ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2020
Virtual Fence Responses Are Socially Facilitated in Beef Cattle.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- How do grazing beef and dairy cattle respond to virtual fences? A review.Journal of animal science · 2024Pooled it
- Animal Individual Factors Dictate Learning Strategy: An Integrated Analysis of Cattle Adaptation to a Virtual Fencing System.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Differential response of Angus-Hereford and Rarámuri Criollo cattle to a dynamic feeding challenge during the training to an autonomous virtual fencing collar.Journal of animal science · 2026Article
- Efficacy of virtual fencing to manage two groups of cattle with adjacent virtual boundaries.Translational animal science · 2026Article
- Effects of Social Facilitation and Introduction Methods for Cattle on Virtual Fence Adaptation.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Stress indicators in dairy cows adapting to virtual fencing.Journal of animal science · 2024Article
- A matter of age? How age affects the adaptation of lactating dairy cows to virtual fencing.Journal of animal science · 2024Article
- Behavioral Adaptations of Nursing Brangus Cows to Virtual Fencing: Insights from a Training Deployment Phase.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Stakeholder Challenges and Opportunities of GPS Shock Collars to Achieve Optimum Welfare in a Conservation or Farm Setting.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Current and Future Approaches to Mitigate Conflict between Humans and Asian Elephants: The Potential Use of Aversive Geofencing Devices.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Review
- Is Virtual Fencing an Effective Way of Enclosing Cattle? Personality, Herd Behaviour and Welfare.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- Dairy cows did not rely on social learning mechanisms when solving a spatial detour task.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Validation of Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) Devices on Sheep to Detect Grazing Movement Leaders and Social Networks in Merino Ewes.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Assess the Welfare Impacts of a New Virtual Fencing Technology.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Group-living can be socially advantageous where the behavior of individuals may be modified by group members through socially facilitative processes. Virtual fencing contains cattle by providing audio and electrical signals via a neckband device. However, little is known about social influences on learning to appropriately respond to the virtual fence (VF) cues. This study aimed to determine whether cattle respond to the behavior of conspecifics during their initial interactions with a VF across 3 days. Sixty-four Angus steers, naïve to virtual fencing, were placed into 8 paddocks (8 animals/group), divided with a VF into two areas- an inclusion and exclusion zone. The animals received an audio cue if they approached the VF followed by an electrical pulse if they continued into the exclusion zone. The GPS and audio and electrical stimuli data were recorded. To quantify social facilitation, individual VF interactions were grouped into 179 "events" across 3 days; starting from when the first animal (leader) approached the VF. The responses of other animals were categorized as (1) followed the leader to move into the exclusion zone (followers, F), (2) accompanied the leader back into the inclusion zone (facilitated, Fa), (3) did not show any reaction (non-facilitated, NFa). A social facilitation score (SFaS) was calculated as SFaS (%) = (F/(Fa+NFa+F))
Indexed as
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.