ArticleJournal of animal science2026
Characterization of individual beef cattle water intake.
Article in Journal of animal science, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Water intake (WI) in beef cattle is influenced by animal class, breed, production system, and environmental conditions, yet current models rely on limited, outdated data. We analyzed 130,000+ daily records of individual WI, dry matter intake (DMI), and body weight (BW) across 10 breeds from grazing and drylot systems over 5 yr. WI varied significantly by class (P < 0.001), with bulls consuming the most water (25.62 ± 0.03 L/d), followed by heifers (23.21 ± 0.07 L/d), and steers (21.83 ± 0.06 L/d), but heifers and steers had higher WI per 100 kg BW (P < 0.001). Breed effects were also significant (P < 0.001), with Red Angus and Limousin exhibiting the highest weight-adjusted WI. Drylot cattle drank more than grazing cattle (24.66 vs. 21.60 L/d; P < 0.001). WI increased with heat load; animals in THI ≥ 90 consumed 8.47 ± 0.03 L/100 kg BW compared to 5.53 ± 0.01 in THI < 72. However, relationships between WI and BW or DMI were weak (R2 = 0.06). These results challenge assumptions embedded in current recommendations (e.g., NASEM) and highlight the need for individualized, context-sensitive models. Our findings support future efforts in water-efficient selection, climate resilience, and sustainable beef production.
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.