Invited review: Social dominance in dairy cattle: A critical review with guidelines for future research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cattle are gregarious animals able to form social relationships. Dominance is one of the most widely studied social behaviors of dairy cattle, especially cows confined indoors. However, much of the past dairy cattle research has used an unstandardized approach, differing in definitions and conceptual understanding of dominance, as well as their methods of data collection and dominance calculation. The first of the 3 aims of this review is to evaluate how dominance relates to the social behavior of housed dairy cows. Cows engage in agonistic interactions to establish and reinforce dominance relationships. An individual's dominance is influenced by intrinsic characteristics, such as personality, and extrinsic factors, including group composition. When competing for resources, agonistic interactions can also be influenced by individual motivational differences, such as hunger, which may diminish the role of dominance in regulating competition. Our second aim is to critically review methods used to assess dominance in cows. This includes discussions on the effect of time and location of data collection on measured values as well as the viability and limitations of some dominance calculation methods. We propose that different methodologies lend themselves to different types of research questions. For example, the use of data stream-based methods that consider the sequence of interactions are useful for estimating how dominance fluctuates with changing conditions and can be used in a dynamically changing group. In contrast, matrix-based methods that aggregate social interactions may be best for identifying the social position of individuals and understanding how social characteristics influence the attributes of a stable hierarchy. Our third aim is to discuss the future of dominance research. We use a flowchart to illustrate guidelines for a more standardized approach to measuring dominance in cattle. We also identify areas in need of further conceptual clarification, suggest practical applications of dominance when managing dairy cattle, and discuss some limitations of dominance research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".