Do Movement Patterns of GPS-Tracked Cattle on Extensive Rangelands Suggest Independence among Individuals?

In behavioral studies, cattle within the same pasture are not considered as independent experimental units because of the potential confounding effects of the herd’s social interactions. However, evaluating cattle behavior on extensive rangelands is logistically challenging for researchers, and treating individual animals as independent experimental units may be beneficial for answering specific research questions. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association patterns among global positioning system (GPS)-tracked cattle at six different study sites in the western United States. A Half-Weight Index (HWI) association value was calculated for each pair of GPS-tracked cows (i.e., dyad) to determine the proportion of time that cattle were within 75 m and 500 m of each other. Cattle at two study sites exhibited relatively low mean HWI-association values (i.e., less than 0.23 HWI); whereas, cattle at other study sites tended to have greater mean HWI associations (i.e., greater than 0.35 HWI). Distinguishing features between study sites with low and high association values were the management of cattle prior to the study, herd size, pasture size, and the number of watering points. However, at all ranches except one, at least 75% of all dyadic associations had HWI values of less than 0.5 at 500 m, indicating that most of the GPS-tracked cows were greater than 500 m from each other for over 50% of tracking period. While interactions among cattle in the same pasture are often inevitable, our data suggests that under some situations, movement patterns of a sub-set of individual GPS-tracked cows may have levels of independence that are sufficient for analysis as individual experimental units. Understanding the level of independence among GPS-tracked cattle may provide options for analysis of grazing behavior for individual cattle within the same pasture.

[1]  L. Howery,et al.  Differences in Home Range and Habitat Use among Individuals in a Cattle Herd , 1996 .

[2]  Susan M. Cooper,et al.  Detecting autocorrelation problems from GPS collar data in livestock studies , 2012 .

[3]  Shusuke Sato,et al.  The Change in Social Behaviour of Newly Introduced Heifers with Original Group Cows , 1991 .

[4]  E. Laca.  New Approaches and Tools for Grazing Management , 2009 .

[5]  K. Bøe,et al.  Grouping and social preferences in calves, heifers and cows , 2003 .

[6]  L. Howery,et al.  Social and environmental factors influence cattle distribution on rangeland , 1998 .

[7]  Gordon B. Stenhouse,et al.  Temporal autocorrelation functions for movement rates from global positioning system radiotelemetry data , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[8]  Steven J. Schwager,et al.  A comparison of association indices , 1987, Animal Behaviour.

[9]  Douglas E. Johnson,et al.  Social Associations and Dominance of Individuals in Small Herds of Cattle , 2007 .

[10]  Ryan M. Nielson,et al.  Prescribed fire effects on resource selection by cattle in mesic sagebrush steppe. Part 1: Spring grazing , 2014 .

[11]  D. Bailey,et al.  Evaluation of Low-Stress Herding and Supplement Placement for Managing Cattle Grazing in Riparian and Upland Areas , 2008 .

[12]  Derek W. Bailey,et al.  Association patterns of visually-observed cattle on Montana, USA foothill rangelands , 2016 .

[13]  D. Ganskopp,et al.  Manipulating cattle distribution with salt and water in large arid-land pastures: a GPS/GIS assessment. , 2001, Applied animal behaviour science.

[14]  A. Lazo.  Social segregation and the maintenance of social stability in a feral cattle population , 1994, Animal Behaviour.

[15]  Ryan A. Long,et al.  Effects of Season and Scale on Response of Elk and Mule Deer to Habitat Manipulation , 2008 .

[16]  M. Owens,et al.  Grazing of crested wheatgrass, with particular reference to effects of pasture size. , 1988 .

[17]  William C. Krueger,et al.  Cattle grazing and behavior on a forested range in the southern Blue Mountains of Oregon, vegetation types. , 1982 .

[18]  B. Sowell,et al.  Delivery method and supplement consumption by grazing ruminants: a review. , 1997, Journal of animal science.

[19]  R. M. Murphey,et al.  Social aggregations in cattle. II. Contributions of familiarity and genetic similarity , 1990, Behavior genetics.

[20]  D. Kimura,et al.  Feral cattle (Bos taurus) on Kuchinoshima Island, southwestern Japan: Their stable ranging and unstable grouping , 1985, Journal of Ethology.

[21]  Peter K. McGregor,et al.  Analyzing Animal Societies: Quantitative Methods for Vertebrate Social Analysis , 2009 .

[22]  R. M. Murphey.  Social aggregations in cattle. I. Segregation by breed in free-ranging herds , 1990, Behavior genetics.

[23]  D. Bailey,et al.  Effect of Previous Experience on Grazing Patterns and Diet Selection of Brangus Cows in the Chihuahuan Desert , 2010 .

[24]  Sato,et al.  The number of farm mates influences social and maintenance behaviours of Japanese Black cows in a communal pasture. , 2000, Applied animal behaviour science.

[25]  Jacqueline L. Frair,et al.  Know Thy Enemy: Experience Affects Elk Translocation Success in Risky Landscapes , 2007 .

[26]  R. Shaw.  Social Organization and Decision Making In North American Bison: Implications For Management , 2012 .

[27]  E. Laca,et al.  Mechanisms that result in large herbivore grazing distribution patterns. , 1996 .

[28]  Hal Whitehead,et al.  Analyzing Animal Societies: Quantitative Methods for Vertebrate Social Analysis , 2008 .

[29]  S. Hurlbert.  Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments , 1984 .

[30]  J. Kie,et al.  Habitat selection by mule deer during migration: effects of landscape structure and natural-gas development , 2012 .

[31]  J. Kie,et al.  A Comparison of Two Modeling Approaches for Evaluating Wildlife–Habitat Relationships , 2009 .

[32]  Steven C. Minta,et al.  Tests of Spatial and Temporal Interaction Among Animals. , 1992, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[33]  Andrew Ash,et al.  Factors affecting the management of cattle grazing distribution in northern Australia: preliminary observations on the effect of paddock size and water points , 2007 .

[34]  P. Pattison,et al.  Changes in temporal and spatial associations between pairs of cattle during the process of familiarisation. , 2010 .

[35]  Kym P. Patison,et al.  Changes in the group associations of free-ranging beef cows at calving , 2014 .

[36]  D. Dwyer.  Activities and grazing preferences of cows with calves in northern Osage County, Oklahoma , 1961 .

[37]  D. Ganskopp,et al.  Do Pasture-Scale Nutritional Patterns Affect Cattle Distribution on Rangelands? , 2006 .

[38]  W. Stricklin.  Matrilinear social dominance and spatial relationships among Angus and Hereford cows. , 1983, Journal of animal science.

[39]  B. Sowell,et al.  Social behavior of grazing beef cattle: Implications for management , 2000 .

[40]  D. Bailey,et al.  Genetic Influences on Cattle Grazing Distribution: Association of Genetic Markers with Terrain Use in Cattle☆ , 2015 .

[41]  Bart Kempenaers,et al.  Spatial autocorrelation: an overlooked concept in behavioral ecology , 2010, Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology.

[42]  W. Stricklin,et al.  SOCIAL STRESS AND DOMINANCE AMONG GROUP MEMBERS AFTER MIXING BEEF COWS , 1990 .

[43]  Tim Wark,et al.  Tracking livestock using global positioning systems – are we still lost? , 2011 .

[44]  D. Bailey,et al.  Research observation: Daily movement patterns of hill climbing and bottom dwelling cows , 2004 .

[45]  A. J. Rook,et al.  Synchronisation of eating, ruminating and idling activity by grazing sheep , 1991 .

[46]  Keith T. Weber,et al.  Assessing independence of animal locations with association matrices. , 2001 .

[47]  M. Špinka,et al.  Pay respect to the elders: age, more than body mass, determines dominance in female beef cattle , 2013, Animal Behaviour.