249 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17235033)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. Pig identification: comparison of results from injected transponders and electronic ear tags.
Marchi E; Ferri N; Comellini F
Vet Ital; 2007; 43(1):97-102. PubMed ID: 20411503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Extended field test on the use of visual ear tags and electronic boluses for the identification of different goat breeds in the United States.
Carné S; Gipson TA; Rovai M; Merkel RC; Caja G
J Anim Sci; 2009 Jul; 87(7):2419-27. PubMed ID: 19329484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Suitability of electronic mini-boluses for early identification of lambs.
Ghirardi JJ; Caja G; Flores C; Garín D; Hernández-Jover M; Bocquier F
J Anim Sci; 2007 Jan; 85(1):248-57. PubMed ID: 17179563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Read distance performance and variation of 5 low-frequency radio frequency identification panel transceiver manufacturers.
Ryan SE; Blasi DA; Anglin CO; Bryant AM; Rickard BA; Anderson MP; Fike KE
J Anim Sci; 2010 Jul; 88(7):2514-22. PubMed ID: 20407068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effects of injection position and transponder size on the performances of passive injectable transponders used for the electronic identification of cattle.
Conill C; Caja G; Nehring R; Ribó O
J Anim Sci; 2000 Dec; 78(12):3001-9. PubMed ID: 11132812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Retention of different sizes of electronic identification boluses in the forestomachs of sheep.
Ghirardi JJ; Caja G; Garín D; Hernández-Jover M; Ribó O; Casellas J
J Anim Sci; 2006 Oct; 84(10):2865-72. PubMed ID: 16971590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Technical note: Evaluation of the official identification system for pigs for sale in New South Wales.
Hernández-Jover M; Wu M; Schembri N; Holyoake PK; Toribio JA
J Anim Sci; 2008 Feb; 86(2):472-5. PubMed ID: 17940157
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Comparison of visual and electronic devices for individual identification of dromedary camels under different farming conditions.
Caja G; Díaz-Medina E; Salama AA; Salama OA; El-Shafie MH; El-Metwaly HA; Ayadi M; Aljumaah RS; Alshaikh MA; Yahyahoui MH; Seddik MM; Hammadi M; Khorchani T; Amann O; Cabrera S
J Anim Sci; 2016 Aug; 94(8):3561-3571. PubMed ID: 27695805
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Modeling the retention of rumen boluses for the electronic identification of goats.
Carné S; Caja G; Ghirardi JJ; Salama AA
J Dairy Sci; 2011 Feb; 94(2):716-26. PubMed ID: 21257040
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Traceability in the pig production chain.
Madec F; Geers R; Vesseur P; Kjeldsen N; Blaha T
Rev Sci Tech; 2001 Aug; 20(2):523-37. PubMed ID: 11548524
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
