Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42554801›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2026

Defining production environments in U.S. sheep populations: clustering climate conditions and management practices.

Hilal Yazar Gunes, Réka Howard, Thomas W Murphy, Carrie S Wilson, Bradley A Freking, Joan M Burke, Joshua Bret Taylor, Luiz F Brito, Ronald M Lewis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Hilal Yazar GunesDepartment of Animal Sciences, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583, United States.
Réka HowardDepartment of Statistics, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583, United States.
Thomas W MurphyRoman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, USDA-ARS, Clay Center, NE 68933, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3527-8814
Carrie S WilsonRange Sheep Production Efficiency Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Dubois, ID 83423, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9971-1061
Bradley A FrekingRoman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, USDA-ARS, Clay Center, NE 68933, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5385-5692
Joan M BurkeDale Bumpers Small Farms Research Center, USDA-ARS, Booneville, AR 72927, United States.
Joshua Bret TaylorRange Sheep Production Efficiency Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Dubois, ID 83423, United States.
Luiz F BritoDepartment of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5819-0922
Ronald M LewisDepartment of Animal Sciences, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, NE 68583, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1658-443X

Funding

Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Competitive 2022-67015-36073
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sheep production in the United States spans diverse geographies and management practices, which are traditionally classified by climate alone. By combining information on climatic conditions and their management practices, we assigned groups of flocks to distinct eco-management clusters that characterized their shared production environments. Ninety-seven producers, whose geographically distributed flocks represented five breeds enrolled in the National Sheep Improvement Program, completed an online management survey. Breeds included Katahdin (n = 50), Polypay (n = 21), Suffolk (n = 13), Rambouillet (n = 8), and Targhee (n = 5). The questionnaire considered parasite control, lambing and udder health management, culling strategies, feeding methods, and climate mitigation practices. We characterized the climates at producer locations based on elevation, seasonal precipitation, soil moisture, and the Comprehensive Climate Index (CCI). The CCI integrated ambient temperature, humidity, wind speed, and solar radiation to reflect thermal stress. Clusters were first formed based on climate or management data via Principal Component Analysis and Multiple Correspondence Analysis, respectively. Both sources of information were then combined to form eco-management clusters using Factorial Analysis of Mixed Data. Cluster quality was assessed using silhouette widths. Differences among clustering approaches were tested with chi-square cross-tabulations and permutation tests. Flock assignments to climate and to management clusters were, statistically, independent within breeds (P > 0.16). Flock allocations to eco-management and management clusters, however, typically aligned (P ≤ 0.01), although less so in Targhee-Rambouillet (P = 0.18). Such was also the case for climate-based clusters (P ≤ 0.04) except in Suffolk (P = 0.50). Overall, coupling of climate and management appeared weakest in Suffolk flocks. Across eco-management clusters, differences in management practices were found for 26 husbandry practices in Katahdin, 21 in Polypay, 7 in Suffolk, and 5 jointly in Rambouillet and Targhee (P < 0.05). Although climate influenced husbandry strategies, producers often adopted unique management practices in response to local conditions. Collectively, climate and management defined distinct yet complementary drivers of environmental heterogeneity, supporting the concept of eco-management clustering as a holistic approach to characterizing the production environments of sheep flocks.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryClimateAnimalsCluster AnalysisFemaleSheepUnited Statesclimateeco-management clustersmanagement surveyproduction environmentssheep

Identifiers

PMID42554801
PMCPMC13668885

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.