ArticleMovement ecology2020
Tracking animal movements using biomarkers in tail hairs: a novel approach for animal geolocating from sulfur isoscapes.
Article in Movement ecology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- An integrated framework to identify and characterize regional-scale insect dispersal.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026Article
- Article
- Using sulfur stable isotope ratios (δRapid communications in mass spectrometry : RCM · 2024Article
- Investigation of optimized observation periods for estimating a representative home range of free-roaming domestic dogs.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- We are what we eat, plus some per mill: Using stable isotopes to estimate diet composition inEcology and evolution · 2022Article
- The Use of Intrinsic Markers for Studying the Migratory Movements of Bats.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- Dietary homogenization and spatial distributions of carbon, nitrogen, and sulfur isotope ratios in human hair in South Korea.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent animal tracking studies are most often based on the application of external geolocators such as GPS and radio transmitters. While these technologies provide detailed movement data, they are costly to acquire and maintain, which often restricts sample sizes. Furthermore, deploying external geolocators requires physically capturing and recapturing of animals, which poses an additional welfare concern. Natural biomarkers provide an alternative, non-invasive approach for addressing a range of geolocation questions and can, because of relatively low cost, be collected from many individuals thereby broadening the scope for population-wide inference.
methodsWe developed a low-cost, minimally invasive method for distinguishing between local versus non-local movements of cattle using sulfur isotope ratios (δ
resultsWe used a Generalized Additive Model to generate a predicted δ
conclusionsWhile the focus of our study was on cattle, this approach can be modified to understand movements in other mobile organisms where the sulfur isoscape is sufficiently heterogeneous relative to the spatial scale of animal movements and where tracking with traditional methods is difficult.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.