Cattle

Cattle, or cows, are the most common type of large domesticated

ungulates. They are a prominent modern member of the subfamily Cattle
Bovinae, are the most widespread species of the genus Bos, and are
most commonly classified collectively as Bos taurus.

Cattle are commonly raised as livestock for meat (beef or veal, see
beef cattle), for milk (see dairy cattle), and for hides, which are used to
make leather. They are used as riding animals and draft animals (oxen
or bullocks, which pull carts, plows and other implements). Another
product of cattle is dung, which can be used to create manure or fuel.
In some regions, such as parts of India, cattle have significant religious
meaning. Cattle, mostly small breeds such as the Miniature Zebu, are
also kept as pets.

Around 10,500 years ago, cattle were domesticated from as few as 80

progenitors in central Anatolia, the Levant and Western Iran.[1] A Swiss Braunvieh cow wearing a
According to an estimate from 2011, there are 1.4 billion cattle in the
cowbell
world.[2] In 2009, cattle became one of the first livestock animals to
have a fully mapped genome.[3] Conservation status
Domesticated
Scientific classification
Contents
Kingdom: Animalia
Taxonomy
Phylum: Chordata
Etymology
Terminology Class: Mammalia
Singular terminology issue Order: Artiodactyla
Other terminology
Family: Bovidae
Characteristics
Subfamily: Bovinae
Anatomy
Digestive system Genus: Bos
Gestation and size Species: B. taurus
Reproduction
Binomial name
Weight
Bos taurus
Cognition
Linnaeus, 1758
Temperament and emotions
Subspecies
Senses
Vision
Bos taurus indicus
Taste
Audition Bos taurus taurus
Olfaction and gustation
Touch
Magnetoreception
Behavior
 Reproductive behavior
Dominance and leadership
Grazing behavior
Genetics
Domestication and husbandry
Usage as money
Bovine range
Modern husbandry
Sleep Synonyms
Economy
Bos primigenius
Cattle meat production
Dairy Bos indicus
Hides Bos longifrons
Feral cattle
Environmental impact
Health
Effect of high stocking density
Animal cruelty concerns
Beef cattle
Dairy cows
Leather
Rodeos
Running of the bulls
Bullfighting
Oxen
Religion, traditions and folklore
Islamic traditions
Hindu tradition
Other traditions
In heraldry
Population
Gallery
See also
References
Further reading

Taxonomy
Cattle were originally identified as three separate species: Bos taurus, the European or "taurine" cattle (including
similar types from Africa and Asia); Bos indicus, the zebu; and the extinct Bos primigenius, the aurochs. The
aurochs is ancestral to both zebu and taurine cattle.[4] These have been reclassified as one species, Bos taurus,
with three subspecies: Bos taurus primigenius, Bos taurus indicus, and Bos taurus taurus.[5][6]

Complicating the matter is the ability of cattle to interbreed with other closely related species. Hybrid individuals
and even breeds exist, not only between taurine cattle and zebu (such as the sanga cattle, Bos taurus africanus),
but also between one or both of these and some other members of the genus Bos – yaks (the dzo or yattle[7]),
banteng, and gaur. Hybrids such as the beefalo breed can even occur
between taurine cattle and either species of bison, leading some authors
to consider them part of the genus Bos, as well.[8] The hybrid origin of
some types may not be obvious – for example, genetic testing of the
Dwarf Lulu breed, the only taurine-type cattle in Nepal, found them to be
a mix of taurine cattle, zebu, and yak.[9] However, cattle cannot be
successfully hybridized with more distantly related bovines such as water
buffalo or African buffalo.

The aurochs originally ranged throughout Europe, North Africa, and

much of Asia. In historical times, its range became restricted to Europe,
and the last known individual died in Mazovia, Poland, in about Żubroń, a wisent and cattle hybrid
1627.[10] Breeders have attempted to recreate cattle of similar
appearance to aurochs by crossing traditional types of domesticated
cattle, creating the Heck cattle breed.

Etymology
The noun cattle (which is treated as a plural and has no singular) encompasses both sexes. The singular, cow,
technically means the female, the male being bull. The plural form cows is sometimes used colloquially to refer
to both sexes collectively, as e.g. in a herd, but that usage can be misleading as the speaker's intent may indeed
be just the females. The bovine species per se is clearly dimorphic.

Cattle did not originate as the term for bovine animals. It was borrowed from Anglo-Norman catel, itself from
medieval Latin capitale 'principal sum of money, capital', itself derived in turn from Latin caput 'head'. Cattle
originally meant movable personal property, especially livestock of any kind, as opposed to real property (the
land, which also included wild or small free-roaming animals such as chickens—they were sold as part of the
land).[11] The word is a variant of chattel (a unit of personal property) and closely related to capital in the
economic sense.[12] The term replaced earlier Old English feoh 'cattle, property', which survives today as fee (cf.
German: Vieh, Dutch: vee, Gothic: faihu).

The word "cow" came via Anglo-Saxon cū (plural cȳ), from Common Indo-European gʷōus (genitive gʷowés) =
"a bovine animal", compare Persian: gâv, Sanskrit: go-, Welsh: buwch.[13] The plural cȳ became ki or kie in
Middle English, and an additional plural ending was often added, giving kine, kien, but also kies, kuin and
others. This is the origin of the now archaic English plural, "kine". The Scots language singular is coo or cou,
and the plural is "kye".

In older English sources such as the King James Version of the Bible, "cattle" refers to livestock, as opposed to
"deer" which refers to wildlife. "Wild cattle" may refer to feral cattle or to undomesticated species of the genus
Bos. Today, when used without any other qualifier, the modern meaning of "cattle" is usually restricted to
domesticated bovines.[14]

Terminology
In general, the same words are used in different parts of the world, but with minor differences in the definitions.
The terminology described here contrasts the differences in definition between the United Kingdom and other
British-influenced parts of the world such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland and the United States.[15]

An "intact" (i.e., not castrated) adult male is called a bull. A wild, young, unmarked bull is known as
a micky in Australia.[16] An unbranded bovine of either sex is called a maverick in the US and
Canada.
An adult female that has had a calf (or two, depending on regional usage) is a cow.
 A young female before she has had a calf of her own[17] and is
under three years of age is called a heifer (/ˈhɛfər/ HEF-ər).[18]
A young female that has had only one calf is occasionally
called a first-calf heifer.
Young cattle of both sexes are called calves until they are
weaned, then weaners until they are a year old in some areas;
in other areas, particularly with male beef cattle, they may be
known as feeder calves or simply feeders. After that, they are
referred to as yearlings or stirks[19] if between one and two
years of age.[20] An Ongole bull
A castrated male is called a steer in the United States; older
steers are often called bullocks in other parts of the world,[21]
but in North America this term refers to a young bull. Piker
bullocks are micky bulls (uncastrated young male bulls) that
were caught, castrated and then later lost.[16] In Australia, the
term Japanese ox is used for grain-fed steers in the weight
range of 500 to 650 kg that are destined for the Japanese
meat trade.[22] In North America, draft cattle under four years
old are called working steers. Improper or late castration on a
bull results in it becoming a coarse steer known as a stag in
Australia, Canada and New Zealand.[23] In some countries, an A Hereford bull
incompletely castrated male is known also as a rig.
A castrated male (occasionally a female or in some areas a
bull) kept for draft or riding purposes is called an ox (plural oxen); ox may also be used to refer to
some carcass products from any adult cattle, such as ox-hide, ox-blood, oxtail, or ox-liver.[18]
A springer is a cow or heifer close to calving.[24]
In all cattle species, a female twin of a bull usually becomes an infertile partial intersex, and is
called a freemartin.
Neat (horned oxen, from which neatsfoot oil is derived), beef (young ox) and beefing (young
animal fit for slaughtering) are obsolete terms, although poll, pollard and polled cattle are still terms
in use for naturally hornless animals, or in some areas also for those that have been disbudded or
dehorned.
Cattle raised for human consumption are called beef cattle. Within the American beef cattle
industry, the older term beef (plural beeves) is still used to refer to an animal of either sex. Some
Australian, Canadian, New Zealand and British people use the term beast.[25]
Cattle bred specifically for milk production are called milking or dairy cattle;[15] a cow kept to
provide milk for one family may be called a house cow or milker. A fresh cow is a dairy term for a
cow or first-calf heifer who has recently given birth, or "freshened."
The adjective applying to cattle in general is usually bovine. The terms bull, cow and calf are also
used by extension to denote the sex or age of other large animals, including whales,
hippopotamuses, camels, elk and elephants.

Singular terminology issue

"Cattle" can only be used in the plural and not in the singular: it is a plurale tantum.[26] Thus one may refer to
"three cattle" or "some cattle", but not "one cattle". "One head of cattle" is a valid though periphrastic way to
refer to one animal of indeterminate or unknown age and sex; otherwise no universally used single-word
singular form of cattle exists in modern English, other than the sex- and age-specific terms such as cow, bull,
steer and heifer. Historically, "ox" was not a sex-specific term for adult cattle, but generally this is now used only
for working cattle, especially adult castrated males. The term is also incorporated into the names of other
species, such as the musk ox and "grunting ox" (yak), and is used in some areas to describe certain cattle
products such as ox-hide and oxtail.[27]
Cow is in general use as a singular for the collective cattle. The word
cow is easy to use when a singular is needed and the sex is unknown or
irrelevant—when "there is a cow in the road", for example. Further, any
herd of fully mature cattle in or near a pasture is statistically likely to
consist mostly of cows, so the term is probably accurate even in the
restrictive sense. Other than the few bulls needed for breeding, the vast
majority of male cattle are castrated as calves and are used as oxen or
slaughtered for meat before the age of three years. Thus, in a pastured
herd, any calves or herd bulls usually are clearly distinguishable from the
cows due to distinctively different sizes and clear anatomical differences.
A Brahman calf
Merriam-Webster and Oxford Living Dictionaries recognize the sex-
nonspecific use of cow as an alternate definition,[28][29] whereas Collins
and the OED do not.

Colloquially, more general nonspecific terms may denote cattle when a singular form is needed. Head of cattle is
usually used only after a numeral. Australian, New Zealand and British farmers use the term beast or cattle
beast. Bovine is also used in Britain. The term critter is common in the western United States and Canada,
particularly when referring to young cattle.[30] In some areas of the American South (particularly the
Appalachian region), where both dairy and beef cattle are present, an individual animal was once called a "beef
critter", though that term is becoming archaic.

Other terminology

Cattle raised for human consumption are called beef cattle. Within the beef cattle industry in parts of the United
States, the term beef (plural beeves) is still used in its archaic sense to refer to an animal of either sex. Cows of
certain breeds that are kept for the milk they give are called dairy cows or milking cows (formerly milch cows).
Most young male offspring of dairy cows are sold for veal, and may be referred to as veal calves.

The term dogies is used to describe orphaned calves in the context of ranch work in the American West, as in
"Keep them dogies moving".[31] In some places, a cow kept to provide milk for one family is called a "house
cow". Other obsolete terms for cattle include "neat" (this use survives in "neatsfoot oil", extracted from the feet
and legs of cattle), and "beefing" (young animal fit for slaughter).

An onomatopoeic term for one of the most common sounds made by cattle is moo (also called lowing). There are
a number of other sounds made by cattle, including calves bawling, and bulls bellowing. Bawling is most
common for cows after weaning of a calf. The bullroarer makes a sound similar to a bull's territorial call.[32]

Characteristics

Anatomy

Cattle are large quadrupedal ungulate mammals with cloven hooves. Most breeds have horns, which can be as
large as the Texas Longhorn or small like a scur. Careful genetic selection has allowed polled (hornless) cattle to
become widespread.

Digestive system

Cattle are ruminants, meaning their digestive system is highly specialized to allow the use of poorly digestible
plants as food. Cattle have one stomach with four compartments, the rumen, reticulum, omasum, and abomasum,
with the rumen being the largest compartment. The reticulum, the smallest compartment, is known as the
"honeycomb". The omasum's main function is to absorb water and
nutrients from the digestible feed. The omasum is known as the "many
plies". The abomasum is like the human stomach; this is why it is known
as the "true stomach".

Cattle are known for regurgitating and re-chewing their food, known as
cud chewing, like most ruminants. While the animal is feeding, the food
is swallowed without being chewed and goes into the rumen for storage
until the animal can find a quiet place to continue the digestion process.
The food is regurgitated, a mouthful at a time, back up to the mouth,
Displayed skeleton of a domestic
where the food, now called the cud, is chewed by the molars, grinding
cow
down the coarse vegetation to small particles. The cud is then swallowed
again and further digested by specialized microorganisms in the rumen.
These microbes are primarily responsible for decomposing cellulose and
other carbohydrates into volatile fatty acids cattle use as their primary
metabolic fuel. The microbes inside the rumen also synthesize amino
acids from non-protein nitrogenous sources, such as urea and ammonia.
As these microbes reproduce in the rumen, older generations die and
their cells continue on through the digestive tract. These cells are then
partially digested in the small intestines, allowing cattle to gain a high-
quality protein source. These features allow cattle to thrive on grasses
and other tough vegetation. Anatomy model of a cow

Gestation and size

The gestation period for a cow is about nine months long. A newborn calf's size can vary among breeds, but a
typical calf weighs 25 to 45 kg (55 to 99 lb). Adult size and weight vary significantly among breeds and sex.
Steers are generally killed before reaching 750 kg (1,650 lb). Breeding stock may be allowed a longer lifespan,
occasionally living as long as 25 years. The oldest recorded cow, Big Bertha, died at the age of 48 in 1993.

Reproduction

On farms it is very common to use artificial insemination (AI), a medically assisted

reproduction technique consisting of the artificial deposition of semen in the female's
genital tract.[33] It is used in cases where the spermatozoa can not reach the fallopian
tubes or simply by choice of the owner of the animal. It consists of transferring, to the
uterine cavity, spermatozoa previously collected and processed, with the selection of
morphologically more normal and mobile spermatozoa.

A cow's udder contains two pairs of mammary glands, (commonly referred to as

teats) creating four "quarters".[34] The front ones are referred to as fore quarters and
the rear ones rear quarters.[35]

Bulls become fertile at about seven months of age. Their fertility is closely related to Reproductive system of
the size of their testicles, and one simple test of fertility is to measure the a bovine female
circumference of the scrotum: a young bull is likely to be fertile once this reaches 28
centimetres (11 in); that of a fully adult bull may be over 40 centimetres
(16 in).[36][37]

A bull has a fibro-elastic penis. Given the small amount of erectile tissue, there is little enlargement after
erection. The penis is quite rigid when non-erect, and becomes even more rigid during erection. Protrusion is not
affected much by erection, but more by relaxation of the retractor penis muscle and straightening of the sigmoid
flexure.[38][39][40] Induced ovulation can be manipulated to produce farming benefits. For example, to
synchronise ovulation of the cattle to benefit dairy farming.
Weight

The weight of adult cattle varies, depending on the breed. Smaller kinds, such as
Dexter and Jersey adults, range between 272 to 454 kg (600 to 1,000 lb). Large
Continental breeds, such as Charolais, Marchigiana, Belgian Blue and Chianina,
adults range from 635 to 1,134 kg (1,400 to 2,500 lb). British breeds, such as
Hereford, Angus, and Shorthorn, mature between 454 to 907 kg (1,000 to 2,000 lb),
occasionally higher, particularly with Angus and Hereford.[41] Bulls are larger than
cows of the same breed by up to a few hundred kilograms. Chianina bulls can weigh
up to 1,500 kg (3,300 lb); British bulls, such as Angus and Hereford, can weigh as
little as 907 kg (2,000 lb) to as much as 1,361 kg (3,000 lb).
Ox testes
The world record for the heaviest bull was 1,740 kg (3,840 lb), a Chianina named
Donetto, when he was exhibited at the Arezzo show in 1955.[42] The heaviest steer
was eight-year-old 'Old Ben', a Shorthorn/Hereford cross weighing in at 2,140 kg
(4,720 lb) in 1910.[43]

In the United States, the average weight of beef cattle has steadily increased, especially since the 1970s,
requiring the building of new slaughterhouses able to handle larger carcasses. New packing plants in the 1980s
stimulated a large increase in cattle weights.[44] Before 1790 beef cattle averaged only 160 kg (350 lb) net; and
thereafter weights climbed steadily.[45][46]

Cognition
In laboratory studies, young cattle are able to memorize the locations of several food sources and retain this
memory for at least 8 hours, although this declined after 12 hours.[47] Fifteen-month-old heifers learn more
quickly than adult cows which have had either one or two calvings, but their longer-term memory is less
stable.[48] Mature cattle perform well in spatial learning tasks and have a good long-term memory in these tests.
Cattle tested in a radial arm maze are able to remember the locations of high-quality food for at least 30 days.
Although they initially learn to avoid low-quality food, this memory diminishes over the same duration.[49]
Under less artificial testing conditions, young cattle showed they were able to remember the location of feed for
at least 48 days.[50] Cattle can make an association between a visual stimulus and food within 1 day—memory
of this association can be retained for 1 year, despite a slight decay.[51]

Calves are capable of discrimination learning[52] and adult cattle compare favourably with small mammals in
their learning ability in the Closed-field Test.[53]

They are also able to discriminate between familiar individuals, and among humans. Cattle can tell the difference
between familiar and unfamiliar animals of the same species (conspecifics). Studies show they behave less
aggressively toward familiar individuals when they are forming a new group.[54] Calves can also discriminate
between humans based on previous experience, as shown by approaching those who handled them positively and
avoiding those who handled them aversively.[55] Although cattle can discriminate between humans by their faces
alone, they also use other cues such as the color of clothes when these are available.[56]

In audio play-back studies, calves prefer their own mother's vocalizations compared to the vocalizations of an
unfamiliar mother.[57]

In laboratory studies using images, cattle can discriminate between images of the heads of cattle and other
animal species.[58] They are also able to distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar conspecifics. Furthermore,
they are able to categorize images as familiar and unfamiliar individuals.[54]

When mixed with other individuals, cloned calves from the same donor form subgroups, indicating that kin
discrimination occurs and may be a basis of grouping behaviour. It has also been shown using images of cattle
that both artificially inseminated and cloned calves have similar cognitive capacities of kin and non-kin
discrimination.[59]

Cattle can recognize familiar individuals. Visual individual recognition is a more complex mental process than
visual discrimination. It requires the recollection of the learned idiosyncratic identity of an individual that has
been previously encountered and the formation of a mental representation.[60] By using 2-dimensional images of
the heads of one cow (face, profiles, 3⁄4 views), all the tested heifers showed individual recognition of familiar
and unfamiliar individuals from their own breed. Furthermore, almost all the heifers recognized unknown
individuals from different breeds, although this was achieved with greater difficulty. Individual recognition was
most difficult when the visual features of the breed being tested were quite different from the breed in the image,
for example, the breed being tested had no spots whereas the image was of a spotted breed.[61]

Cattle use visual/brain lateralisation in their visual scanning of novel and familiar stimuli.[62] Domestic cattle
prefer to view novel stimuli with the left eye, i.e. using the right brain hemisphere (similar to horses, Australian
magpies, chicks, toads and fish) but use the right eye, i.e. using the left hemisphere, for viewing familiar
stimuli.[63]

Temperament and emotions

In cattle, temperament can affect production traits such as carcass and
meat quality or milk yield as well as affecting the animal's overall health
and reproduction. Cattle temperament is defined as "the consistent
behavioral and physiological difference observed between individuals in
response to a stressor or environmental challenge and is used to describe
the relatively stable difference in the behavioral predisposition of an
animal, which can be related to psychobiological mechanisms".[65]
Generally, cattle temperament is assumed to be multidimensional. Five
underlying categories of temperament traits have been proposed:[66]

shyness-boldness
exploration-avoidance
activity
aggressiveness Ear postures of cows are studied as
indicators of their emotional state
sociability
and overall animal welfare.[64]

In a study on Holstein–Friesian heifers learning to press a panel to open a

gate for access to a food reward, the researchers also recorded the heart
rate and behavior of the heifers when moving along the race towards the food. When the heifers made clear
improvements in learning, they had higher heart rates and tended to move more vigorously along the race. The
researchers concluded this was an indication that cattle may react emotionally to their own learning
improvement.[67]

Negative emotional states are associated with a bias toward negative responses towards ambiguous cues in
judgement tasks. After separation from their mothers, Holstein calves showed such a cognitive bias indicative of
low mood.[68] A similar study showed that after hot-iron disbudding (dehorning), calves had a similar negative
bias indicating that post-operative pain following this routine procedure results in a negative change in emotional
state.[69]

In studies of visual discrimination, the position of the ears has been used as an indicator of emotional state.[54]
When cattle are stressed other cattle can tell by the chemicals released in their urine.[70]

Cattle are very gregarious and even short-term isolation is considered to cause severe psychological stress. When
Aubrac and Friesian heifers are isolated, they increase their vocalizations and experience increased heart rate and
plasma cortisol concentrations. These physiological changes are greater in Aubracs. When visual contact is re-
instated, vocalisations rapidly decline, regardless of the familiarity of the returning cattle, however, heart rate
decreases are greater if the returning cattle are familiar to the previously-isolated individual.[71] Mirrors have
been used to reduce stress in isolated cattle.[72]

Senses
Cattle use all of the five widely recognized sensory modalities. These can assist in some complex behavioural
patterns, for example, in grazing behaviour. Cattle eat mixed diets, but when given the opportunity, show a
partial preference of approximately 70% clover and 30% grass. This preference has a diurnal pattern, with a
stronger preference for clover in the morning, and the proportion of grass increasing towards the evening.[73]

Vision

Vision is the dominant sense in cattle and they obtain almost 50% of their information visually. [74]

Cattle are a prey animal and to assist predator detection, their eyes are located on the sides of their head rather
than the front. This gives them a wide field of view of 330° but limits binocular vision (and therefore stereopsis)
to 30° to 50° compared to 140° in humans.[54][75] This means they have a blind spot directly behind them. Cattle
have good visual acuity,[54] but compared to humans, their visual accommodation is poor.[74]

Cattle have two kinds of color receptors in the cone cells of their retinas. This means that cattle are dichromatic,
as are most other non-primate land mammals.[76][77] There are two to three rods per cone in the fovea centralis
but five to six near the optic papilla.[75] Cattle can distinguish long wavelength colors (yellow, orange and red)
much better than the shorter wavelengths (blue, grey and green). Calves are able to discriminate between long
(red) and short (blue) or medium (green) wavelengths, but have limited ability to discriminate between the short
and medium. They also approach handlers more quickly under red light.[78] Whilst having good color sensitivity,
it is not as good as humans or sheep.[54]

A common misconception about cattle (particularly bulls) is that they are enraged by the color red (something
provocative is often said to be "like a red flag to a bull"). This is a myth. In bullfighting, it is the movement of
the red flag or cape that irritates the bull and incites it to charge.[79]

Taste

Cattle have a well-developed sense of taste and can distinguish the four primary tastes (sweet, salty, bitter and
sour). They possess around 20,000 taste buds. The strength of taste perception depends on the individual's
current food requirements. They avoid bitter-tasting foods (potentially toxic) and have a marked preference for
sweet (high calorific value) and salty foods (electrolyte balance). Their sensitivity to sour-tasting foods helps
them to maintain optimal ruminal pH.[74]

Plants have low levels of sodium and cattle have developed the capacity of seeking salt by taste and smell. If
cattle become depleted of sodium salts, they show increased locomotion directed to searching for these. To assist
in their search, the olfactory and gustatory receptors able to detect minute amounts of sodium salts increase their
sensitivity as biochemical disruption develops with sodium salt depletion.[80][81]

Audition

Cattle hearing ranges from 23 Hz to 35 kHz. Their frequency of best sensitivity is 8 kHz and they have a lowest
threshold of −21 db (re 20 μN/m−2), which means their hearing is more acute than horses (lowest threshold of 7
db).[82] Sound localization acuity thresholds are an average of 30°. This means that cattle are less able to localise
sounds compared to goats (18°), dogs (8°) and humans (0.8°).[83] Because cattle have a broad foveal fields of
view covering almost the entire horizon, they may not need very accurate locus information from their auditory
systems to direct their gaze to a sound source.

Vocalisations are an important mode of communication amongst cattle and can provide information on the age,
sex, dominance status and reproductive status of the caller. Calves can recognize their mothers using
vocalizations; vocal behaviour may play a role by indicating estrus and competitive display by bulls.[84]

Olfaction and gustation

Cattle have a range of odiferous glands over their body including

interdigital, infraorbital, inguinal and sebaceous glands, indicating
that olfaction probably plays a large role in their social life. Both the
primary olfactory system using the olfactory bulbs, and the
secondary olfactory system using the vomeronasal organ are
used.[85] This latter olfactory system is used in the flehmen
response. There is evidence that when cattle are stressed, this can be
recognised by other cattle and this is communicated by alarm
substances in the urine.[70] The odour of dog faeces induces
behavioural changes prior to cattle feeding, whereas the odours of
urine from either stressed or non-stressed conspecifics and blood Several senses are used in social
relationships among cattle.
have no effect.[86]

In the laboratory, cattle can be trained to recognise conspecific

individuals using olfaction only.[85]

In general, cattle use their sense of smell to "expand" on information detected by other sensory modalities.
However, in the case of social and reproductive behaviours, olfaction is a key source of information.[74]

Touch

Cattle have tactile sensations detected mainly by mechanoreceptors, thermoreceptors and nociceptors in the skin
and muzzle. These are used most frequently when cattle explore their environment.[74]

Magnetoreception

There is conflicting evidence for magnetoreception in cattle. One study reported that resting and grazing cattle
tend to align their body axes in the geomagnetic north–south (N-S) direction.[87] In a follow-up study, cattle
exposed to various magnetic fields directly beneath or in the vicinity of power lines trending in various magnetic
directions exhibited distinct patterns of alignment.[88] However, in 2011, a group of Czech researchers reported
their failed attempt to replicate the finding using Google Earth images.[89]

Behavior
Under natural conditions, calves stay with their mother until weaning at 8 to 11 months. Heifer and bull calves
are equally attached to their mothers in the first few months of life.[90] Cattle are considered to be "hider" type
animals, but in the artificial environment of small calving pens, close proximity between cow and calf is
maintained by the mother at the first three calvings but this changes to being mediated by the calf after these.
Primiparous dams show a higher incidence of abnormal maternal behavior.[91]
Beef-calves reared on the range suckle an average of 5.0 times every
24 hours with an average total time of 46 min spent suckling. There is a
diurnal rhythm in suckling activity with peaks between 05:00–07:00,
10:00–13:00 and 17:00–21:00.[92]

Studies on the natural weaning of zebu cattle (Bos indicus) have shown
that the cow weans her calves over a 2-week period, but after that, she
continues to show strong affiliatory behavior with her offspring and Play media
preferentially chooses them for grooming and as grazing partners for at Video of a calf suckling
least 4–5 years.[93]

Reproductive behavior

Semi-wild Highland cattle heifers first give birth at 2 or 3 years of age,

and the timing of birth is synchronized with increases in natural food
quality. Average calving interval is 391 days, and calving mortality
within the first year of life is 5%.[94]

Dominance and leadership

One study showed that over a 4-year period, dominance relationships A cow giving birth
within a herd of semi-wild highland cattle were very firm. There were
few overt aggressive conflicts and the majority of disputes were settled
by agonistic (non-aggressive, competitive) behaviors that involved no physical contact between opponents (e.g.
threatening and spontaneous withdrawing). Such agonistic behavior reduces the risk of injury. Dominance status
depended on age and sex, with older animals generally being dominant to young ones and males dominant to
females. Young bulls gained superior dominance status over adult cows when they reached about 2 years of
age.[94]

As with many animal dominance hierarchies, dominance-associated aggressiveness does not correlate with rank
position, but is closely related to rank distance between individuals.[94]

Dominance is maintained in several ways. Cattle often engage in mock fights where they test each other's
strength in a non-aggressive way. Licking is primarily performed by subordinates and received by dominant
animals. Mounting is a playful behavior shown by calves of both sexes and by bulls and sometimes by cows in
estrus,[95] however, this is not a dominance related behavior as has been found in other species.[94]

The horns of cattle are "honest signals" used in mate selection. Furthermore, horned cattle attempt to keep
greater distances between themselves and have fewer physical interactions than hornless cattle. This leads to
more stable social relationships.[96]

In calves, the frequency of agonistic behavior decreases as space allowance increases, but this does not occur for
changes in group size. However, in adult cattle, the number of agonistic encounters increases as the group size
increases.[97]

Grazing behavior

When grazing, cattle vary several aspects of their bite, i.e. tongue and jaw movements, depending on
characteristics of the plant they are eating. Bite area decreases with the density of the plants but increases with
their height. Bite area is determined by the sweep of the tongue; in one study observing 750-kilogram (1,650 lb)
steers, bite area reached a maximum of approximately 170 cm2 (30 sq in). Bite depth increases with the height of
the plants. By adjusting their behavior, cattle obtain heavier bites in swards that are tall and sparse compared
with short, dense swards of equal mass/area.[98] Cattle adjust other aspects of their grazing behavior in relation
to the available food; foraging velocity decreases and intake rate increases in areas of abundant palatable
forage.[99]

Cattle avoid grazing areas contaminated by the faeces of other cattle more strongly than they avoid areas
contaminated by sheep,[100] but they do not avoid pasture contaminated by rabbit faeces.[101]

Genetics
In 24 April 2009, edition of the journal Science, a team of researchers led by the National Institutes of Health
and the US Department of Agriculture reported having mapped the bovine genome.[102] The scientists found
cattle have about 22,000 genes, and 80% of their genes are shared with humans, and they share about 1000 genes
with dogs and rodents, but are not found in humans. Using this bovine "HapMap", researchers can track the
differences between the breeds that affect the quality of meat and milk yields.[103]

Behavioral traits of cattle can be as heritable as some production traits, and often, the two can be related.[104]
The heritability of fear varies markedly in cattle from low (0.1) to high (0.53); such high variation is also found
in pigs and sheep, probably due to differences in the methods used.[105] The heritability of temperament
(response to isolation during handling) has been calculated as 0.36 and 0.46 for habituation to handling.[106]
Rangeland assessments show that the heritability of aggressiveness in cattle is around 0.36.[107]

Quantitative trait loci (QTLs) have been found for a range of production and behavioral characteristics for both
dairy and beef cattle.[108]

Domestication and husbandry

Cattle occupy a unique role in human history, having been domesticated
since at least the early neolithic age.

Archeozoological and genetic data indicate that cattle were first

domesticated from wild aurochs (Bos primigenius) approximately 10,500
years ago. There were two major areas of domestication: one in the Near
East (specifically central Anatolia, the Levant and Western Iran), giving
rise to the taurine line, and a second in the area that is now Pakistan,
resulting in the indicine line.[109] Modern mitochondrial DNA variation Texas Longhorns are a US breed.
indicates the taurine line may have arisen from as few as 80 aurochs
tamed in the upper reaches of Mesopotamia near the villages of Çayönü
Tepesi in what is now southeastern Turkey and Dja'de el-Mughara in what is now northern Iraq.[1]

Although European cattle are largely descended from the taurine lineage, gene flow from African cattle (partially
of indicine origin) contributed substantial genomic components to both southern European cattle breeds and their
New World descendants.[109] A study on 134 breeds showed that modern taurine cattle originated from Africa,
Asia, North and South America, Australia, and Europe.[110] Some researchers have suggested that African
taurine cattle are derived from a third independent domestication from North African aurochsen.[109]

Usage as money

As early as 9000 BC both grain and cattle were used as money or as barter (the first grain remains found,
considered to be evidence of pre-agricultural practice date to 17,000 BC).[111][112][113] Some evidence also
exists to suggest that other animals, such as camels and goats, may have been used as currency in some parts of
the world.[114] One of the advantages of using cattle as currency is that it allows the seller to set a fixed price. It
even created the standard pricing. For example, two chickens were traded for one cow as cows were deemed to
be more valuable than chickens.[112]

Modern husbandry

Cattle are often raised by allowing herds to graze on the grasses of large
tracts of rangeland. Raising cattle in this manner allows the use of land
that might be unsuitable for growing crops. The most common
interactions with cattle involve daily feeding, cleaning and milking.
Many routine husbandry practices involve ear tagging, dehorning,
loading, medical operations, vaccinations and hoof care, as well as
training for agricultural shows and preparations. Also, some cultural
differences occur in working with cattle; the cattle husbandry of Fulani
This Hereford is being inspected for
men rests on behavioural techniques, whereas in Europe, cattle are
ticks. Cattle are often restrained or
controlled primarily by physical means, such as fences.[115] Breeders use confined in cattle crushes (squeeze
cattle husbandry to reduce M. bovis infection susceptibility by selective chutes) when given medical
breeding and maintaining herd health to avoid concurrent disease.[116] attention.

Cattle are farmed for beef, veal, dairy, and leather. They are less
commonly used for conservation grazing, or simply to maintain
grassland for wildlife, such as in Epping Forest, England. They are often
used in some of the most wild places for livestock. Depending on the
breed, cattle can survive on hill grazing, heaths, marshes, moors and
semidesert. Modern cattle are more commercial than older breeds and,
having become more specialized, are less versatile. For this reason, many
smaller farmers still favor old breeds, such as the Jersey dairy breed. In
Portugal, Spain, southern France and some Latin American countries,
bulls are used in the activity of bullfighting; Jallikattu in India is a bull
taming sport radically different from European bullfighting, humans are This young bovine has a nose ring to
unarmed and bulls are not killed. In many other countries bullfighting is prevent it from suckling, which is
illegal. Other activities such as bull riding are seen as part of a rodeo, usually to assist in weaning.
especially in North America. Bull-leaping, a central ritual in Bronze Age
Minoan culture (see Sacred Bull), still exists in southwestern France. In
modern times, cattle are also entered into agricultural competitions. These competitions can involve live cattle or
cattle carcases in hoof and hook events.

In terms of food intake by humans, consumption of cattle is less efficient than of grain or vegetables with regard
to land use, and hence cattle grazing consumes more area than such other agricultural production when raised on
grains.[117] Nonetheless, cattle and other forms of domesticated animals can sometimes help to use plant
resources in areas not easily amenable to other forms of agriculture. Bulls are sometimes used as guard
animals.[118][119]

Sleep

The average sleep time of a domestic cow is about 4 hours a day.[120] Cattle do have a stay apparatus,[121] but do
not sleep standing up,[122] they lie down to sleep deeply.[123] In spite of the urban legend, cows cannot be tipped
over by people pushing on them.[124]

Economy
The meat of adult cattle is known as beef, and that of calves is veal.
Other animal parts are also used as food products, including blood, liver,
kidney, heart and oxtail. Cattle also produce milk, and dairy cattle are
specifically bred to produce the large quantities of milk processed and
sold for human consumption. Cattle today are the basis of a multibillion-
dollar industry worldwide. The international trade in beef for 2000 was
over $30 billion and represented only 23% of world beef production.[125]
Approximately 300 million cattle, including dairy cattle, are slaughtered
each year for food.[126] The production of milk, which is also made into
cheese, butter, yogurt, and other dairy products, is comparable in
Holstein cattle are the primary dairy
economic size to beef production, and provides an important part of the
breed, bred for high milk production.
food supply for many of the world's people. Cattle hides, used for leather
to make shoes, couches and clothing, are another widespread product.
Cattle remain broadly used as draft animals in many developing
countries, such as India. Cattle are also used in some sporting games, including rodeo and bullfighting.

Cattle meat production

Cattle meat production (kt)
Country 2008 2009 2010 2011
Argentina 3132 3378 2630 2497
Australia 2132 2124 2630 2420
Brazil 9024 9395 9115 9030
China 5841 6060 6244 6182
Germany 1199 1190 1205 1170
Japan 520 517 515 500
US 12163 11891 12046 11988

Source: Helgi Library,[127] World Bank, FAOSTAT

About half the world's meat comes from cattle.[128]

Dairy

Certain breeds of cattle, such as the Holstein-Friesian, are used to produce milk,[129][130] which can be processed
into dairy products such as milk, cheese or yogurt. Dairy cattle are usually kept on specialized dairy farms
designed for milk production. Most cows are milked twice per day, with milk processed at a dairy, which may be
onsite at the farm or the milk may be shipped to a dairy plant for eventual sale of a dairy product.[131] For dairy
cattle to continue producing milk, they must give birth to one calf per year. If the calf is male, it generally is
slaughtered at a young age to produce veal.[132] They will continue to produce milk until three weeks before
birth.[130] Over the last fifty years, dairy farming has become more intensive to increase the yield of milk
produced by each cow. The Holstein-Friesian is the breed of dairy cow most common in the UK, Europe and the
United States. It has been bred selectively to produce the highest yields of milk of any cow. Around 22 litres per
day is average in the UK.[129][130]

Hides
Most cattle are not kept solely for hides, which are usually a by-product of beef
production. Hides are most commonly used for leather, which can be made into a
variety of product, including shoes. In 2012 India was the world's largest
producer of cattle hides.[133]

Feral cattle
Feral cattle are defined as being 'cattle that are not domesticated or
cultivated'.[134] Populations of feral cattle are known to come from and exist in:
Australia, United States of America,[135] Colombia, Argentina, Spain, France
and many islands, including New Guinea, Hawaii, Galapagos, Juan Fernández
Islands, Hispaniola (Dominican Republic and Haiti), Tristan da Cunha and Île
Amsterdam,[136] two islands of Kuchinoshima[137] and Kazura Island next to Dairy farming and the
Naru Island in Japan.[138][139] Chillingham cattle is sometimes regarded as a milking of cattle was once
performed largely by hand,
feral breed.[140] Aleutian wild cattles can be found on Aleutian Islands.[141] The
but is now usually done by
"Kinmen cattle" which is dominantly found on Kinmen Island, Taiwan is mostly
machine.
domesticated while smaller portion of the population is believed to live in the
wild due to accidental releases.[142]

Other notable examples include cattle in the vicinity of Hong Kong (in the Shing Mun Country Park,[143] among
Sai Kung District[144] and Lantau Island[145] and on Grass Island[146]), and semi-feral animals in Yangmingshan,
Taiwan.[147]

Environmental impact
Estimated virtual water requirements for various foods (m³ water/ton)[148]
Chapagain
Hoekstra& Hung Zimmer& Renault
& Hoekstra Okiet al.
Average
(2003) (2003) (2003)
(2003)

Beef 15,977 13,500 20,700 16,730

Pork 5,906 4,600 5,900 5,470
Cheese 5,288 5,290
Poultry 2,828 4,100 4,500 3,810
Eggs 4,657 2,700 3,200 3,520
Rice 2,656 1,400 3,600 2,550
Soybeans 2,300 2,750 2,500 2,520
Wheat 1,150 1,160 2,000 1,440
Maize 450 710 1,900 1,020
Milk 865 790 560 740
Potatoes 160 105 130

Mean greenhouse gas emissions for different food types[149]

Food Types Greenhouse Gas Emissions (g CO2-Ceq per g protein)
Ruminant Meat 62
Recirculating Aquaculture 30
 Trawling Fishery 26
Non-recirculating Aquaculture 12
Pork 10
Poultry 10
Dairy 9.1
Non-trawling Fishery 8.6
Eggs 6.8
Starchy Roots 1.7
Wheat 1.2
Maize 1.2
Legumes 0.25

Gut flora in cattle include

Mean land use of different foods[150]
methanogens that produce methane as
a byproduct of enteric fermentation, Food Types Land Use (m2year per 100g protein)
which cattle belch out. The same Lamb and Mutton 185
volume of atmospheric methane has a Beef 164
higher global warming potential than
Cheese 41
atmospheric carbon dioxide.[151][152]
Methane belching from cattle can be Pork 11
reduced with genetic selection, Poultry 7.1
immunization, rumen defaunation, diet Eggs 5.7
modification, decreased antibiotic use, 3.7
Farmed Fish
and grazing management, among
others.[153][154][155][156] Groundnuts 3.5
Peas 3.4
A report from the Food and Tofu 2.2
Agriculture Organization (FAO) states
that the livestock sector is
Mean acidifying emissions (air pollution) of different foods per 100g
"responsible for 18% of
of protein[150]
greenhouse gas
Acidifying Emissions (g SO2eq per 100g protein)
emissions".[157] The IPCC Food Types
estimates that cattle and Beef 343.6
other livestock emit about Cheese 165.5
80 to 93 Megatonnes of 142.7
Pork
methane per year,[158]
accounting for an Lamb and Mutton 139.0
estimated 37% of Farmed Crustaceans 133.1
anthropogenic methane Poultry 102.4
emissions, [157] and Farmed Fish 65.9
additional methane is
produced by anaerobic Eggs 53.7
fermentation of manure in Groundnuts 22.6
manure lagoons and other Peas 8.5
manure storage 6.7
Tofu
structures.[159] The net
change in atmospheric Mean eutrophying emissions (water pollution) of different foods per 100g
methane content was
of protein[150]
recently about 1
Megatonne per Food Types Eutrophying Emissions (g PO43-eq per 100g protein)
year,[160] and in some Beef 365.3
recent years there has Farmed Fish 235.1
been no increase in Farmed Crustaceans 227.2
atmospheric methane Cheese 98.4
content.[161] While
Lamb and Mutton 97.1
cattle fed forage
actually produce more Pork 76.4
methane than grain-fed Poultry 48.7
cattle, the increase Eggs 21.8
may be offset by the
Groundnuts 14.1
increased carbon
recapture of pastures, Peas 7.5
which recapture three Tofu 6.2
times the CO2 of
cropland used for grain.[162]

One of the cited changes suggested to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is

intensification of the livestock industry, since intensification leads to less land
for a given level of production. This assertion is supported by studies of the US
beef production system, suggesting practices prevailing in 2007 involved 8.6%
less fossil fuel use, 16.3% less greenhouse gas emissions, 12.1% less water use,
and 33.0% less land use, per unit mass of beef produced, than those used in
1977.[163] The analysis took into account not only practices in feedlots, but also
feed production (with less feed needed in more intensive production systems),
forage-based cow-calf operations and back-grounding before cattle enter a
feedlot (with more beef produced per head of cattle from those sources, in more
intensive systems), and beef from animals derived from the dairy industry.
Cattle in dry landscape north
The number of American cattle kept in confined feedlot conditions fluctuates.
of Alice Springs, Australia
From 1 January 2002 through 1 January 2012, there was no significant overall
(CSIRO)
upward or downward trend in the number of US cattle on feed for slaughter,
which averaged about 14.046 million head over that period.[164][165] Previously,
the number had increased; it was 12.453 million in 1985.[166] Cattle on
feed (for slaughter) numbered about 14.121 million on 1 January 2012,
i.e. about 15.5% of the estimated inventory of 90.8 million US cattle
(including calves) on that date. Of the 14.121 million, US cattle on feed
(for slaughter) in operations with 1000 head or more were estimated to
number 11.9 million.[165] Cattle feedlots in this size category correspond
to the regulatory definition of "large" concentrated animal feeding
operations (CAFOs) for cattle other than mature dairy cows or veal
Cattle near the Bruneau River in Elko
calves.[167] Significant numbers of dairy, as well as beef cattle, are County, Nevada
confined in CAFOs, defined as "new and existing operations which
stable or confine and feed or maintain for a total of 45 days or more in
any 12-month period more than the number of animals specified"[168]
where "[c]rops, vegetation, forage growth, or post-harvest residues are
not sustained in the normal growing season over any portion of the lot or
facility."[169] They may be designated as small, medium and large. Such
designation of cattle CAFOs is according to cattle type (mature dairy
cows, veal calves or other) and cattle numbers, but medium CAFOs are
so designated only if they meet certain discharge criteria, and small
CAFOs are designated only on a case-by-case basis.[170]
Cattle freely roam in the Norwegian
A CAFO that discharges pollutants is required to obtain a permit, which mountains in summer, here in
requires a plan to manage nutrient runoff, manure, chemicals, Oppdal.
contaminants, and other wastewater pursuant to the US Clean Water
Act.[171] The regulations involving CAFO permitting have been
extensively litigated.[172] Commonly, CAFO wastewater and manure nutrients are applied to land at agronomic
rates for use by forages or crops, and it is often assumed that various constituents of wastewater and manure, e.g.
organic contaminants and pathogens, will be retained, inactivated or degraded on the land with application at
such rates; however, additional evidence is needed to test reliability of such assumptions .[173] Concerns raised
by opponents of CAFOs have included risks of contaminated water due to feedlot runoff,[174] soil erosion,
human and animal exposure to toxic chemicals, development of antibiotic resistant bacteria and an increase in E.
coli contamination.[175] While research suggests some of these impacts can be mitigated by developing
wastewater treatment systems[174] and planting cover crops in larger setback zones,[176] the Union of Concerned
Scientists released a report in 2008 concluding that CAFOs are generally unsustainable and externalize
costs.[162]

An estimated 935,000 cattle operations were operating in the US in 2010.[177] In 2001, the US Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) tallied 5,990 cattle CAFOs then regulated, consisting of beef (2,200), dairy (3,150),
heifer (620) and veal operations (20).[178] Since that time, the EPA has established CAFOs as an enforcement
priority. EPA enforcement highlights for fiscal year 2010 indicated enforcement actions against 12 cattle CAFOs
for violations that included failures to obtain a permit, failures to meet the terms of a permit, and discharges of
contaminated water.[179]

Another concern is manure, which if not well-managed, can

lead to adverse environmental consequences. However,
manure also is a valuable source of nutrients and organic
matter when used as a fertilizer.[180] Manure was used as a
fertilizer on about 6,400,000 hectares (15.8 million acres) of
US cropland in 2006, with manure from cattle accounting
for nearly 70% of manure applications to soybeans and
about 80% or more of manure applications to corn, wheat,
barley, oats and sorghum.[181] Substitution of manure for
synthetic fertilizers in crop production can be
environmentally significant, as between 43 and 88
megajoules of fossil fuel energy would be used per kg of
nitrogen in manufacture of synthetic nitrogenous
Cattle grazing in a high-elevation environment at
fertilizers.[182] the Big Pasture Plateau, Slovenia

Grazing by cattle at low intensities can create a favourable

environment for native herbs and forbs by mimicking the
native grazers who they displaced; in many world regions, though, cattle are reducing biodiversity due to
overgrazing.[183] A survey of refuge managers on 123 National Wildlife Refuges in the US tallied 86 species of
wildlife considered positively affected and 82 considered negatively affected by refuge cattle grazing or
haying.[184] Proper management of pastures, notably managed intensive rotational grazing and grazing at low
intensities can lead to less use of fossil fuel energy, increased recapture of carbon dioxide, fewer ammonia
emissions into the atmosphere, reduced soil erosion, better air quality, and less water pollution.[162]

Health
The veterinary discipline dealing with cattle and cattle diseases (bovine veterinary) is called buiatrics.[185]
Veterinarians and professionals working on cattle health issues are pooled in the World Association for Buiatrics,
founded in 1960.[186] National associations and affiliates also exist.[187]

Cattle diseases were in the center of attention in the 1980s and 1990s when the Bovine spongiform
encephalopathy (BSE), also known as mad cow disease, was of concern. Cattle might catch and develop various
other diseases, like blackleg, bluetongue, foot rot too.[188][189][190]
In most states, as cattle health is not only a veterinarian issue, but also a public health issue, public health and
food safety standards and farming regulations directly affect the daily work of farmers who keep cattle.[191]
However, said rules change frequently and are often debated. For instance, in the U.K., it was proposed in 2011
that milk from tuberculosis-infected cattle should be allowed to enter the food chain.[192] Internal food safety
regulations might affect a country's trade policy as well. For example, the United States has just reviewed its
beef import rules according to the "mad cow standards"; while Mexico forbids the entry of cattle who are older
than 30 months.[193]

Cow urine is commonly used in India for internal medical purposes.[194][195] It is distilled and then consumed by
patients seeking treatment for a wide variety of illnesses.[196] At present, no conclusive medical evidence shows
this has any effect.[197] However, an Indian medicine containing cow urine has already obtained U.S.
patents.[198]

Digital dermatitis is caused by the bacteria from the genus Treponema. It differs from foot rot and can appear
under unsanitary conditions such as poor hygiene or inadequate hoof trimming, among other causes. It primarily
affects dairy cattle and has been known to lower the quantity of milk produced, however the milk quality
remains unaffected. Cattle are also susceptible to ringworm caused by the fungus, Trichophyton verrucosum, a
contagious skin disease which may be transferred to humans exposed to infected cows.[199]

Effect of high stocking density

Stocking density refers to the number of animals within a specified area. When stocking density reaches high
levels, the behavioural needs of the animals may not be met. This can negatively influence health, welfare and
production performance.[200]

The effect of overstocking in cows can have a negative effect on milk production and reproduction rates which
are two very important traits for dairy farmers. Overcrowding of cows in barns has been found to reduced
feeding, resting and rumination.[200] Although they consume the same amount of dry matter within the span of a
day, they consume the food at a much more rapid rate, and this behaviour in cows can lead to further
complications.[201] The feeding behaviour of cows during their post-milking period is very important as it has
been proven that the longer animals can eat after milking, the longer they will be standing up and therefore
causing less contamination to the teat ends.[202] This is necessary to reduce the risk of mastitis as infection has
been shown to increase the chances of embryonic loss.[203] Sufficient rest is important for dairy cows because it
is during this period that their resting blood flow increases up to 50%, this is directly proportionate to milk
production.[202] Each additional hour of rest can be seen to translate to 2 to 3.5 more pounds of milk per cow
daily. Stocking densities of anything over 120% have been shown to decrease the amount of time cows spend
lying down.[204]

Cortisol is an important stress hormone; its plasma concentrations increase greatly when subjected to high levels
of stress.[205] Increased concentration levels of cortisol have been associated with significant increases in
gonadotrophin levels and lowered progestin levels. Reduction of stress is important in the reproductive state of
cows as an increase in gonadotrophin and lowered progesterone levels may impinge on the ovulatory and
lutenization process and to reduce the chances of successful implantation.[206] A high cortisol level will also
stimulate the degradation of fats and proteins which may make it difficult for the animal to sustain its pregnancy
if implanted successfully.[205]

Animal cruelty concerns

Animal rights activists have criticized the treatment of cattle, claiming that common practices in cattle
husbandry, slaughter, and entertainment unnecessarily cause cattle fear, stress, and pain. They advocate for
abstaining from the consumption of cattle-related animal products (such as beef, cow's milk, veal, and leather)
and cattle-based entertainment (such as rodeos and bullfighting) in order to end one's participation in the cruelty,
claiming that the animals are only treated this way due to market forces and popular demand.
Beef cattle

The following practices have been criticized by animal welfare and animal rights groups:[207] branding,[208]
castration,[209] dehorning,[210] ear tagging,[211] nose ringing,[212] restraint,[213] tail docking,[214] the use of veal
crates,[215] and cattle prods.[216] Further, the stress induced by high stocking density (such as in feedlots,
auctions, and during transport) is known to negatively affect the health of cattle,[217][218] and has also been
criticized.[219][220]

Dairy cows

While the treatment of dairy cows is similar to that of beef cattle, especially towards the end of their life, it has
faced additional criticism.[221] To produce milk from dairy cattle, most calves are separated from their mothers
soon after birth and fed milk replacement in order to retain the cows' milk for human consumption.[222] Animal
welfare advocates point out that this breaks the natural bond between the mother and her calf.[222] Unwanted
male calves are either slaughtered at birth or sent for veal production.[222] To prolong lactation, dairy cows are
almost permanently kept pregnant through artificial insemination.[222] Because of this, some feminists state that
dairy production is based on the sexual exploitation of cows.[223][224] Although cows' natural life expectancy is
about twenty years,[225] after about five years the cows' milk production has dropped; they are then considered
"spent" and are sent to slaughter, which is considered cruel by some.[226][227]

Leather

While leather is often a by-product of slaughter, in some countries, such as India and Bangladesh, cows are
raised primarily for their leather. These leather industries often make their cows walk long distances across
borders to be killed in neighboring provinces and countries where cattle slaughter is legal. Some cows die along
the long journey, and exhausted animals are often beaten and have chili and tobacco rubbed into their eyes to
make them keep walking.[228] These practices have faced backlash from various animal rights groups.[229][230]

Rodeos

There has been a long history of protests against rodeos,[231] with the opposition saying that rodeos are
unnecessary and cause stress, injury, and death to the animals.[232][233]

Running of the bulls

The running of the bulls faces opposition due to the stress and injuries incurred by the bulls during the event.[234]

Bullfighting

Bullfighting is considered by many people, including animal rights and animal welfare advocates, to be a cruel,
barbaric blood sport in which bulls are forced to suffer severe stress and a slow, torturous death.[235] A number
of animal rights and animal welfare groups are involved in anti-bullfighting activities.[236]

Oxen
Oxen (singular ox) are cattle trained as draft animals. Often they are adult, castrated males of larger breeds,
although females and bulls are also used in some areas. Usually, an ox is over four years old due to the need for
training and to allow it to grow to full size. Oxen are used for plowing, transport, hauling cargo, grain-grinding
by trampling or by powering machines, irrigation by powering pumps, and wagon drawing. Oxen were
commonly used to skid logs in forests, and sometimes still are, in low-
impact, select-cut logging. Oxen are most often used in teams of two,
paired, for light work such as carting, with additional pairs added when
more power is required, sometimes up to a total of 20 or more.

Oxen can be trained to respond to a teamster's signals. These signals are

given by verbal commands or by noise (whip cracks). Verbal commands
vary according to dialect and local tradition. Oxen can pull harder and
longer than horses. Though not as fast as horses, they are less prone to
injury because they are more sure-footed.
Draft Zebus in Mumbai, Maharashtra,
Many oxen are used worldwide, especially in developing countries. India
About 11.3 million draft oxen are used in sub-Saharan Africa.[237] In
India, the number of draft cattle in 1998 was estimated at 65.7 million
head.[238] About half the world's crop production is thought to depend on
land preparation (such as plowing) made possible by animal traction.[239]

Religion, traditions and folklore

Islamic traditions
Oxen used in traditional ploughing –
The cow is mentioned often in the Quran. The second and longest surah Karnataka
of the Quran is named Al-Baqara ("The Cow"). Out of the 286 verses of
the surah, seven mention cows (Al Baqarah 67–73).[240][241] The name
of the surah derives from this passage in which Moses orders his people to sacrifice a cow in order to resurrect a
man murdered by an unknown person.[242]

Hindu tradition

Cattle are venerated within the Hindu religion of

India. In the Vedic period they were a symbol of
plenty [243]:130 and were frequently slaughtered. In
later times they gradually acquired their present
status. According to the Mahabharata, they are to be
treated with the same respect 'as one's mother'.[244]
In the middle of the first millennium, the
consumption of beef began to be disfavoured by
lawgivers.[243]:144 Although there has never been Worldwide laws on killing cattle for consumption
any cow-goddesses or temples dedicated to Cattle killing is legal Cattle killing is
them,[243]:146 cows appear in numerous stories from partially illegal1
the Vedas and Puranas. The deity Krishna was
Unknown
brought up in a family of cowherders, and given the
name Govinda (protector of the cows). Also, Shiva
is traditionally said to ride on the back of a bull 1The laws vary internally.
named Nandi.

Hinduism considers cows as divine and satvik (with pure virtues) and they are worshipped as goddesses.
Medical science stresses the importance of the cow for her milk, her urine as well as her excreta in our day-to-
day life. Govidyapeetham, India aims to revive reproduction methodologies undertaken by Balram (brother of
Lord Krishna, a deity in Hinduism) combining with modern technology.[245]
Milk and milk products were used in Vedic rituals.[243]:130 In the
postvedic period products of the cow—milk, curd, ghee, but also cow
dung and urine (gomutra), or the combination of these five
(panchagavya)—began to assume an increasingly important role in ritual
purification and expiation.[243]:130–131

Veneration of the cow has become a symbol of the identity of Hindus as

a community,[243]:20 especially since the end of the 19th century.
Slaughter of cows (including oxen, bulls and calves) is forbidden by law
in several states of the Indian Union. McDonald's outlets in India do not The "Ure-Ox" (Aurochs) by Edward
serve any beef burgers. In Maharaja Ranjit Singh's empire of the early Topsell, 1658
19th century, the killing of a cow was punishable by death.[246]

Other traditions
The Evangelist St. Luke is depicted as an ox in Christian art.
In Judaism, as described in Numbers 19:2 (https://www.mecho
n-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0419.htm#2), the ashes of a sacrificed
unblemished red heifer that has never been yoked can be
used for ritual purification of people who came into contact
with a corpse.
The ox is one of the 12-year cycle of animals which appear in
the Chinese zodiac related to the Chinese calendar. See: Ox
Riding an ox in Hova, Sweden
(Zodiac).
The constellation Taurus represents a bull.
An apocryphal story has it that a cow started the Great
Chicago Fire by kicking over a kerosene lamp. Michael Ahern,
the reporter who created the cow story, admitted in 1893 that
he had fabricated it for more colorful copy.
On 18 February 1930, Elm Farm Ollie became the first cow to
fly in an airplane and also the first cow to be milked in an
airplane.
The first known law requiring branding in North America was
Ancient cattle reproduction
enacted on 5 February 1644, by Connecticut. It said that all
methodologies revived at
cattle and pigs had to have a registered brand or earmark by 1
Govidyapeetham, India
May 1644.[247]
The akabeko (赤べこ, red cow) is a traditional toy from the
Aizu region of Japan that is thought to ward off illness.[248]
The case of Sherwood v. Walker—involving a supposedly barren heifer that was actually pregnant
—first enunciated the concept of mutual mistake as a means of destroying the meeting of the
minds in contract law.
The Fulani of West Africa are the world's largest nomadic cattle-herders.
The Maasai tribe of East Africa traditionally believe their god Engai entitled them to divine rights to
the ownership of all cattle on earth.[249]

In heraldry
Cattle are typically represented in heraldry by the bull.
 Arms of the Azores Arms of Arms of Turin, Italy
Mecklenburg region,
Germany Legend of the founding of
Durham Cathedral is that
monks carrying the body of
Saint Cuthbert were led to
the location by a milk maid
who had lost her dun cow,
which was found resting on
the spot.

Arms of Kaunas, Arms of Bielsk Arms of Ciołek,

Lithuania Podlaski, Poland Poland

An idealized depiction of girl cow

herders in 19th-century Norway
by Knud Bergslien

Arms of Turek,
Poland

Population
For 2013, the FAO estimated global cattle numbers at 1.47 billion.[250] Regionally, the FAO estimate for 2013
includes: Asia 497 million; South America 350 million; Africa 307 million; Europe 122 million; North America
102 million; Central America 47 million; Oceania 40 million; and Caribbean 9 million.
 Cattle population

Region 2009[251] 2013[251] 2016[251]

Brazil 205,308,000 186,646,205 218,225,177

India 195,815,000 194,655,285 185,987,136

United States 94,721,000 96,956,461 91,918,000

European Union 90,685,000 88,001,000 90,057,000

China 82,625,000 102,668,900 84,523,418

Argentina 54,464,000 52,509,049 52,636,778

Pakistan 33,029,000 26,007,848 42,800,000

Mexico 32,307,000 31,222,196 33,918,906

Australia 27,907,000 27,249,291 24,971,349

Bangladesh 22,976,000 22,844,190 23,785,000

Russia 21,038,000 28,685,315 18,991,955

South Africa 13,761,000 13,526,296 13,400,272

Canada 13,030,000 13,287,866 12,035,000

Others 523,776,000 554,786,000 624,438,000

Gallery

Didactic model of Bovine anatomical Didactic model of a

Bovine model bovine muscular
system

See also
1966 anti-cow slaughter agitation Cattle age determination
Category:Individual cattle Cowboy
British Cattle Health Initiative Intensive animal farming
Bull-baiting List of cattle breeds
Bullocky List of domesticated animals
Bulls and Cows (game)

References
1. Bollongino, R.; Burger, J.; Powell, A.; Mashkour, M.; Vigne, J.-D.; Thomas, M. G. (2012). "Modern
 taurine cattle descended from small number of Near-Eastern founders" (http://mbe.oxfordjournals.
org/content/early/2012/03/14/molbev.mss092). Molecular Biology and Evolution. 29 (9): 2101–
2104. doi:10.1093/molbev/mss092 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fmolbev%2Fmss092).
PMID 22422765 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22422765). Archived (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20120331193505/http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/03/14/molbev.mss092) from
the original on 31 March 2012. Op. cit. in Wilkins, Alasdair (28 March 2012). "DNA reveals that
cows were almost impossible to domesticate" (http://io9.com/5897169/dna-reveals-that-cows-were
-almost-impossible-to-domesticate?tag=archaeology). io9. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/2
0120512072737/http://io9.com/5897169/dna-reveals-that-cows-were-almost-impossible-to-domesti
cate?tag=archaeology) from the original on 12 May 2012. Retrieved 2 April 2012.
2. "Counting Chickens" (https://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/07/global-livestock-
counts). The Economist. 27 July 2011. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20160715181213/htt
p://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/07/global-livestock-counts) from the original on 15
July 2016. Retrieved 6 July 2016.
3. Brown, David (23 April 2009). "Scientists Unravel Genome of the Cow" (https://www.washingtonpo
st.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/23/AR2009042303453.html). The Washington Post.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20110628203746/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/c
ontent/article/2009/04/23/AR2009042303453.html) from the original on 28 June 2011. Retrieved
23 April 2009.
4. Ajmone-Marsan, Paolo; Garcia, J.F; Lenstra, Johannes (January 2010). "On the origin of cattle:
How aurochs became domestic and colonized the world" (https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio
n/222110938). Evolutionary Anthropology. 19: 148–157. doi:10.1002/evan.20267 (https://doi.org/1
0.1002%2Fevan.20267). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20171204171106/https://www.rese
archgate.net/publication/222110938_On_the_origin_of_cattle_how_aurochs_became_domestic_a
nd_colonized_the_world) from the original on 4 December 2017. Retrieved 3 December 2017.
5. Wilson, D.E.; Reeder, D.M., eds. (2005). "Bos taurus" (http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/biolog
y/resources/msw3/browse.asp?id=14200687). Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and
Geographic Reference (http://www.google.com/books?id=JgAMbNSt8ikC&pg=PA1) (3rd ed.).
Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 978-0-8018-8221-0. OCLC 62265494 (https://www.worldca
t.org/oclc/62265494).
6. "Bos taurus" (https://www.itis.gov/servlet/SingleRpt/SingleRpt?search_topic=TSN&search_value=1
83838). Integrated Taxonomic Information System. Retrieved 9 May 2015.
7. "Yattle What?" (https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/10/AR200708100
2119.html) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20170701203752/http://www.washingtonpost.co
m/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/10/AR2007081002119.html) 1 July 2017 at the Wayback
Machine, The Washington Post, 11 August 2007
8. Groves, C. P., 1981. Systematic relationships in the Bovini (Artiodactyla, Bovidae). Zeitschrift für
Zoologische Systematik und Evolutionsforschung, 4:264–278., quoted in Grubb, P. (2005). "Genus
Bison" (http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/biology/resources/msw3/browse.asp?id=14200668).
In Wilson, D.E.; Reeder, D.M (eds.). Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic
Reference (http://www.google.com/books?id=JgAMbNSt8ikC&pg=PA637) (3rd ed.). Johns
Hopkins University Press. pp. 637–722. ISBN 978-0-8018-8221-0. OCLC 62265494 (https://www.
worldcat.org/oclc/62265494).
9. Takeda, Kumiko; et al. (April 2004). "Mitochondrial DNA analysis of Nepalese domestic dwarf cattle
Lulu". Animal Science Journal. 75 (2): 103–110. doi:10.1111/j.1740-0929.2004.00163.x (https://do
i.org/10.1111%2Fj.1740-0929.2004.00163.x).
10. Van Vuure, C.T. 2003. De Oeros – Het spoor terug (in Dutch), Cis van Vuure, Wageningen
University and Research Centrum: quoted by The Extinction Website: Bos primigenius
primigenius. (http://www.petermaas.nl/extinct/speciesinfo/aurochs.htm) Archived (https://web.archi
ve.org/web/20090420140454/http://www.petermaas.nl/extinct/speciesinfo/aurochs.htm) 20 April
2009 at the Wayback Machine
11. Harper, Douglas (2001). "Cattle" (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=cattle). Online
Etymological Dictionary. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20071011182356/http://etymonline.
com/index.php?term=cattle) from the original on 11 October 2007. Retrieved 13 June 2007.;
"cattle, n." OED Online. Oxford University Press, September 2014. Web. 6 December 2014.
12. Harper, Douglas (2001). "Chattel" (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=chattel). Online
Etymological Dictionary. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20071011182401/http://etymonline.
com/index.php?term=chattel) from the original on 11 October 2007. Retrieved 13 June 2007.;
Harper, Douglas (2001). "Capital" (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=capital). Online
Etymological Dictionary. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20071011182517/http://etymonline.
com/index.php?term=capital) from the original on 11 October 2007. Retrieved 13 June 2007.;
"cattle, n." OED Online. Oxford University Press, September 2014. Web. 6 December 2014.
13. "cow, n.1." OED Online. Oxford University Press, September 2014. Web. 6 December 2014.
14. "cattle, n." OED Online. Oxford University Press, September 2014. Web. 6 December 2014
15. "Cattle Terminology" (https://web.archive.org/web/20080401084434/http://www.experiencefestival.
com/a/Cattle_-_Terminology/id/1287270). experiencefestival.com. Archived from the original (htt
p://www.experiencefestival.com/a/Cattle_-_Terminology/id/1287270) on 1 April 2008.
16. Coupe, Sheena (ed.), Frontier Country, Vol. 1, Weldon Russell Publishing, Willoughby, 1989,
ISBN 1-875202-01-3
17. "Definition of heifer" (http://webster.com/dictionary/heifer). Merriam-Webster. Archived (https://web.
archive.org/web/20070822193523/http://www.webster.com/dictionary/heifer) from the original on
22 August 2007. Retrieved 29 November 2006.
18. Delbridge, Arthur, The Macquarie Dictionary, 2nd ed., Macquarie Library, North Ryde, 1991
19. McIntosh, E., The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English, Clarendon Press, 1967
20. Warren, Andrea. "Pioneer Girl: Growing Up on the Prairie" (https://web.archive.org/web/200402050
13115/http://www.lexile.com/PowerV/Pioneer%20Girl%20Growng%20Up%20on%20the%20Prairi
e.pdf) (PDF). Lexile. Archived from the original (http://www.lexile.com/PowerV/Pioneer%20Girl%20
Growng%20Up%20on%20the%20Prairie.pdf) (PDF) on 5 February 2004. Retrieved 29 November
2006.
21. Delbridge, A, et al., Macquarie Dictionary, The Book Printer, Australia, 1991
22. Meat & Livestock Australia, Feedback, June/July 2008
23. "Sure Ways to Lose Money on Your Cattle" (http://www.spiritwoodstockyards.ca/losemoney.html).
Spiritwoodstockyards.ca. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20140116030226/http://www.spirit
woodstockyards.ca/losemoney.html) from the original on 16 January 2014. Retrieved 15 October
2013.
24. FAQs: What is meant by springer cows and heifers? (http://beef.unl.edu/FAQ/200509030.shtml)
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20100707061932/http://beef.unl.edu/FAQ/200509030.shtml)
7 July 2010 at the Wayback Machine, Dr. Rick Rasby, Professor of Animal Science, University of
Nebraska – Lincoln, 6 September 2005. Retrieved: 12 August 2010.
25. UK Daily Mirror article 5 Jan 2015 (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nazi-super-cows-too-ag
gressive-4921075) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20161107140815/http://www.mirror.co.u
k/news/uk-news/nazi-super-cows-too-aggressive-4921075) 7 November 2016 at the Wayback
Machine Retrieved on 6 November 2016
26. "Cattle (5, 6)" (http://oed.com/search?searchType=dictionary&q=Cattle+%285%2C+6%29). Oxford
English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. September 2005. (Subscription or UK public
library membership (https://www.oed.com/public/login/loggingin#withyourlibrary) required.)
27. "Ox (1, 2)" (http://oed.com/search?searchType=dictionary&q=Ox+%281%2C+2%29). Oxford
English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. September 2005. (Subscription or UK public
library membership (https://www.oed.com/public/login/loggingin#withyourlibrary) required.)
28. "Merriam Webster Online" (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cow). Merriam-
webster.com. 31 August 2012. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20131015042256/http://www.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cow) from the original on 15 October 2013. Retrieved 15 October
2013.
29. "Oxford Dictionaries" (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/cow). Oxford Dictionaries.
Retrieved 12 September 2018.
30. " "Critter," definition 2" (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/critter). Thefreedictionary.com. Retrieved
15 October 2013.
31. Beales, Terry (1999). "Keep Those Dogies Movin!" (https://web.archive.org/web/20080602151855/
http://www.tahc.state.tx.us/news/pr/1999/1999.08_CattleMove.pdf) (PDF). Texas Animal Health
Commission News Release. Archived from the original (http://www.tahc.state.tx.us/news/pr/1999/1
999.08_CattleMove.pdf) (PDF) on 2 June 2008. Retrieved 28 June 2008.
32. "Bawling in Cattle" (https://web.archive.org/web/20150326045618/http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$de
partment/deptdocs.nsf/all/faq10691). Archived from the original (http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$dep
artment/deptdocs.nsf/all/faq10691) on 26 March 2015. Retrieved 5 May 2015.
33. Richard M. Hopper (18 August 2014). Bovine Reproduction (https://books.google.com/books?id=g
xZTBAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=insemination). Wiley. ISBN 978-1-118-47085-
5.
34. Hasheider, Phillip (25 June 2011). The Family Cow Handbook. ISBN 978-0-7603-4067-7.
35. "Udder Structure & Disease" (https://web.archive.org/web/20150518073505/https://www.uvm.edu/
extension/agriculture/faccp/files/aglabor_bilingual/milk_quality_posters.pdf) (PDF). UVM. 6 May
2015. Archived from the original (https://www.uvm.edu/extension/agriculture/faccp/files/aglabor_bili
ngual/milk_quality_posters.pdf) (PDF) on 18 May 2015.
36. "G Jayawardhana (2006), Testicle Size – A Fertility Indicator in Bulls, Australian Government
Agnote K44" (https://web.archive.org/web/20121116045317/http://www.nt.gov.au/d/Content/File/p/
Anim_Dis/747.pdf) (PDF). Archived from the original (http://www.nt.gov.au/d/Content/File/p/Anim_
Dis/747.pdf) (PDF) on 16 November 2012. Retrieved 6 August 2012.
37. "A P Carter, P D P Wood and Penelope A Wright (1980), Association between scrotal
circumference, live weight and sperm output in cattle, Journal of Reproductive Fertility, 59, pp.
447–451" (http://www.reproduction-online.org/cgi/reprint/59/2/447.pdf) (PDF). Retrieved 6 August
2012.
38. Sarkar, A. (2003). Sexual Behaviour In Animals (https://books.google.com/books?id=bsCiWUiPY5
UC). Discovery Publishing House. ISBN 978-81-7141-746-9.
39. William O. Reece (2009). Functional Anatomy and Physiology of Domestic Animals (https://books.
google.com/books?id=naSWWxJLcd0C). John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-8138-1451-3.
40. James R. Gillespie; Frank Flanders (2009). Modern Livestock & Poultry Production (https://books.g
oogle.com/books?id=7Z9o_vGPP4cC). Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-1-4283-1808-3.
41. "Hereford cattle weight" (http://www.cattlenetwork.net/breeds/hereford.htm). Archived (https://web.
archive.org/web/20150124050154/http://www.cattlenetwork.net/breeds/hereford.htm) from the
original on 24 January 2015.
42. Friend, John B., Cattle of the World, Blandford Press, Dorset, 1978
43. McWhirter, Norris & Ross, Guinness Book of Records, Redwood Press, Trowbridge, 1968
44. Kenneth H. Mathews – 1999 – U.S. Beef Industry: Cattle Cycles, Price Spreads, and Packer
concentration. Page 6
45. American Economic Growth and Standards of Living before the Civil War, Robert E. Gallman, John
Joseph Wallis. 2007 p. 248
46. "Cattle increasing in size" (http://beefmagazine.com/genetics/0201-increased-beef-cows). Beef
Magazine. February 2009. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20150503101557/http://beefmag
azine.com/genetics/0201-increased-beef-cows) from the original on 3 May 2015. Retrieved 5 May
2015.
47. Bailey, D.W.; Rittenhouse, L.R.; Hart, R.H.; Richards, R.W (1989). "Characteristics of spatial
memory in cattle" (https://zenodo.org/record/1258397). Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 23 (4):
331–340. doi:10.1016/0168-1591(89)90101-9 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0168-1591%2889%299
0101-9).
48. Kovalčik, K.; Kovalčik, M. (1986). "Learning ability and memory testing in cattle of different ages".
Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 15 (1): 27–29. doi:10.1016/0168-1591(86)90019-5 (https://doi.
org/10.1016%2F0168-1591%2886%2990019-5).
49. Mendl, M.; Nicol, C.J. (2009). "Chapter 5: Learning and cognition". In Jensen, P. (ed.). The
Ethology of Domestic Animals: An Introductory Text. CABI. pp. 61–63.
50. Ksiksi, T.; Laca, E.A. (2002). "Cattle do remember locations of preferred food over extended
periods". Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences. 15 (6): 900–904.
doi:10.5713/ajas.2002.900 (https://doi.org/10.5713%2Fajas.2002.900).
51. Hirata, M.; Takeno, N. (2014). "Do cattle (Bos taurus) retain an association of a visual cue with a
food reward for a year?". Animal Science Journal. 85 (6): 729–734. doi:10.1111/asj.12210 (https://
doi.org/10.1111%2Fasj.12210). PMID 24798642 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24798642).
52. Schaeffer, R.G.; Sikes, J.D. (1971). "Discrimination learning in dairy calves". Journal of Dairy
Science. 54 (6): 893–896. doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(71)85937-4 (https://doi.org/10.3168%2Fjds.
s0022-0302%2871%2985937-4). PMID 5141440 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5141440).
53. Kilgour, R. (1981). "Use of the Hebb–Williams closed-field test to study the learning ability of
Jersey cows". Animal Behaviour. 29 (3): 850–860. doi:10.1016/s0003-3472(81)80020-6 (https://do
i.org/10.1016%2Fs0003-3472%2881%2980020-6).
54. Coulon, M.; Baudoin, C.; Heyman, Y.; Deputte, B.L. (2011). "Cattle discriminate between familiar
and unfamiliar conspecifics by using only head visual cues". Animal Cognition. 14 (2): 279–290.
doi:10.1007/s10071-010-0361-6 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10071-010-0361-6). PMID 21132446
(https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21132446).
55. de Passille, A.M.; Rushen, J.; Ladewig, J.; Petherick, C. (1996). "Dairy calves' discrimination of
people based on previous handling". Journal of Animal Science. 74 (5): 969–974.
doi:10.2527/1996.745969x (https://doi.org/10.2527%2F1996.745969x). PMID 8726728 (https://pub
med.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8726728).
56. Mendl, M.; Nicol, C.J. (2009). "Chapter 5: Learning and cognition". In Jensen, P. (ed.). The
Ethology of Domestic Animals: An Introductory Text. CABI. p. 144.
57. Barfield, C.H.; Tang‐Martinez, Z.; Trainer, J.M. (1994). "Domestic calves (Bos taurus) recognize
their own mothers by auditory cues". Ethology. 97 (4): 257–264. doi:10.1111/j.1439-
0310.1994.tb01045.x (https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1439-0310.1994.tb01045.x).
58. Coulon, M.; Deputte, B.L.; Heyman, Y.; Delatouche, L.; Richard, C.; Baudoin, C. (2007). 14 èmes
Recontres autour des recherches sur les ruminants, Paris, les 5 et 6 Décembre 2007. Social
cognition and welfare in cattle: capacities of visual species discrimination (in French). Institut
National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA). pp. 297–300.
59. Coulon, M.; Baudoin, C.; Abdi, H.; Heyman, Y.; Deputte, B.L. (2010). "Social behavior and kin
discrimination in a mixed group of cloned and non cloned heifers (Bos taurus)". Theriogenology. 74
(9): 1596–1603. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2010.06.031 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.theriogeno
logy.2010.06.031). PMID 20708240 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20708240).
60. Hagen, K.; Broom, D.M. (2003). "Cattle discriminate between individual familiar herd members in a
learning experiment". Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 82 (1): 13–28. doi:10.1016/s0168-
1591(03)00053-4 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fs0168-1591%2803%2900053-4).
61. Coulon, M.; Deputte, B.L.; Heyman, Y.; Baudoin, C. (2009). "Individual recognition in domestic
cattle (Bos taurus): evidence from 2D-images of heads from different breeds" (https://www.ncbi.nl
m.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2636880). PLOS ONE. 4 (2): 4441. Bibcode:2009PLoSO...4.4441C (ht
tps://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009PLoSO...4.4441C). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004441 (http
s://doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0004441). PMC 2636880 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/a
rticles/PMC2636880). PMID 19212439 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19212439).
62. Phillips, C.J.C.; Oevermans, H.; Syrett, K.L.; Jespersen, A.Y.; Pearce, G.P. (2015). "Lateralization
of behavior in dairy cows in response to conspecifics and novel persons" (https://www.repository.c
am.ac.uk/handle/1810/247470). Journal of Dairy Science. 98 (4): 2389–2400.
doi:10.3168/jds.2014-8648 (https://doi.org/10.3168%2Fjds.2014-8648). PMID 25648820 (https://pu
bmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25648820).
63. Robins, A.; Phillips, C. (2010). "Lateralised visual processing in domestic cattle herds responding
to novel and familiar stimuli". Laterality. 15 (5): 514–534. doi:10.1080/13576500903049324 (http
s://doi.org/10.1080%2F13576500903049324). PMID 19629847 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1
9629847).
64. Proctor, Helen S.; Carder, Gemma (9 October 2014). "Can ear postures reliably measure the
positive emotional state of cows?" (http://www.appliedanimalbehaviour.com/article/S0168-1591(14)
00249-4/abstract). International Society for Applied Ethology. 161: 20–27.
doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2014.09.015 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.applanim.2014.09.015).
65. Brand, B.; Hadlich, F.; Brandt, B.; Schauer, N.; Graunke, K.L.; Langbein, J.; ... and Schwerin, M.
(2015). "Temperament type specific metabolite profiles of the prefrontal cortex and serum in cattle"
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4416037). PLOS ONE. 10 (4): e0125044.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0125044 (https://doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0125044).
PMC 4416037 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4416037). PMID 25927228 (https://
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25927228).
66. Réale, D.; Reader, S.M.; Sol, D.; McDougall, P.T.; Dingemanse, N.J. (2007). "Integrating animal
temperament within ecology and evolution". Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 82 (2): 291–318.
doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.2007.00010.x (https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1469-185x.2007.00010.x).
hdl:1874/25732 (https://hdl.handle.net/1874%2F25732). PMID 17437562 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nl
m.nih.gov/17437562).
67. Hagen, K.; Broom, D. (2004). "Emotional reactions to learning in cattle" (http://www.appliedanimalb
ehaviour.com/article/S0168-1591%2803%2900294-6/abstract). Applied Animal Behaviour Science.
85 (3–4): 203–213. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2003.11.007 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.applanim.20
03.11.007).
68. Daros, R.R.; Costa, J.H.; von Keyserlingk, M.A.; Hötzel, M.J.; Weary, D.M. (2014). "Separation
from the dam causes negative judgement bias in dairy calves" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/a
rticles/PMC4029834). PLOS ONE. 9 (5): e98429. Bibcode:2014PLoSO...998429D (https://ui.adsab
s.harvard.edu/abs/2014PLoSO...998429D). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0098429 (https://doi.org/10.1
371%2Fjournal.pone.0098429). PMC 4029834 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC402
9834). PMID 24848635 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24848635).
69. Neave, H.W.; Daros, R.R.; Costa, J.H.C.; von Keyserlingk, M.A.G.; Weary, D.M. (2013). "Pain and
pessimism: Dairy calves exhibit negative judgement bias following hot-iron disbudding" (https://ww
w.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3851165). PLOS ONE. 8 (12): e80556.
Bibcode:2013PLoSO...880556N (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PLoSO...880556N).
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0080556 (https://doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0080556).
PMC 3851165 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3851165). PMID 24324609 (https://
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24324609).
70. Boissy, A.; Terlouw, C.; Le Neindre, P. (1998). "Presence of cues from stressed conspecifics
increases reactivity to aversive events in cattle: evidence for the existence of alarm substances in
urine". Physiology and Behavior. 63 (4): 489–495. doi:10.1016/s0031-9384(97)00466-6 (https://do
i.org/10.1016%2Fs0031-9384%2897%2900466-6). PMID 9523888 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.g
ov/9523888).
71. Boissy, A.; Le Neindre, P. (1997). "Behavioral, cardiac and cortisol responses to brief peer
separation and reunion in cattle". Physiology & Behavior. 61 (5): 693–699. doi:10.1016/s0031-
9384(96)00521-5 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fs0031-9384%2896%2900521-5). PMID 9145939 (htt
ps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9145939).
72. Kay, R.; Hall, C. (2009). "The use of a mirror reduces isolation stress in horses being transported
by trailer" (http://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/12196/1/193254_1634%20Hall%20PostPrint.pdf) (PDF).
Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 116 (2): 237–243. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2008.08.013 (https://
doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.applanim.2008.08.013).
73. Rutter, S.M. (2006). "Diet preference for grass and legumes in free-ranging domestic sheep and
cattle: current theory and future application". Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 97 (1): 17–35.
doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2005.11.016 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.applanim.2005.11.016).
74. Adamczyk, K.; Górecka-Bruzda, A.; Nowicki, J.; Gumułka, M.; Molik, E.; Schwarz, T.; Klocek, C.
(2015). "Perception of environment in farm animals – A review". Annals of Animal Science. 15 (3):
565–589. doi:10.1515/aoas-2015-0031 (https://doi.org/10.1515%2Faoas-2015-0031).
75. Phillips, C. (2008). Cattle Behaviour and Welfare. John Wiley and Sons.
76. Jacobs, G.H.; Deegan, J.F.; Neitz, J. (1998). "Photopigment basis for dichromatic color vision in
cows, goats and sheep". Vis. Neurosci. 15 (3): 581–584. doi:10.1017/s0952523898153154 (https://
doi.org/10.1017%2Fs0952523898153154). PMID 9685209 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9685
209).
77. Phillips, C.J.C.; Lomas, C.A. (2001). "Perception of color by cattle and its influence on behavior".
Journal of Dairy Science. 84 (4): 807–813. doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(01)74537-7 (https://doi.or
g/10.3168%2Fjds.s0022-0302%2801%2974537-7). PMID 11352156 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.
gov/11352156).
78. Phillips, C.J.C.; Lomas, C.A. (2001). "The perception of color by cattle and its influence on
behavior". Journal of Dairy Science. 84 (4): 807–813. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74537-7 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.3168%2Fjds.S0022-0302%2801%2974537-7). PMID 11352156 (https://pubmed.nc
bi.nlm.nih.gov/11352156).
79. "Why Do Bulls Charge When they See Red?" (http://www.livescience.com/33700-bulls-charge-red.
html). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20150518105254/http://www.livescience.com/33700-b
ulls-charge-red.html) from the original on 18 May 2015.
80. Bell, F.R.; Sly, J. (1983). "The olfactory detection of sodium and lithium salts by sodium deficient
cattle". Physiology and Behavior. 31 (3): 307–312. doi:10.1016/0031-9384(83)90193-2 (https://doi.
org/10.1016%2F0031-9384%2883%2990193-2). PMID 6634998 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
6634998).
81. Bell, F. R. (1984). "Aspects of ingestive behavior in cattle". Journal of Animal Science. 59 (5):
1369–1372. doi:10.2527/jas1984.5951369x (https://doi.org/10.2527%2Fjas1984.5951369x).
PMID 6392276 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6392276).
82. Heffner, R.S.; Heffner, H.E. (1983). "Hearing in large mammals: Horses (Equus caballus) and
cattle (Bos taurus)". Behavioral Neuroscience. 97 (2): 299–309. doi:10.1037/0735-7044.97.2.299
(https://doi.org/10.1037%2F0735-7044.97.2.299).
83. Heffner, R.S.; Heffner, H.E. (1992). "Hearing in large mammals: sound-localization acuity in cattle
(Bos taurus) and goats (Capra hircus)". Journal of Comparative Psychology. 106 (2): 107–113.
doi:10.1037/0735-7036.106.2.107 (https://doi.org/10.1037%2F0735-7036.106.2.107).
PMID 1600717 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1600717).
84. Watts, J.M.; Stookey, J.M. (2000). "Vocal behaviour in cattle: the animal's commentary on its
biological processes and welfare". Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 67 (1): 15–33.
doi:10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00108-2 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2FS0168-1591%2899%2900108-
2). PMID 10719186 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10719186).
85. Bouissou, M.F.; Boissy, A.; Le Niendre, P.; Vessier, I. (2001). "The Social Behaviour of Cattle 5.". In
Keeling, L.; Gonyou, H. (eds.). Social Behavior in Farm Animals. CABI Publishing. pp. 113–133.
86. Terlouw, E.C.; Boissy, A.; Blinet, P. (1998). "Behavioural responses of cattle to the odours of blood
and urine from conspecifics and to the odour of faeces from carnivores". Applied Animal Behaviour
Science. 57 (1): 9–21. doi:10.1016/s0168-1591(97)00122-6 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fs0168-159
1%2897%2900122-6).
87. Begall, S.; Cerveny, J.; Neef, J.; Vojtech, O.; Burda, H. (2008). "Magnetic alignment in grazing and
resting cattle and deer" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2533210). Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105 (36): 13451–13455. Bibcode:2008PNAS..10513451B (https://ui.adsabs.harv
ard.edu/abs/2008PNAS..10513451B). doi:10.1073/pnas.0803650105 (https://doi.org/10.1073%2F
pnas.0803650105). PMC 2533210 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2533210).
PMID 18725629 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18725629).
88. Burda, H.; Begalla, S.; Červený, J.; Neefa, J.; Němecd, P. (2009). "Extremely low-frequency
electromagnetic fields disrupt magnetic alignment of ruminants" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
articles/PMC2667019). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 106 (14): 5708–5713.
Bibcode:2009PNAS..106.5708B (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009PNAS..106.5708B).
doi:10.1073/pnas.0811194106 (https://doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.0811194106). PMC 2667019 (http
s://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2667019). PMID 19299504 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.ni
h.gov/19299504).
89. Hert, J; Jelinek, L; Pekarek, L; Pavlicek, A (2011). "No alignment of cattle along geomagnetic field
lines found". Journal of Comparative Physiology. 197 (6): 677–682. arXiv:1101.5263 (https://arxiv.o
rg/abs/1101.5263). Bibcode:2011arXiv1101.5263H (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011arXiv1
101.5263H). doi:10.1007/s00359-011-0628-7 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00359-011-0628-7).
PMID 21318402 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21318402).
90. Johnsen, J.F.; Ellingsen, K.; Grøndahl, A.M.; Bøe, K.E.; Lidfors, L.; Mejdell, C.M. (2015). "The
effect of physical contact between dairy cows and calves during separation on their post-
separation behavioural" (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274013035). Applied Animal
Behaviour Science. 166: 11–19. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2015.03.002 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.
applanim.2015.03.002). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20170707160417/https://www.resea
rchgate.net/profile/Julie_Johnsen/publication/274013035_The_effect_of_physical_contact_betwee
n_dairy_cows_and_calves_during_separation_on_their_post-separation_behavioural_response/lin
ks/551541630cf2d70ee26fee97.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 7 July 2017.
91. Edwards, S.A.; Broom, D.M. (1982). "Behavioural interactions of dairy cows with their newborn
calves and the effects of parity". Animal Behaviour. 30 (2): 525–535. doi:10.1016/s0003-
3472(82)80065-1 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fs0003-3472%2882%2980065-1).
92. Odde, K. G.; Kiracofe, G.H.; Schalles, R.R. (1985). "Suckling behavior in range beef calves".
Journal of Animal Science. 61 (2): 307–309. doi:10.2527/jas1985.612307x (https://doi.org/10.252
7%2Fjas1985.612307x). PMID 4044428 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4044428).
93. Reinhardt, V.; Reinhardt, A. (1981). "Cohesive relationships in a cattle herd (Bos indicus)".
Behaviour. 77 (3): 121–150. doi:10.1163/156853981X00194 (https://doi.org/10.1163%2F15685398
1X00194).
94. Reinhardt, C.; Reinhardt, A.; Reinhardt, V. (1986). "Social behaviour and reproductive performance
in semi-wild Scottish Highland cattle". Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 15 (2): 125–136.
doi:10.1016/0168-1591(86)90058-4 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0168-1591%2886%2990058-4).
95. "Signs of Heat (Heat Detection and Timing of Insemination for Cattle)" (http://extension.psu.edu/ani
mals/dairy/health/reproduction/insemination/ec402/signs-of-heat). Heat Detection and Timing of
Insemination for Cattle (Penn State Extension). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/2016110516
1839/http://extension.psu.edu/animals/dairy/health/reproduction/insemination/ec402/signs-of-heat)
from the original on 5 November 2016.
96. Knierim, U.; Irrgang, N.; Roth, B.A. (2015). "To be or not to be horned–consequences in cattle".
Livestock Science. 179: 29–37. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2015.05.014 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.livsci.
2015.05.014).
97. Kondo, S.; Sekine, J.; Okubo, M.; Asahida, Y. (1989). "The effect of group size and space
allowance on the agonistic and spacing behavior of cattle". Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 24
(2): 127–135. doi:10.1016/0168-1591(89)90040-3 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2F0168-1591%2889%
2990040-3).
98. Laca, E.A.; Ungar, E.D.; Seligman, N.; Demment, M.W. (1992). "Effects of sward height and bulk
density on bite dimensions of cattle grazing homogeneous swards". Grass and Forage Science. 47
(1): 91–102. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2494.1992.tb02251.x (https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1365-2494.199
2.tb02251.x).
99. Bailey, D.W.; Gross, J.E.; Laca, E.A.; Rittenhouse, L.R.; Coughenour, M.B.; Swift, D.M.; Sims, P.L.
(1996). "Mechanisms that result in large herbivore grazing distribution patterns". Journal of Range
Management. 49 (5): 386–400. doi:10.2307/4002919 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2F4002919).
JSTOR 4002919 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/4002919).
00. Forbes, T.D.A.; Hodgson, J. (1985). "The reaction of grazing sheep and cattle to the presence of
dung from the same or the other species". Grass and Forage Science. 40 (2): 177–182.
doi:10.1111/j.1365-2494.1985.tb01735.x (https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1365-2494.1985.tb01735.x).
01. Daniels, M.J.; Ball, N.; Hutchings, M.R.; Greig, A. (2001). "The grazing response of cattle to
pasture contaminated with rabbit faeces and the implications for the transmission of
paratuberculosis". The Veterinary Journal. 161 (3): 306–313. doi:10.1053/tvjl.2000.0550 (https://do
i.org/10.1053%2Ftvjl.2000.0550). PMID 11352488 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11352488).
02. "Cow genome unraveled in bid to improve meat, milk" (https://web.archive.org/web/200904271911
47/http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090423/ap_on_sc/us_sci_bovine_basics). Associated Press. 23
April 2009. Archived from the original (https://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090423/ap_on_sc/us_sci_b
ovine_basics) on 27 April 2009. Retrieved 23 April 2009.
03. Gill, Victoria (23 April 2009). "BBC: Cow genome 'to transform farming' " (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/h
i/science/nature/8014598.stm). BBC News. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/2013101719594
2/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8014598.stm) from the original on 17 October 2013.
Retrieved 15 October 2013.
04. Canario, L.; Mignon-Grasteau, S.; Dupont-Nivet, M.; Phocas, F. (2013). "Genetics of behavioural
adaptation of livestock to farming conditions". Animal. 7 (3): 357–377.
doi:10.1017/S1751731112001978 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS1751731112001978).
PMID 23127553 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23127553).
05. Jensen, P., ed. (2009). The Ethology of Domestic Animals: An Introductory Text. CABI. p. 111.
06. Schmutz, S. M.; Stookey, J. M.; Winkelman-Sim, D. C.; Waltz, C. S.; Plante, Y.; Buchanan, F. C.
(2001). "A QTL study of cattle behavioral traits in embryo transfer families". Journal of Heredity. 92
(3): 290–292. doi:10.1093/jhered/92.3.290 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fjhered%2F92.3.290).
PMID 11447250 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11447250).
07. Canario, L.; Mignon-Grasteau, S.; Dupont-Nivet, M.; Phocas, F. (2013). "Genetics of behavioural
adaptation of livestock to farming conditions". Animal. 7 (3): 357–377.
doi:10.1017/S1751731112001978 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS1751731112001978).
PMID 23127553 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23127553).
08. Friedrich, J.; Brand, B.; Schwerin, M. (2015). "Genetics of cattle temperament and its impact on
livestock production and breeding – a review" (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/27583720
7). Archives Animal Breeding. 58: 13–21. doi:10.5194/aab-58-13-2015 (https://doi.org/10.5194%2F
aab-58-13-2015). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20150924121237/http://www.researchgat
e.net/profile/Bodo_Brand/publication/275837207_Genetics_of_cattle_temperament_and_its_impac
t_on_livestock_production_and_breeding__a_review/links/55485d420cf2e2031b386dd8.pdf)
(PDF) from the original on 24 September 2015.
09. McTavish, E.J.; Decker, J.E.; Schnabel, R.D.; Taylor, J.F.; Hillis, D.M.year=2013 (2013). "New
World cattle show ancestry from multiple independent domestication events" (https://www.ncbi.nl
m.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3625352). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110 (15): E1398–1406.
Bibcode:2013PNAS..110E1398M (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013PNAS..110E1398M).
doi:10.1073/pnas.1303367110 (https://doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.1303367110). PMC 3625352 (http
s://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3625352). PMID 23530234 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.ni
h.gov/23530234).
10. Decker, J.E.; McKay, S.D.; Rolf, M.M.; Kim, J.; Molina Alcalá, A.; Sonstegard, T.S.; et al. (2014).
"Worldwide patterns of ancestry, divergence, and admixture in domesticated cattle" (https://www.nc
bi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3967955). PLoS Genet. 10 (3): e1004254.
doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1004254 (https://doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1004254).
PMC 3967955 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3967955). PMID 24675901 (https://
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24675901).
11. Gustavo A Slafer; Jose Luis Molina-Cano; Roxana Savin; Jose Luis Araus; Ignacio Romagosa
(2002). Barley Science: Recent Advances from Molecular Biology to Agronomy of Yield and
Quality (https://books.google.com/books?id=awQqSujTR1MC). CRC Press. p. 1. ISBN 978-1-
56022-910-0.
12. Glyn Davies; Julian Hodge Bank (2002). A history of money: from ancient times to the present day
(https://books.google.com/books?id=Yx68AAAAIAAJ). University of Wales Press. ISBN 978-0-
7083-1717-4.
13. Jesús Huerta de Soto (2006). Money, Bank Credit, and Economic Cycles (https://archive.org/detail
s/bub_gb_AJLGKdOZneMC). Ludwig von Mises Institute. p. 51 (https://archive.org/details/bub_gb
_AJLGKdOZneMC/page/n105). ISBN 978-1-61016-388-0.
14. "A History of Money" (https://www.hostmerchantservices.com/articles/financial-news-articles/the-hi
story-of-currency-from-bartering-to-the-credit-card/). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/201505
21084634/https://www.hostmerchantservices.com/articles/financial-news-articles/the-history-of-cur
rency-from-bartering-to-the-credit-card/) from the original on 21 May 2015. Retrieved 19 May 2015.
15. Lott, Dale F.; Hart, Benjamin L. (October 1979). "Applied ethology in a nomadic cattle culture".
Applied Animal Ethology. 5 (4): 309–319. doi:10.1016/0304-3762(79)90102-0 (https://doi.org/10.10
16%2F0304-3762%2879%2990102-0).
16. Krebs JR, Anderson T, Clutton-Brock WT, et al. (1997). "Bovine tuberculosis in cattle and badgers:
an independent scientific review" (https://web.archive.org/web/20040722232232/http://www.defra.g
ov.uk/animalh/tb/publications/hpanel.pdf) (PDF). Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
Archived from the original (http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/tb/publications/hpanel.pdf) (PDF) on
22 July 2004. Retrieved 4 September 2006.
17. Edward O. Wilson, The Future of Life, 2003, Vintage Books, 256 pages ISBN 0-679-76811-4
18. Cailey Rizzo. "Junkyard Owner Replaces Guard Dogs With Two Fighting Bulls Because It's Spain"
(https://www.travelandleisure.com/animals/junkyard-bulls-spain). www.travelandleisure.com.
19. Govan, Fiona (26 October 2016). "Bulls replace guard dogs at scrap yard in Valencia" (https://ww
w.thelocal.es/20161026/bulls-replace-guard-dogs-at-scrap-yard-in-valencia). www.thelocal.es.
20. "40 Winks?" Jennifer S. Holland, National Geographic Vol. 220, No. 1. July 2011.
21. Asprea, Lori; Sturtz, Robin (2012). Anatomy and physiology for veterinary technicians and nurses
a clinical approach (https://books.google.com/books?id=74Hd_YLuHsUC&pg=PT109). Chichester:
Iowa State University Pre. p. 109. ISBN 978-1-118-40584-0.
22. "Animal MythBusters – Manitoba Veterinary Medical Association" (http://www.mvma.ca/resources/
animal-owners/animal-mythbusters#cow+tipping). www.mvma.ca. Archived (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20160415135131/http://www.mvma.ca/resources/animal-owners/animal-mythbusters#cow+t
ipping) from the original on 15 April 2016.
23. Collins, Nick (6 September 2013). "Cow tipping myth dispelled" (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/
science/science-news/10289862/Cow-tipping-myth-dispelled.html). The Daily Telegraph. Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/20160426021919/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-n
ews/10289862/Cow-tipping-myth-dispelled.html) from the original on 26 April 2016. Retrieved
18 May 2016.
24. Haines, Lester (9 November 2005). "Boffins debunk cow-tipping myth" (https://www.theregister.co.
uk/2005/11/09/cow_tipping). The Register UK. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/2012103114
4516/http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/09/cow_tipping/) from the original on 31 October 2012.
Retrieved 30 November 2012.
25. (Clay 2004).
26. "FAOSTAT" (http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QL). www.fao.org. Retrieved 25 October 2019.
27. | "HelgiLibrary – Cattle Meat Production" (http://helgilibrary.com/indicators/index/cattle-meat-produ
ction). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20140404055307/http://helgilibrary.com/indicators/ind
ex/cattle-meat-production) from the original on 4 April 2014. Retrieved 12 February 2014. Cattle
Meat Production | 12 February 2014
28. Rickard, G., & Book, I. (1999). Bovids:useful ruminants. In Investigating God's world (3rd ed.).
Pensacola, Fla.: A Beka Book.
29. "UK Dairy Cows" (http://ukcows.com/holsteinUK/publicweb/Education/HUK_Edu_DairyCows.asp
x?cmh=66). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20150518064015/http://ukcows.com/holsteinU
K/publicweb/Education/HUK_Edu_DairyCows.aspx?cmh=66) from the original on 18 May 2015.
Retrieved 7 May 2015.
30. "Compassion in World Farming: Dairy Cattle" (http://www.ciwf.org.uk/farm-animals/cows/dairy-cow
s/). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20150518074913/http://www.ciwf.org.uk/farm-animals/c
ows/dairy-cows/) from the original on 18 May 2015. Retrieved 7 May 2015.
31. Pearson, R.E.; Fulton, L.A.; Thompson, P.D.; Smith, J.W. (1979). "Milking 3 Times per day" (http://
www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302%2879%2983526-2/abstract). Journal of Dairy
Science. 62 (12): 1941–1950. doi:10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(79)83526-2 (https://doi.org/10.3168%2
Fjds.S0022-0302%2879%2983526-2). PMID 541464 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/541464).
32. "Veal and the Dairy Industry" (http://www.ciwf.org.uk/farm-animals/cows/veal-calves/). Compassion
in World Farming. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20150518074915/http://www.ciwf.org.uk/f
arm-animals/cows/veal-calves/) from the original on 18 May 2015. Retrieved 9 May 2015.
33. "FAO – Cattle Hides" (http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/est/COMM_MARKETS_MONITORIN
G/Hides_Skins/Documents/COMPENDIUM2013.pdf) (PDF). Archived (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20150128005513/http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/est/COMM_MARKETS_MONITORING/
Hides_Skins/Documents/COMPENDIUM2013.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 28 January 2015.
Retrieved 16 May 2015.
34. "Definition of Feral cattle" (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feral). Archived (https://web.
archive.org/web/20150921162050/http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feral) from the
original on 21 September 2015. Retrieved 4 May 2015.
35. Sahagun, Louis. "Feral cattle terrorize hikers and devour native plants in a California national
monument" (https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-feral-bulls-20180302-story.html).
latimes.com.
36. Grubb, P. (2005). "Bos taurus" (http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/biology/resources/msw3/bro
wse.asp?id=14200687). In Wilson, D.E.; Reeder, D.M (eds.). Mammal Species of the World: A
Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (http://www.google.com/books?id=JgAMbNSt8ikC&pg=PA6
37) (3rd ed.). Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 637–722. ISBN 978-0-8018-8221-0.
OCLC 62265494 (https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/62265494).
37. "NGRC Bos taurus" (http://www.nodai-genome.org/bos_taurus.html?lang=en). www.nodai-
genome.org. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20160223064915/http://www.nodai-genome.or
g/bos_taurus.html?lang=en) from the original on 23 February 2016.
38. "Archived copy" (https://web.archive.org/web/20160425012219/http://www.tech.nagoya-u.ac.jp/eve
nt/h26/Vol10/hon_secur/O9-SEI-1-s.pdf) (PDF). Archived from the original (http://www.tech.nagoya
-u.ac.jp/event/h26/Vol10/hon_secur/O9-SEI-1-s.pdf) (PDF) on 25 April 2016. Retrieved 12 April
2016.
39. "葛島（野生化した和牛のいる島） – 奈留島港レンタカー" (http://www.narusima.com/cont3/17.htm
l). www.narusima.com. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20160714115549/http://www.narusi
ma.com/cont3/17.html) from the original on 14 July 2016.
40. "Science – Chillingham Wild Cattle" (http://chillinghamwildcattle.com/science/).
chillinghamwildcattle.com. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20160509052751/http://chillingha
mwildcattle.com/science/) from the original on 9 May 2016.
41. "Alaska Isle a Corral For Feral Cattle Herd; U.S. Wants to Trade Cows for Birds" (https://web.archi
ve.org/web/20121020122750/http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-80866.html). The Washington
Post. 23 October 2005. Archived from the original (http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-80866.html)
on 20 October 2012. Retrieved 26 April 2016.
42. "牛ばかりいる台湾の孤島・金門島 / 牛による牛のためのモーモーパラダイスだったことが判明" (h
ttp://photrip-guide.com/2016/04/10/taiwan-kinmon-ushi/). 世界を旅するガイドブック Photrip フォ
トリップ. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20160507102829/http://photrip-guide.com/2016/0
4/10/taiwan-kinmon-ushi/) from the original on 7 May 2016.
43. 城門水塘融和歷史 (http://www.hkcd.com/content/2015-01/08/content_901069.html) Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20160401134605/http://www.hkcd.com/content/2015-01/08/content_9010
69.html) 1 April 2016 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved on 8 May 2017
44. 2015. 郊野香港，野牛與人和諧共處 (https://cn.nytimes.com/china/20151123/c23hongkong/zh-han
t/). The New York Times. Retrieved on 8 May 2017
45. 2014. 西貢流浪牛被逼遷大嶼山 漁護署：牛隻健康年中再檢討 (http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/realti
me/news/20140326/52324506) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20171022193724/http://hk.a
pple.nextmedia.com/realtime/news/20140326/52324506) 22 October 2017 at the Wayback
Machine. Retrieved on 8 May 2017
46. 陳漢榮. 陳盛臣. 2003. 短線遊：跟住牛屎遊塔門 (http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/supplement/travel/
art/20031022/3613316) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20171022193726/http://hk.apple.ne
xtmedia.com/supplement/travel/art/20031022/3613316) 22 October 2017 at the Wayback Machine.
Retrieved on 8 May 2017
47. 太厲害！擎天崗的牛 乖乖跟「他」走！ (http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/1435758)
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20171022193658/http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingn
ews/1435758) 22 October 2017 at the Wayback Machine. The Liberty Times. Retrieved on 8 May
2017
48. "Virtual Water Trade" (http://www.waterfootprint.org/Reports/Report12.pdf) (PDF).
Wasterfootprint.org. Retrieved 30 March 2015.
49. Michael Clark; Tilman, David (November 2014). "Global diets link environmental sustainability and
human health". Nature. 515 (7528): 518–522. doi:10.1038/nature13959 (https://doi.org/10.1038%2
Fnature13959). ISSN 1476-4687 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1476-4687). PMID 25383533 (http
s://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25383533).
50. Nemecek, T.; Poore, J. (1 June 2018). "Reducing food's environmental impacts through producers
and consumers". Science. 360 (6392): 987–992. doi:10.1126/science.aaq0216 (https://doi.org/10.1
126%2Fscience.aaq0216). ISSN 0036-8075 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0036-8075).
PMID 29853680 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29853680).
51. Myhre, Gunnar (2013), "Anthropogenic and Natural Radiative Forcing" (http://www.climatechange2
013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_Chapter08_FINAL.pdf) (PDF), Climate Change 2013: The
Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University
Press, archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20170206230016/http://www.climatechange2013.org/
images/report/WG1AR5_Chapter08_FINAL.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 6 February 2017,
retrieved 22 December 2016. See Table 8.7.
52. IPCC. 2007. Fourth Assessment Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
53. Boadi, D.; Benchaar, C.; Chiquette, J.; Massé, D. (2004). "Mitigation strategies to reduce enteric
methane emissions from dairy cows: Update review". Can. J. Anim. Sci. 84 (3): 319–335.
doi:10.4141/a03-109 (https://doi.org/10.4141%2Fa03-109).
54. Martin, C.; Morgavi, D.P.; Doreau, M. (2010). "Methane mitigation in ruminants: from microbe to
the farm scale". Animal. 4 (3): 351–365. doi:10.1017/s1751731109990620 (https://doi.org/10.101
7%2Fs1751731109990620). PMID 22443940 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22443940).
55. Eckard, R. J.; Grainger, C.; de Klein, C.A.M. (2010). "Options for the abatement of methane and
nitrous oxide from ruminant production: A review". Livestock Science. 130 (1–3): 47–56.
doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2010.02.010 (https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.livsci.2010.02.010).
56. Axt, Barbara (25 May 2016). "Treating cows with antibiotics doubles dung methane emissions" (htt
ps://www.newscientist.com/article/2089867-treating-cows-with-antibiotics-doubles-dung-methane-e
missions/). New Scientist. Retrieved 5 October 2019.
57. Steinfeld, H. et al. 2006, Livestock's Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options (https://boo
ks.google.com/books?id=1B9LQQkm_qMC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=greenhouse&f=fal
se). Livestock, Environment and Development, FAO.
58. IPCC. 2001. Third Assessment Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Working
Group I: The Scientific Basis. Table 4.2
59. US EPA. 2012. Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gase emissions and sinks: 1990–2010. US.
Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 430-R-12-001. Section 6.2.
60. IPCC. 2007. Fourth Assessment Report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
61. Dlugokencky, E. J.; Nisbet, E.G.; Fisher, R.; Lowry, D. (2011). "Global atmospheric methane:
budget, changes and dangers". Phil. Trans. R. Soc. 369 (1943): 2058–2072.
Bibcode:2011RSPTA.369.2058D (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011RSPTA.369.2058D).
doi:10.1098/rsta.2010.0341 (https://doi.org/10.1098%2Frsta.2010.0341). PMID 21502176 (https://
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21502176).
62. "Gurian-Sherman, Doug. CAFOs Uncovered: The Untold Costs of Confined Animal Feeding
Operations" (http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/food_and_agriculture/cafos-uncovered.pdf)
(PDF). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20130126213408/http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/docu
ments/food_and_agriculture/cafos-uncovered.pdf) (PDF) from the original on 26 January 2013.
Retrieved 15 October 2013.
63. Capper, J. L. (2011). "The environmental impact of beef production in the United States: 1977
compared with 2007". J. Anim. Sci. 89 (12): 4249–4261. doi:10.2527/jas.2010-3784 (https://doi.or
g/10.2527%2Fjas.2010-3784). PMID 21803973 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21803973).
64. USDA. 2011. Agricultural Statistics 2011. US Government Printing Office, Washington. 509 pp.
Table 7.6.
65. USDA. 2012. Cattle. "Archived copy" (https://web.archive.org/web/20120617004300/http://usda01.l
ibrary.cornell.edu/usda/current/Catt/Catt-01-27-2012.pdf) (PDF). Archived from the original (http://u
sda01.library.cornell.edu/usda/current/Catt/Catt-01-27-2012.pdf) (PDF) on 17 June 2012.
Retrieved 18 July 2012.
66. USDA 1994. Agricultural Statistics 1994. US Government Printing Office, Washington. 485 pp.
Table 377.
67. US Code of Federal Regulations 40 CFR 122.23
68. " "What is a Factory Farm?" Sustainable Table" (https://web.archive.org/web/20120605014129/htt
p://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/factoryfarming/). Sustainabletable.org. Archived from the
original (http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/factoryfarming/) on 5 June 2012. Retrieved
15 October 2013.
69. US Code of Federal Regulations 40 CFR 122
70. " "Regulatory Definitions of Large CAFOs, Medium CAFO, and Small CAFOs." Environmental
Protection Agency Fact Sheet" (http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sector_table.pdf) (PDF). Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/20150924094619/http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/sector_table.pdf)
(PDF) from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 15 October 2013.
71. US Code of Federal Regulations 40 CFR 122.23, 40 CFR 122.42
72. See, e.g., Waterkeeper Alliance et al. v. EPA, 399 F.3d 486 (2nd cir. 2005); National Pork
Producers Council, et al. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 635 F. 3d 738 (5th Cir.
2011) (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4003887446881112013&q=National+Pork+
Producers+Council+v+epa&as_sdt=2,27&as_vis=1).
73. Bradford, S. A., E. Segal, W. Zheng, Q. Wang, and S. R. Hutchins. 2008. Reuse of concentrated
animal feeding operation wastewater on agricultural lands. J. Env. Qual. 37 (supplement): S97-
S115.
74. Richard Koelsch, Carol Balvanz, John George, Dan Meyer, John Nienaber, Gene Tinker. "Applying
Alternative Technologies to CAFOs: A Case Study" (https://web.archive.org/web/20131017230339/
http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/waste_mgt/natlcenter/sanantonio/balvanz.pdf) (PDF). Archived from the
original (http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/waste_mgt/natlcenter/sanantonio/balvanz.pdf) (PDF) on 17
October 2013. Retrieved 16 January 2018.
75. "Ikerd, John. The Economics of CAFOs & Sustainable Alternatives" (http://web.missouri.edu/~ikerd
j/papers/Fairfield%20IA%20-%20Economics%20of%20CAFOs.htm). Web.missouri.edu. Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/20140810081852/http://web.missouri.edu/~ikerdj/papers/Fairfield%20
IA%20-%20Economics%20of%20CAFOs.htm) from the original on 10 August 2014. Retrieved
15 October 2013.
76. "Hansen, Dave, Nelson, Jennifer and Volk, Jennifer. Setback Standards and Alternative
Compliance Practices to Satisfy CAFO Requirements: An assessment for the DEF-AG group" (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20120502130352/http://dda.delaware.gov/nutrients/Draft_TechStandards/
CAFO_BMPassessment.pdf) (PDF). Archived from the original (http://dda.delaware.gov/nutrients/
Draft_TechStandards/CAFO_BMPassessment.pdf) (PDF) on 2 May 2012. Retrieved 15 October
2013.
77. USDA. 2011. Agricultural Statistics 2011. US Government Printing Office, Washington. 509 pp.
Table 7.1.
78. EPA. 2001. Environmental and economic benefit analysis of proposed revisions to the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Regulation and the effluent guidelines for concentrated
animal feeding operations. US Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-821-R-01-002. 157 pp.
79. "Clean Water Act (CWA) Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations National Enforcement Initiative"
(https://web.archive.org/web/20131115074052/http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/planning/priorit
ies/cwacafo.html). Epa.gov. Archived from the original (http://www.epa.gov/compliance/data/planni
ng/priorities/cwacafo.html) on 15 November 2013. Retrieved 15 October 2013.
80. "Manure management" (https://web.archive.org/web/20130903054645/http://www.fao.org/ag/again
fo/programmes/en/lead/toolbox/Tech/20ManMgn.htm). Fao.org. Archived from the original (http://w
ww.fao.org/ag/againfo/programmes/en/lead/toolbox/Tech/20ManMgn.htm) on 3 September 2013.
Retrieved 15 October 2013.
81. McDonald, J. M. et al. 2009. Manure use for fertilizer and for energy. Report to Congress. USDA,
AP-037. 53pp.
82. Shapouri, H. et al. 2002. The energy balance of corn ethanol: an update. USDA Agricultural
Economic Report 814.
83. E.O. Wilson, The Future of Life, 2003, Vintage Books, 256 pages ISBN 0-679-76811-4
84. Strassman, B. I. 1987. Effects of cattle grazing and haying on wildlife conservation at National
Wildlife Refuges in the United States (https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/481
62/267_2005_Article_BF01867177.pdf?sequence=1). Environmental Mgt. 11: 35–44 .
85. "Buatrics" (http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/buiatrics). Retrieved 19 November 2013.
86. "World Association for Buiatrics" (https://archive.today/20131204161936/http://www.buiatrics.com/s
howpage.php?p=eng_wab). Archived from the original (http://www.buiatrics.com/showpage.php?p
=eng_wab) on 4 December 2013. Retrieved 4 December 2013.
87. "List of Countries 2012" (https://web.archive.org/web/20180918122359/http://www.buiatrics.com/sh
owpage.php?p=eng_list). Archived from the original (http://www.buiatrics.com/showpage.php?p=e
ng_list) on 18 September 2018. Retrieved 4 December 2013.
88. "Common and important diseases of cattle" (http://www.daff.gov.za/docs/Infopaks/commonDisease
s.htm). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20131205030006/http://www.daff.gov.za/docs/Infopa
ks/commonDiseases.htm) from the original on 5 December 2013. Retrieved 17 November 2013.
89. "Identification of new cattle virus will help rule out mad cow disease" (http://news.ucdavis.edu/sear
ch/news_detail.lasso?id=10688). Retrieved 17 November 2013.
90. "Cattle Diseases" (http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/topic_cattle_diseases). Archived (https://web.archive.org/
web/20131125074301/http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/topic_cattle_diseases) from the original on 25
November 2013. Retrieved 4 December 2013.
91. "Cattle Disease Guide" (http://www.thecattlesite.com/diseaseinfo/). Retrieved 4 December 2013.
92. Harvey, Fiona (17 May 2011). "Easing of farming regulations could allow milk from TB-infected
cattle into food chain" (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/may/17/farming-regulation-
tb-cattle-milk). The Guardian. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20140201102312/http://www.t
heguardian.com/environment/2011/may/17/farming-regulation-tb-cattle-milk) from the original on 1
February 2014. Retrieved 4 December 2013.
93. Abbott, Charles (2 November 2013). "U.S. aligns beef rules with global mad cow standards" (http
s://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/02/us-usa-madcow-idUSBRE9A106C20131102). Reuters.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20131201165201/http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/02/
us-usa-madcow-idUSBRE9A106C20131102) from the original on 1 December 2013. Retrieved
4 December 2013.
94. West, Julian (2 September 2001). "A gift from the gods: bottled cow's urine" (https://www.telegrap
h.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/1339267/A-gift-from-the-gods-bottled-cows-urine.html). The
Telegraph. London. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20140810161740/http://www.telegraph.c
o.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/1339267/A-gift-from-the-gods-bottled-cows-urine.html) from the
original on 10 August 2014. Retrieved 4 December 2013.
95. "Cow Urine as Medicine" (https://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/07/29/cow-urine-as-medicine/).
WSJ. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20140714233205/http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2
010/07/29/cow-urine-as-medicine/) from the original on 14 July 2014. Retrieved 4 December 2013.
96. Esterbrook, John. "Cow Urine As Panacea?" (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cow-urine-as-panace
a/). CBS News. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20141230061723/http://www.cbsnews.com/
news/cow-urine-as-panacea/) from the original on 30 December 2014. Retrieved 4 December
2013.
97. "(video) Indian Doctors Use Cow Urine As Medicine" (https://www.wsj.com/video/indian-doctors-us
e-cow-urine-as-medicine/6E5E9BB4-B07A-418B-AAD3-C2121AEE0928.html). The Wall Street
Journal. 29 July 2010. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20141230114704/http://www.wsj.co
m/video/indian-doctors-use-cow-urine-as-medicine/6E5E9BB4-B07A-418B-AAD3-C2121AEE092
8.html) from the original on 30 December 2014. Retrieved 27 November 2010.
98. "Cow urine drug developed by RSS body gets US patent" (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/co
w-urine-drug-developed-by-rss-body-gets-us-patent/635054/). The Indian Express. 17 June 2010.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20131121101659/http://www.indianexpress.com/news/cow-
urine-drug-developed-by-rss-body-gets-us-patent/635054) from the original on 21 November 2013.
Retrieved 4 December 2013.
99. Beneke, E.; Rogers, A. (1996). Medical Mycology and Human Mycoses. California: Star. pp. 85–
90. ISBN 978-0-89863-175-3.
00. Grant, R. (2011). "Taking advantage of natural behavior improves dairy cow performance" (http://ar
ticles.extension.org/pages/11129/taking-advantage-of-natural-behavior-improves-dairy-cow-perfor
mance). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20161202101756/http://articles.extension.org/page
s/11129/taking-advantage-of-natural-behavior-improves-dairy-cow-performance) from the original
on 2 December 2016.
01. Huzzey, J.; Keyserlingk, M.; Overton, T. (2012). "The behaviour and physiological consequences of
overstocking dairy cattle" (https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/20143159639). American
Association of Bovine Practitioners: 92.
02. Tyler, J.W; Fox, L.K.; Parish, S.M.; Swain, J.; Johnson, D.J.; Grassechi, H.A. (1997). "Effect of
feed availability on post-milking standing time in dairy cows". Journal of Dairy Research. 64 (4):
617–620. doi:10.1017/s0022029997002501 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2Fs0022029997002501).
PMID 9403771 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9403771).
03. Schefers, J.M.; Weigel, K.A.; Rawson, C.L.; Zwald, N.R.; Cook, N.B. (2010). "Management
practices associated with conception rate and service rate of lactating Holstein cows in large,
commercial dairy herds". J. Dairy Sci. 93 (4): 1459–1467. doi:10.3168/jds.2009-2015 (https://doi.or
g/10.3168%2Fjds.2009-2015). PMID 20338423 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20338423).
04. Krawczel, P. 2012. Improving animal well-being through facilities management. Southern Dairy
Conference, 24 January 2012. Slides available at "Archived copy" (https://web.archive.org/web/20
151020174144/http://www.southerndairyconference.com/Documents/2012Krawczel.pdf) (PDF).
Archived from the original (http://www.southerndairyconference.com/Documents/2012Krawczel.pd
f) (PDF) on 20 October 2015. Retrieved 2 December 2016.. Accessed 16 November 2016
05. Sjaasted O.V., Howe K., Sand O., (2010) Physiology of Domestic Animals. 3rd edition.
Sunderland: Sinaver Association. Inc
06. Nepomnaschy, B. England; Welch, P.; McConnell, K.; Strassman, D. (2004). "Stress and female
reproductive function: a study of daily variations in cortisol, gonadotrophins, and gonadal steroids
in a rural Mayan population" (https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/35107/1/20057_ftp.
pdf) (PDF). American Journal of Human Biology. 16 (5): 523–532. doi:10.1002/ajhb.20057 (https://
doi.org/10.1002%2Fajhb.20057). hdl:2027.42/35107 (https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42%2F35107).
PMID 15368600 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15368600).
07. "Cattle" (https://awionline.org/content/cattle). awionline.org. Retrieved 31 May 2019.
08. Schwartzkopf-Genswein, K. S.; Stookey, J. M.; Welford, R. (1 August 1997). "Behavior of cattle
during hot-iron and freeze branding and the effects on subsequent handling ease". Journal of
Animal Science. 75 (8): 2064–2072. doi:10.2527/1997.7582064x (https://doi.org/10.2527%2F1997.
7582064x). ISSN 0021-8812 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0021-8812). PMID 9263052 (https://pu
bmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9263052).
09. Coetzee, Hans (19 May 2013). Pain Management, An Issue of Veterinary Clinics: Food Animal
Practice (https://books.google.com/?id=LpIbwuYIyEcC&pg=PT70&dq=cattle+castration+painful#v=
onepage&q=cattle%20castration%20painful&f=false). Elsevier Health Sciences. ISBN 978-
1455773763.
10. "Welfare Implications of Dehorning and Disbudding Cattle" (https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Li
teratureReviews/Pages/Welfare-Implications-of-Dehorning-and-Disbudding-Cattle.aspx).
www.avma.org. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20170623173534/https://www.avma.org/KB/
Resources/LiteratureReviews/Pages/Welfare-Implications-of-Dehorning-and-Disbudding-Cattle.as
px) from the original on 23 June 2017. Retrieved 5 April 2017.
11. Goode, Erica (25 January 2012). "Ear-Tagging Proposal May Mean Fewer Branded Cattle" (https://
www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/us/ear-tagging-proposal-may-mean-fewer-branded-cattle.html). The
New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0362-4331). Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/20170406111331/http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/26/us/ear-tagging-proposal-
may-mean-fewer-branded-cattle.html) from the original on 6 April 2017. Retrieved 5 April 2017.
12. Grandin, Temple (21 July 2015). Improving Animal Welfare, 2 Edition: A Practical Approach (http
s://books.google.com/?id=fzc7CgAAQBAJ&pg=PA111&lpg=PA111&dq=cattle+nose+ring+pain#v=
onepage&q=cattle%20nose%20ring%20pain&f=false). CABI. ISBN 9781780644677.
13. "Restraint of Livestock" (http://www.grandin.com/references/abdlps.html). www.grandin.com.
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20171213024104/http://www.grandin.com/references/abdlp
s.html) from the original on 13 December 2017. Retrieved 5 April 2017.
14. Doyle, Rebecca; Moran, John (3 February 2015). Cow Talk: Understanding Dairy Cow Behaviour
to Improve Their Welfare on Asian Farms (https://books.google.com/?id=xPt1BgAAQBAJ&pg=PA2
1&dq=cattle+tail+docking+pain#v=onepage&q=cattle%20tail%20docking%20pain&f=false). Csiro
Publishing. ISBN 9781486301621.
15. McKenna, C. (2001). "The case against the veal crate: An examination of the scientific evidence
that led to the banning of the veal crate system in the EU and of the alternative group housed
systems that are better for calves, farmers and consumers" (https://www.ciwf.org.uk/media/381863
5/case-against-the-veal-crate.pdf) (PDF). Compassion in World Farming. Retrieved 19 April 2016.
16. "Using Prods and Persuaders Properly to Handle Cattle, Pigs, and Sheep" (http://grandin.com/beh
aviour/principles/prods.html). grandin.com. Retrieved 31 May 2019.
17. Grant, R. (2011). "Taking advantage of natural behavior improves dairy cow performance" (http://ar
ticles.extension.org/pages/11129/taking-advantage-of-natural-behavior-improves-dairy-cow-perfor
mance). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20161202101756/http://articles.extension.org/page
s/11129/taking-advantage-of-natural-behavior-improves-dairy-cow-performance) from the original
on 2 December 2016.
18. Grandin, Temple (1 December 2016). "Evaluation of the welfare of cattle housed in outdoor feedlot
pens". Veterinary and Animal Science. 1–2: 23–28. doi:10.1016/j.vas.2016.11.001 (https://doi.org/
10.1016%2Fj.vas.2016.11.001). ISSN 2451-943X (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/2451-943X).
19. "The Beef Industry" (https://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-food/factory-farming/cows/beef-i
ndustry/). PETA. Retrieved 31 May 2019.
20. "Animal Cruelty - Beef" (http://www.veganpeace.com/animal_cruelty/beef.htm).
www.veganpeace.com. Retrieved 31 May 2019.
21. "Dairy Investigation | Mercy For Animals" (http://dairy.mercyforanimals.org/).
dairy.mercyforanimals.org. Retrieved 31 May 2019.
22. Vegetarian Society. "Dairy Cows & Welfare" (https://www.vegsoc.org/info-hub/why-go-veggie/anim
als/cattle/). Retrieved 31 May 2019.
23. Adams, Carol J. (21 September 2012). "Dairy is a Feminist Issue" (https://caroljadams.blogspot.co
m/2012/09/dairy-is-feminist-issue.html). Carol J. Adams. Retrieved 31 May 2019.
24. Adams, Carol J. (2015). "The Sexual Politics of Meat". The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-
vegetarian Critical Theory. doi:10.5040/9781501312861.ch-001 (https://doi.org/10.5040%2F97815
01312861.ch-001). ISBN 9781501312861.
25. Erik Marcus (2000). Vegan: The New Ethics of Eating (https://books.google.com/books?id=3hHjqs
43t8oC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false). ISBN 9781590133446.
26. Desaulniers, Élise (2013). Vache à lait : dix mythes de l'industrie laitière (https://web.archive.org/w
eb/20130921061132/http://livres.edesaulniers.com/?product=vache-a-lait-dix-mythes-de-lindustrie-
laitiere) (in French). Editions Stanké, Québec. Archived from the original (http://livres.edesaulniers.
com/?product=vache-a-lait-dix-mythes-de-lindustrie-laitiere) on 21 September 2013. Retrieved
19 May 2014.
27. Wolfson, D. J. (1996). Beyond the law: Agribusiness and the systemic abuse of animals raised for
food or food production Animal L., 2, 123. (http://nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/bibarticles/wolfson
_beyond.pdf)
28. "How India's sacred cows are beaten, abused and poisoned to make" (http://www.independent.co.
uk/news/world/asia/how-indias-sacred-cows-are-beaten-abused-and-poisoned-to-make-leather-for
-high-street-shops-724696.html). The Independent. 14 February 2000. Retrieved 31 May 2019.
29. "Why do some people choose not to wear leather?" (https://www.animalsaustralia.org/issues/truth-
about-leather.php). www.animalsaustralia.org. Retrieved 31 May 2019.
30. "The Leather Industry" (https://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-clothing/leather-industry/).
PETA. Retrieved 31 May 2019.
31. Westermeier: 436
32. "Rodeos" (https://www.peta.org/issues/animals-in-entertainment/cruel-sports/rodeos/). PETA.
Retrieved 31 May 2019.
33. AP, Michael Smith / (17 July 2008). "Animal rights group targets popular rodeo" (http://www.nbcne
ws.com/id/25725170/ns/us_news-life/t/animal-rights-group-targets-popular-rodeo/). msnbc.com.
Retrieved 31 May 2019.
34. "Running of the Bulls: Bulls Tortured, Stabbed to Death" (https://www.peta.org/features/what-you-d
ont-know-about-running-of-the-bulls/). PETA. Retrieved 31 May 2019.
35. "What is bullfighting?" (https://web.archive.org/web/20110930072409/http://www.league.org.uk/con
tent.asp?CategoryID=1938). League Against Cruel Sports. Archived from the original (http://www.l
eague.org.uk/content.asp?CategoryID=1938) on 30 September 2011.
"ICABS calls on Vodafone to drop bullfighting from ad" (http://www.banbloodsports.com/ln-080
7c.htm). www.banbloodsports.com.
"The suffering of bullfighting bulls" (https://web.archive.org/web/20090126084718/http://english.
stieren.net/index.php?id=390). www.english.stieren.net. Archived from the original (http://englis
h.stieren.net/index.php?id=390) on 26 January 2009.
36. PETA. "Running of the Bulls Factsheet" (http://www.runningofthenudes.com/bullfighting_facts.asp).
www.runningofthenudes.com.
37. Muruvimi, F. and J. Ellis-Jones. 1999. A farming systems approach to improving draft animal
power in Sub-Saharan Africa. In: Starkey, P. and P. Kaumbutho. 1999. Meeting the challenges of
animal traction. Intermediate Technology Publications, London. pp. 10–19.
38. Phaniraja, K. L. and H. H. Panchasara. 2009. Indian draught animals power. Veterinary World
2:404–407.
39. Nicholson, C. F, R. W. Blake, R. S. Reid and J. Schelhas. 2001. Environmental impacts of livestock
in the developing world. Environment 43(2): 7–17.
40. Diane Morgan (2010). Essential Islam: A Comprehensive Guide to Belief and Practice (https://archi
ve.org/details/essentialislamco0000morg). ABC-CLIO. p. 27 (https://archive.org/details/essentialisl
amco0000morg/page/27). ISBN 9780313360251.
41. Thomas Hughes (1995) [first published in 1885]. Dictionary of Islam (https://books.google.com/?id
=O84eYLVHvB0C&pg=PA364#v=onepage&f=false). Asian Educational Services. p. 364.
ISBN 9788120606722.
42. Avinoam Shalem (2013). Constructing the Image of Muhammad in Europe (https://books.google.c
om/?id=9GTnBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA127#v=onepage&f=false). Walter de Gruyter. p. 127.
ISBN 9783110300864.
43. Jha, D. N. (2002). The myth of the holy cow. London: Verso. p. 130. ISBN 978-1-85984-676-6.
44. "Mahabharata, Book 13-Anusasana Parva, Section LXXVI" (http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m13/
m13b041.htm). Sacred-texts.com. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20131012075852/http://w
ww.sacred-texts.com/hin/m13/m13b041.htm) from the original on 12 October 2013. Retrieved
15 October 2013.
45. "Govidyapitham – Shree Aniruddha Upasana Foundation" (http://aniruddhafoundation.com/compa
ssion-govidyapitham/). Retrieved 28 January 2018.
46. Swamy, Subramanian (19 January 2016). "Save the cow, save earth" (http://newindianexpress.co
m/opinion/article158600.ece). Express Buzz. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/201609101548
33/http://www.newindianexpress.com/opinion/article158600.ece) from the original on 10
September 2016. Retrieved 19 January 2016.
47. Kane, J.; Anzovin, S.; Podell, J. (1997). Famous First Facts. New York, NY: H. W. Wilson
Company. p. 5 (https://archive.org/details/famousfirstfacts00kane_0/page/5). ISBN 978-0-8242-
0930-8.
48. Madden, Thomas (May 1992). "Akabeko (http://www6.plala.or.jp/awia/AizuGlossary.html) Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/20070221103824/http://www6.plala.or.jp/awia/AizuGlossary.html) 21
February 2007 at the Wayback Machine". OUTLOOK. Online copy accessed 18 January 2007.
49. Patrick Mendis 2007. Glocalization: The Human Side of Globalization.. p160
50. FAOSTAT. [Agricultural statistics database] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations, Rome. "Faostat" (http://faostat3.fao.org/). Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/2016011
5152948/http://faostat3.fao.org/) from the original on 15 January 2016. Retrieved 13 January 2016.
51. "Live Animals" (http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QA/visualize). FAO. Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20181030170521/http://
www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QA/visualize) from the original on 30 October 2018. Retrieved
4 November 2018.

Further reading
Bhattacharya, S. 2003. Cattle ownership makes it a man's world (https://www.newscientist.com/arti
cle.ns?id=dn4220). Newscientist.com. Retrieved 26 December 2006.
Cattle Today (CT). 2006. Website. Breeds of cattle (http://www.cattle-today.com/). Cattle Today.
Retrieved 26 December 2006
Clay, J. 2004. World Agriculture and the Environment: A Commodity-by-Commodity Guide to
Impacts and Practices. Washington, DC: Island Press. ISBN 1-55963-370-0.
Clutton-Brock, J. 1999. A Natural History of Domesticated Mammals. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. ISBN 0-521-63495-4.
Purdy, Herman R.; R. John Dawes; Dr. Robert Hough (2008). Breeds Of Cattle (http://www.breeds
ofcattle.net/) (2nd ed.). – A visual textbook containing History/Origin, Phenotype & Statistics of 45
breeds.
Huffman, B. 2006. The ultimate ungulate page (https://web.archive.org/web/20070202174629/htt
p://www.ultimateungulate.com/). UltimateUngulate.com. Retrieved 26 December 2006.
Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG). 2005. Bos taurus (http://www.issg.org/database/specie
s/ecology.asp?si=172&fr=1&sts=sss). Global Invasive Species Database.
Johns, Catherine. 2011 Cattle: History, Myth, Art. London: The British Museum Press. 978-0-7141-
5084-0
Nowak, R.M. and Paradiso, J.L. 1983. Walker's Mammals of the World. Baltimore, MD: The Johns
Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-2525-3
Oklahoma State University (OSU). 2006. Breeds of Cattle (http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/cattl
e). Retrieved 5 January 2007.
Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). 2004. Holy cow (https://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/holycow/inde
x.html). PBS Nature. Retrieved 5 January 2007.
Rath, S. 1998. The Complete Cow. Stillwater, MN: Voyageur Press. ISBN 0-89658-375-9.
Raudiansky, S. 1992. The Covenant of the Wild. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc.
ISBN 0-688-09610-7.
Spectrum Commodities (SC). 2006. Live cattle (https://web.archive.org/web/20061115175810/htt
p://spectrumcommodities.com/education/commodity/lc.html). Spectrumcommodities.com.
Retrieved 5 January 2007.
Voelker, W. 1986. The Natural History of Living Mammals. Medford, NJ: Plexus Publishing, Inc.
ISBN 0-937548-08-1.
Yogananda, P. 1946. The Autobiography of a Yogi. Los Angeles: Self Realization Fellowship.
ISBN 0-87612-083-4.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cattle&oldid=952745642"

This page was last edited on 23 April 2020, at 21:53 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site,
you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a
non-profit organization.