Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33240636›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2020

Foraging efficiency, social status and body condition in group-living horses and ponies.

Sarah L Giles, Pat Harris, Sean A Rands, Christine J Nicol

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Transcriptomic signature related to poor welfare of sport horses.Comprehensive psychoneuroendocrinology · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sarah L GilesSchool of Veterinary Sciences, University of Bristol, Langford, North Somerset, UK.
Pat HarrisEquine Studies Group, WALTHAM Petcare Science Institute, Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, UK.
Sean A RandsSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7400-005X
Christine J NicolRoyal Veterinary College, Hatfield, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individual animals experience different costs and benefits associated with group living, which may impact on their foraging efficiency in ways not yet well specified. This study investigated associations between social dominance, body condition and interruptions to foraging behaviour in a cross-sectional study of 116 domestic horses and ponies, kept in 20 discrete herds. Social dominance was measured for each individual alongside observations of winter foraging behaviour. During bouts of foraging, the duration, frequency and category (vigilance, movement, social displacements given and received, scratching and startle responses) of interruptions were recorded, with total interruption time taken as a proxy measure of foraging efficiency. Total foraging time was not influenced by body condition or social dominance. Body condition was associated with social dominance, but more strongly associated with foraging efficiency. Specifically, lower body condition was associated with greater vigilance. This demonstrates that factors other than social dominance can result in stable differences in winter body condition.

Indexed as

Body conditionForagingGroup livingHorseObesitySocial statusVigilance

Identifiers

PMID33240636
PMCPMC7659649

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.