ArticleVeterinary and animal science2025
Identification and evaluation of agroecosystem compartments as forage sources for free-ranging goats in smallholder farming systems of western Democratic Republic of Congo.
Article in Veterinary and animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Free-ranging goats forage across multiple agroecosystem compartments, thereby contributing to nutrient redistribution. Despite their importance in nutrient flows, little is known about how these compartments support goat diets or about their spatial structure. This study addresses this gap by identifying, mapping, and characterising the agroecosystems exploited by free-ranging goats as forage sources and by assessing the contribution of each compartment to their daily diet. Twelve adult female goats from local herds were monitored during both the dry and rainy seasons for three consecutive days at four sites, using GPS collars combined with drone surveys and direct observations. Two observers were assigned to each goat: one, equipped with a stopwatch and tracking sheet, recorded feeding stations, forages consumed, and biting times; the other, using a Sony HDR-CX405 camera, documented biting behaviour. Drone-based mapping revealed five distinct compartments of the foraging area: croplands (6.1 %-14.8 %), fallow lands (2.7 %-12.5 %), rangelands (36.4 %-69.7 %), residue supply areas (9.8 %-46.7 %), and hedgerows (0.1 %-5.4 %). The agroecosystem landscapes were highly fragmented (24-54 patches/ha) and exhibited SHDI values ranging from 0.94 to 1.19. Goats consumed 57 forage species, dominated by grasses (17 %) and legumes (9 %), with the remaining 74 % spanning 31 botanical families. The integration of GPS tracks with land-use maps and direct observations revealed that rangelands and agricultural lands were the primary contributors to free-ranging goats' daily dry matter intake and forage species diversity. The marked heterogeneity and floristic richness of these agroecosystem compartments underpin their importance as key forage sources supporting smallholder free-range goat farming in western Democratic Republic of Congo.
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.