2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2016.05.017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Important role of dominance in allogrooming behaviour in beef cattle

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
10
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
1
10
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Some cows were very active and central in the network, while others almost did not interact. Previous studies on social grooming in cattle found similar results (17,47,48,56), suggesting that specific individuals might be key players in the network structure.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 57%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Some cows were very active and central in the network, while others almost did not interact. Previous studies on social grooming in cattle found similar results (17,47,48,56), suggesting that specific individuals might be key players in the network structure.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 57%
“…Contact networks, based on direct or indirect observations, can provide more detailed information as for example the type of interaction and the directionality (who starts the interaction and who receives it). Despite the major potential for social grooming networks to provide information on the dynamic of social behavior, those specific networks have been rarely explored in cattle (47,48).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, determining the criteria for defining which time intervals fall within bouts and which fall between bouts requires consideration. Some previous authors have used various bout criteria for characterizing allogrooming, based on the ability to make reliable measurements between observers (Laister et al, 2011), in reference to previous works (Tresoldi et al, 2015;Šárová et al, 2016), or without clear justification (Sato et al, 1991;Krohn, 1994;Val-Laillet et al, 2009). However, more rigorous approaches to determining bout criteria have been developed, for example, to determine meal criteria for feeding behavior (Tolkamp et al, 1998;Yeates et al, 2001).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this regard, Bøe and Faerevik (2003) reported that young animals have higher rates of social interactions than adult ones. Nevertheless, in female herds, as reported by Reinhardt et al (1986), social ranking is related to the age of the animals. In our study, even though the herd consisted mainly of females, hierarchies related to the age of the animals were not detected.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The activity of moving also proved to be a social activity like grazing, as indicated by the density, the degree, closeness, and betweenness centrality. Similarly, the necessity of maintaining social coherence under conditions of mobility in grazing cattle was also stated by Sato (1982). However, due to the fact that moving is an antagonistic activity, water buffaloes did not tend to socialize as much as during grazing.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%