ArticleAnatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007)2026
Descriptive, comparative, and functional anatomy of the facial musculature in cattle (Bos taurus).
Article in Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007), 2026. 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
Abstract
Facial expressions can provide insight into animal emotions and pain, but no standardized system for assessing the entire facial display in cattle (Bos taurus Linnaeus) exists. The Facial Action Coding System (FACS), originally developed for humans, identifies distinct facial movements based on mimetic muscles. Developing a cattle-specific FACS requires mapping and comparing cattle mimetic musculature with that of humans and related species, which was the aim of this study. Dissection of three heads-using skinning and facial mask preparation on opposite sides-identified 30 mimetic muscles and revealed notable fiber blending in the lower face and ear region. The method helped clarify subtle anatomical discrepancies in previous literature that are important for interpreting muscle function. Muscular differences with humans and horses suggest a slightly less diverse or different facial repertoire in cattle. Robust lips and a different lip-muscle arrangement likely restrict the marginal, upper lip, and lip-corner movements described in one or both comparison species. A broad insertion of the M. levator labii superioris indicates involvement in both upper lip and nostril movements, and several muscles appeared to influence nostril shape. The eyebrow region-served only by a broad M. frontalis-suggests fewer eyebrow movements than in humans and broader ones than in horses. Cattle also possess musculature supporting movements not described in one or both comparison species, including upper lip retraction, nostril lifting, cheek raising, and diverse ear movements supported by well-developed ear muscles. The findings provide a basis for developing a FACS for cattle, pending validation in live animals.
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.