ArticleScientific reports2023
Domestication and breeding objective did not shape the interpretation of physical and social cues in goats (Capra hircus).
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validating a Target-Enrichment Design for Capturing Uniparental Haplotypes in Ancient Domesticated Animals.Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- Street-wise dog testing: Feasibility and reliability of a behavioural test battery for free-ranging dogs in their natural habitat.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial selection by humans, either through domestication or subsequent selection for specific breeding objectives, drives changes in animal cognition and behaviour. However, most previous cognitive research comparing domestic and wild animals has focused on companion animals such as canids, limiting any general claims about the effects of artificial selection by humans. Using a cognitive test battery, we investigated the ability of wild goats (non-domestic, seven subjects), dwarf goats (domestic, not selected for milk production, 15 subjects) and dairy goats (domestic, selected for high milk yield, 18 subjects) to utilise physical and social cues in an object choice task. To increase the heterogeneity of our test samples, data for domestic goats were collected by two experimenters at two research stations (Agroscope; Research Institute for Farm Animal Biology). We did not find performance differences between the three groups in the cognitive test battery for either physical or social cues. This indicates that for a domestic non-companion animal species, domestication and selection for certain breeding objectives did not measurably shape the physical and cognitive skills of goats.
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.