ArticleTropical animal health and production2026
Behavioural and health status assessment of cattle in a semi-intensive system.
Article in Tropical animal health and production, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The productivity of ruminants is largely hinged on nutrition and management systems. Hence, a 2-month study was conducted to assess the behaviour, welfare, and health status of White Fulani (WF) and Sokoto Gudali (SG) cattle breeds raised under a semi-intensive farming system. A total of 60 cattle were evaluated using Qualitative Behavioral Assessment (QBA) parameters such as activeness, friendliness, and agitation; assessed skin condition (e.g., cleanliness, hair loss, ocular and nasal discharge, diarrhea, and lameness). Data/observations were taken twice weekly. 10 mL of blood samples were collected from all the animals for haematological and serum biochemical studies. All data collected were subjected to appropriate statistical analyses. Results from QBA revealed marked differences in activity levels and sociability. WF cattle showed greater calmness (90.91%) and more frequent cud-chewing (92.31%), while SG cattle displayed greater sociability (68.75%). Skin condition assessment revealed a higher proportion of WF cattle (96.00%) has cleaner skin when compared to SG cattle (83.00%). Neither breed had diarrhea nor lameness, while minor ocular and nasal discharges were observed. Haematological and serum analyses revealed no significant (P > 0.05) differences, although WF cattle had higher values across most parameters except the mean corpuscular haemoglobin concentration (33.26 g/dL), granulocyte (42.17%), and monocyte (2.50%) count. SG cattle had higher total protein (81.63 g/L), albumin (30.53 g/L), aspartate aminotransferase (78.05 IU/L), alanine transaminase (67.10 IU/L), and cholesterol (3.81 mmol/L) concentrations, while WF cattle had higher globulin (52.22 g/L) and glucose (46.00 mg/dl) concentrations. Thus, findings highlight breed-specific behavioral differences in cattle raised under semi-intensive systems, while haematological and serum indices were indifferent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41843234What 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.