behaviours including loud vocalizations, attacking and rough treatment of the body, consuming the body, tending it carefully, making soft vocalizations before abandoning it, and especially in the case of deaths of unknown cause, partially covering it with vegetation. Some individuals have even been seen returning to where they last saw the body of a familiar conspecific.[24]

This is an photo of example behavioral responses at the location of Thomas' dead body. One of the adult females (Noel) (a) selects a grass stem, (b) holds the grass in her mouth while inspecting Thomas' mouth with her hands, and (c) subsequently uses the grass stem to pick at Thomas' teeth.
Adult females using grass stems to pick clean Thomas' teeth.[25]

Edwin Van Leeuwen from Chimfunshi Wildlife Orphanage Trust, a chimpanzee sanctuary, suggests that chimpanzees' responses to death may be mediated by social bonds with the deceased individual. They observed the reaction of a group of chimpanzees to finding the dead body of a 9-year-old male group member named Thomas.[25] The behaviour of the group was characterized by quiet attendance and close inspections punctuated by rare outbursts.[25]The group also used grass stems to groom Thomas by picking at his teeth. Moreover, the body was continuously attended and closely inspected by several adults and juveniles, including an adult male who had formed a close social bond with Thomas prior to his death following Thomas's mother's death 4 years earlier.[25]

Other primates have been observed to behave similarly. Peter J. Fashing observed that in gelada baboons (Theropithecus gelada), female geladas in Ethiopia carrying dead infants from 1 hour to sometimes 48 days after death.[26] Fashing found that the dead infants were carried by their mothers, other females in their group, and even by females of other groups. Gelada mothers usually continued to groom their infants for weeks after death and were not avoided by other members of their group, despite the powerful smell of decay emanating from their infants.[26]

Criticisms and Controversies

Experiencing Grief

Measuring pain and grief is inherently subjective and especially difficult to study in animals who cannot communicate their experiences directly to researchers.[15][27] Some philosophies situate grief as a complex emotion that requires a detailed grasp on the particular situation and comprehension of death.[24] This requires capacity for the individual to project far into the future and past in order to grasp the consequences and finality of death.[25] The distress an animal expresses after the death of another is by this philosophy argued to be more akin to separation anxiety, as the suffering is coming from the need and lack they feel from the loss, rather than the existential awareness of finality and inevitability that can be seen in humans.[24] Others argue that this does not preclude other species from experiencing grief, as although it is difficult to measure their intellectual comprehension, they may comprehend the loss through the practical alterations to their daily life, and can also show how this affects them through changed behaviors.[25]

Anthropomorphism

A key issue for the topic of animal sentience is anthropomorphism: defined as projecting human mental characteristics onto other species, seen by many in the scientific community as a sentimental and uncritical error.[28] The opposite mistake of refusing to attribute these capacities to nonhuman animals is recently being discussed as a phenomenon.[28] There is a trend in western science of assuming that a trait does not exist in species until it is proven to be.[15] This has been referred to as non-Darwinian for not assuming that related species will have the same traits.[15] Some critics of this perspective reason that it is influenced by economic pressures, as there are less hindrances to economic activity when the moral question of non-human sentience is not taken into account. For example it is more convenient for the fishing industry to assume that fish cannot feel pain unless specifically proven otherwise, despite their shared lineage with other vertebrates who have been proven to contain pain receptors in their epidermis.[15] Critics of this dichotomous viewpoint western science often operates from propose scientists should let go of the assumption that emotions are unique to humans, and accept that like all traits, they are inherited from a long evolutionary history and could be present in a wide array of species.[15] This aligns both with the Darwinist theory, and with many Indigenous worldviews, which situate humans as just one member of the entire community of species.[15]

Moving Forward

Ethical/Legal Implications

Potential ethical implications follow the demonstration that there are non-human animals that experience and understand death, and more generally that these animals are sentient creatures.[2] Justifications for the pain and death inflicted on animals by humans have been supported by the idea in ethics that it is not immoral to kill something if it does not have any awareness of the past or future and thus would have no awareness or experience of death because they would not fear it beforehand.[2] This assumption has informed approaches to animal welfare, with policymakers placing very few limitations on the treatment of animals, especially in agriculture and scientific experimentation.[2] For instance, the AVMA classifies a large range of methods for euthanasia as acceptable, often even without euthanasia, including gassing, pithing, decapitation of mice and captive bolt guns.[2] These deaths are considered acceptable because they are quick, demonstrating the perspective that the animal's present experience of pain is acceptable so long as the process is not drawn out, and also the belief their fellow animals who often witness the death will not remember it traumatically. However, as demonstrated by the case of the two mallard ducks rescued from the foie gras industry, these birds developed a longterm social bond following their painful experience in captivity and when one died the other exhibited funereal grieving behaviour and a fear of people for the remaining two months of its life.[10] This suggests that mallard ducks are capable of internalizing their past experiences and understanding death enough to fear it, thus the trauma they experience should have ethical implications on policies surrounding their treatment in captivity up to and including how they die.[10] More broadly an animal's capacity to understand and grieve death suggests that animals experience death in ways similar to humans indicating an ethical obligation to institute stronger legal protections for the protection of animals from physical and emotional harm. [2]

Social Implications

Matthew T Rader: Poultry Farm in Namakkal, Tamil Nadu[29]

There is also potential for knowledge of animal funerals to have an impact on how the public perceives animals and thus what actions they take to protect them.[4] Rui Pedro Fonseca and Ruben Sanchez-Sabate looked at a collection of studies that examined to what extent people perceive different animals to experience emotions including grief and fear.[4] They found that people consistently underestimated the emotional capacity of agricultural animals such as cows, pigs and chickens in comparison to household pets such as dogs and species typically perceived as more advanced including chimpanzees and dolphins.[4] While there is a gap in research on the presence of funeral practices in farm animals, there has been evidence that cows, pigs and chickens all exhibit grieving behaviours, such as increased vocalization of distress, when isolated from their mothers.[27] Researchers such as McGrath et al. believe that efforts to increase public knowledge of these animals' capacity to experience grief could have significant impacts on the social acceptability of industrial farmings' treatment of these animals. [27] This is supported by the research of Fonseca & Sanchez-Sabate which found that when the suffering of farm animals is explained to people they are more likely to express a desire to change their meat consumption practices or to support policy changes in factory farming.[4] There is also evidence outside of factory farming, that awareness of animal grieving practices, specifically forms of animal funerals can impact the public's desire to protect animals. For instance, the global attention that Tahlequah the Southern Resident Killer Whale received after carrying her stillborn calf's corpse for 17 days.[30] This story of a mother mourning her calf inspired the creation of the Oklahoma Killer Whale Project, in Tahlequah, Oklahoma almost 2000 miles from the habitat of Southern Resident Killer Whales.[30] This suggests that knowledge of animal funerals and grief in animals can create powerful empathetic response in humans and thus that utilizing these stories of animals experiencing grief can help conservation efforts gain support from the public.[30]

Conclusion

Although animal grief is a difficult complex topic, animal funeral behaviours offer a window into understanding how animals cope with grief. Birds, elephants, and primates all demonstrate behavioural changes in response to deaths in the community that suggest they are engaging in a funereal response. These observations of emotional behaviour following death suggest animals have at a minimum grief-like emotions. Such findings challenge the Western perceptions of animals as non-sentient beings which gained prevalence during the Renaissance and the 20th century.[6] Critiques of current research on animal funerals focus on the challenge of proving animals' internal grief and anthropomorphism in the research. This leads some researchers to posit that animal responses to death reflect separation anxiety rather than an existential understanding of death.[24] However, these critiques do not mean that the research documenting animal funerals should be discarded, it simply suggests that additional research is needed to understand cognitively the level of emotional understanding animals have when engaging in funeral behaviour.[2] Considering the potential ethical and social implications of the ability of animals to experience grief and thus to experience death it is especially important to continue these studies. Understanding funeral behaviours in animals and the general ability of animals to suffer can not only encourages humans to reevaluate their relationship with other species but could also lead to stronger legal protections for animals.[27][2]

References

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 King, B. J. (2013). When Animals Mourn. Scientific American, 309(1), 62–67. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26017823
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 Pierce, J. (2013). The dying animal. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 10(4), 469–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-013-9480-5
  3. ↑ Goldenberg, S. Z., & Wittemyer, G. (2019). Elephant behavior toward the dead: A review and insights from field observations. Primates, 61(1), 119–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10329-019-00766-5; Miller, W. R., & Brigham, R. M. (1988). “Ceremonial” Gathering of Black-Billed Magpies (Pica pica) after the Sudden Death of a Conspecific. The Murrelet, 69(3), 78–79. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3534036; Pierce, J. (2013). The dying animal. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 10(4), 469–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-013-9480-5
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Fonseca, R. P., & Sanchez-Sabate, R. (2022). Consumers’ Attitudes towards Animal Suffering: A Systematic Review on Awareness, Willingness and Dietary Change. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(23), 16372. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192316372
  5. ↑ René Descartes, oil on oak by Frans Hals, c. 1649; in the National Gallery of Denmark.
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 Duncan, I. J. (2006). The changing concept of animal sentience. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 100(1–2), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.04.011
  7. ↑ Nadler, Steven. “The Many Lives of René Descartes.” Journal of the History of Ideas, vol. 83, no. 3, July 2022, pp. 501–22. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhi.2022.0024.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Plumwood, V. (2002). Chapter 4: Descartes and the Dream of Power. In Feminism and the Mastery of Nature (pp. 104–119). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203006757
  9. ↑ Preece, Rod. “Chapter 4: The Renaissance.” Awe for the Tiger, Love for the Lamb, 1st ed., Routledge, 1995, pp. 90–123, https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-mono/10.4324/9780203491805-11/renaissance-rod-preece?context=ubx&refId=b018859b-853e-43f1-b5b4-cb3f880ea04e.
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 King, Barbara J. (2013). "Animal mourning: Précis of How animals grieve". Animal Sentience. 1 – via WellBeing International.
  11. ↑ Broom, D. M. (2011). A history of animal welfare science. Acta Biotheoretica, 59(2), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-011-9123-3
  12. ↑ Boron, Marta. Pica Hudsonia, Canada. 19 Oct. 2015, www.flickr.com/photos/156754334@N02/35595622660.
  13. ↑ Raspet, Cricket. Yellow-billed Magpie (Pica Nuttalli). 31 Jan. 2023, www.inaturalist.org/photos/254607090.
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 14.2 14.3 Miller, W.R.; Brigham, R. M. (1988). ""Ceremonial" Gathering of Black-Billed Magpies (Pica pica) after the Sudden Death of a Conspecific". The Murrelet. 69: 78–79 – via JSTOR.
  15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6 15.7 Pierotti, Raymond; Annett, Cynthia (2014). "Review: We Probably Thought That Would Be True: Perceiving Complex Emotional States in Nonhumans". Ethnobiology Letters. 5: 15–21 – via JSTOR.
  16. ↑ Baird, Michael L. Western Scrub-Jay (Aphelocoma californica). 7 Nov. 2009, www.flickr.com/photos/72825507@N00/4084206601.
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 17.2 Iglesias, T. L.; McElreath, R.; Patricelli, G. L. (2012). "Western scrub-jay funerals: cacophonous aggregations in response to dead conspecifics". Animal Behaviour. 85: 1103–1111 – via Science Direct.
  18. ↑ Roy, Sutirtho (2023). "The Emotional Intelligence of Different Animals". Wildlife SOS.
  19. ↑ 19.00 19.01 19.02 19.03 19.04 19.05 19.06 19.07 19.08 19.09 19.10 19.11 19.12 19.13 19.14 19.15 19.16 19.17 19.18 19.19 19.20 Goldenberg, Shifra Z.; Wittemyer, George (2019). "Elephant behavior toward the dead: A review and insights from field observations". Primates. 61: 119–128 – via Springer Nature Link.
  20. ↑ Goldenberg, Shifra Z.; Wittemyer, George (2020). "Elephant behavior toward the dead: A review and insights from field observations". Primates. 61: 119–128 – via Springer Nature Link.
  21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 Mikkelsen, T.S. (2005). "Initial sequence of the chimpanzee genome and comparison with the human genome". Nature.
  22. ↑ King, Barbara J. (2013). Death, Mourning, and Burial: A Cross-Cultural Reader. Antonius C. G. M. Robben. pp. 202~207.
  23. ↑ Fashing, Peter J. (06 December 2010). "Death among geladas (Theropithecus gelada): a broader perspective on mummified infants and primate thanatology". American journal of primatology. 73. Check date values in: |date= (help)
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 24.2 24.3 24.4 Anderson, James R. (16 July 2018). "Chimpanzees and Death". Royal Society.
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 25.2 25.3 25.4 25.5 Edwin, J.C. (09 May 2016). "Chimpanzees' responses to the dead body of a 9-year-old group member". American journal of primatology. 78. Check date values in: |date= (help) Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name ":9" defined multiple times with different content
  26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 Fashing, Peter J. (06 December 2010). "Death among geladas (Theropithecus gelada): a broader perspective on mummified infants and primate thanatology". American journal of primatology. 73. Check date values in: |date= (help)
  27. ↑ 27.0 27.1 27.2 27.3 McGrath, N., et al. “Public Attitudes Towards Grief in Animals.” Animal Welfare, vol. 22, no. 1, Jan. 2013, pp. 33–47. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.22.1.033.
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 Sober, Elliott (2005). "Comparative Psychology Meets Evolutionary Biology: Morgan's Canon and Cladistic Parsimony". Thinking with Animals: New Perspectives on Anthropomorphism, Columbia University Press: 85–99 – via ResearchGate.
  29. ↑ Rader, Matthew T. Poultry Farm in Namakkal, Tamil Nadu. 2010.
  30. ↑ 30.0 30.1 30.2 Smith, Pauline, et al. “Empathy for Wildlife: The Importance of the Individual.” AMBIO, May 2024, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-024-02017-4.


Seekiefer (Pinus halepensis) 9months-fromtop.jpg
 This conservation resource was created by Course:CONS200. It is shared under a CC-BY 4.0 International License.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=Course:CONS200/2024WT1/Animal_funerals:_How_different_animal_species_mourn_their_dead&oldid=853817"