These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

90 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1462494)

  • 1. Positioning of identification transponders in the auricle of pigs.
    Lambooij E
    Vet Rec; 1992 Oct; 131(18):419-20. PubMed ID: 1462494
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Use of ear tags and injectable transponders for the identification and traceability of pigs from birth to the end of the slaughter line.
    Caja G; Hernández-Jover M; Conill C; Garín D; Alabern X; Farriol B; Ghirardi J
    J Anim Sci; 2005 Sep; 83(9):2215-24. PubMed ID: 16100077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of injecting electronic transponders into the auricle of pigs.
    Lammers GH; Langeveld NG; Lambooij E; Gruys E
    Vet Rec; 1995 Jun; 136(24):606-9. PubMed ID: 7571264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of visual and electronic identification devices in pigs: slaughterhouse performance.
    Santamarina C; Hernández-Jover M; Babot D; Caja G
    J Anim Sci; 2007 Feb; 85(2):497-502. PubMed ID: 17235033
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Traceability of extensively produced Iberian pigs using visual and electronic identification devices from farm to slaughter.
    Gosálvez LF; Santamarina C; Averós X; Hernández-Jover M; Caja G; Babot D
    J Anim Sci; 2007 Oct; 85(10):2746-52. PubMed ID: 17609464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Optimal implantation site of transponders for identification of experimental swine.
    Nakamura S; Sakaoka A; Ikuno E; Asou R; Shimizu D; Hagiwara H
    Exp Anim; 2019 Feb; 68(1):13-23. PubMed ID: 30078789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Electronic identification with injectable transponders in pig production: results of a field trail on commercial farms and slaughterhouses concerning injectability and retrievability.
    Lambooij E; Langeveld NG; Lammers GH; Huiskes JH
    Vet Q; 1995 Dec; 17(4):118-23. PubMed ID: 8751271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of visual and electronic identification devices in pigs: on-farm performances.
    Babot D; Hernández-Jover M; Caja G; Santamarina C; Ghirardi JJ
    J Anim Sci; 2006 Sep; 84(9):2575-81. PubMed ID: 16908663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Subcutaneous electronic identification in cattle: a field study.
    Løken T; Vatn G; Kummen E
    Vet Rec; 2011 Sep; 169(10):250. PubMed ID: 21813580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Marking transgenic Xenopus froglets with passive micro transponders.
    Waldner C; Roose M; Ryffel GU
    Transgenic Res; 2007 Aug; 16(4):539-40. PubMed ID: 17225070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The use of passive injectable transponders in fattening lambs from birth to slaughter: effects of injection position, age, and breed.
    Conill C; Caja G; Nehring R; Ribó O
    J Anim Sci; 2002 Apr; 80(4):919-25. PubMed ID: 12002329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Lifetime traceability of weaner pigs in concrete-based and deep-litter production systems in Australia.
    Schembri N; Sithole F; Toribio JA; Hernández-Jover M; Holyoake PK
    J Anim Sci; 2007 Nov; 85(11):3123-30. PubMed ID: 17686903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Nylon ear tags for individual identification of guinea pigs.
    Kitagaki M; Shibuya K
    Contemp Top Lab Anim Sci; 2004 Mar; 43(2):16-20. PubMed ID: 15053502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Readability of visual and electronic leg tags versus rumen boluses and electronic ear tags for the permanent identification of dairy goats.
    Carné S; Caja G; Rojas-Olivares MA; Salama AA
    J Dairy Sci; 2010 Nov; 93(11):5157-66. PubMed ID: 20965331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Sitting of transponders.
    Sutherland AK
    Vet Rec; 1992 Nov; 131(19):448. PubMed ID: 1455599
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Microchip implant for positive animal identification.
    Sacco W
    Am Biotechnol Lab; 1992 Feb; 10(1):16-7. PubMed ID: 1367870
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Long-term performance of visual and electronic identification devices in dairy goats.
    Carné S; Caja G; Ghirardi JJ; Salama AA
    J Dairy Sci; 2009 Apr; 92(4):1500-11. PubMed ID: 19307631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Status of electronic identification and temperature monitoring.
    Holm DM; Araki CT
    Proc Annu Meet U S Anim Health Assoc; 1979; (83):320-35. PubMed ID: 298926
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Subcutaneous tissue reaction to polyethylene terephtalate-covered electronic identification transponders in pigs.
    Lambooij E; de Groot PH; Molenbeek RF; Gruys E
    Vet Q; 1992 Dec; 14(4):145-7. PubMed ID: 1485404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Administration of identification boluses to sheep.
    Wardrope DD
    Vet Rec; 2003 Oct; 153(14):440. PubMed ID: 14582739
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.