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 *

305 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34245955)

  • 1. The effects of farming systems (organic vs. conventional) on dairy cow welfare, based on the Welfare Quality® protocol.
    Wagner K; Brinkmann J; Bergschmidt A; Renziehausen C; March S
    Animal; 2021 Aug; 15(8):100301. PubMed ID: 34245955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Assessment of welfare indicators in dairy farms offering pasture at differing levels.
    Armbrecht L; Lambertz C; Albers D; Gauly M
    Animal; 2019 Oct; 13(10):2336-2347. PubMed ID: 30917877
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Animal welfare outcomes and associated risk indicators on Austrian dairy farms: A cross-sectional study.
    Schenkenfelder J; Winckler C
    J Dairy Sci; 2021 Oct; 104(10):11091-11107. PubMed ID: 34218918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessing dairy cow welfare during the grazing and housing periods on spring-calving, pasture-based dairy farms.
    Crossley RE; Bokkers EAM; Browne N; Sugrue K; Kennedy E; de Boer IJM; Conneely M
    J Anim Sci; 2021 May; 99(5):. PubMed ID: 33758924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Relationship between herd size and measures of animal welfare on dairy cattle farms with freestall housing in Germany.
    Gieseke D; Lambertz C; Gauly M
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Aug; 101(8):7397-7411. PubMed ID: 29778480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Behavior of cows during and after peak feeding time on organic and conventional dairy farms in the United Kingdom.
    Langford FM; Rutherford KM; Sherwood L; Jack MC; Lawrence AB; Haskell MJ
    J Dairy Sci; 2011 Feb; 94(2):746-53. PubMed ID: 21257042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Assessing dairy goat welfare in intensive or semi-intensive farming conditions in Mexico.
    Silva Salas MÁ; Mondragón-Ancelmo J; Jiménez Badillo MDR; Rodríguez Licea G; Napolitano F
    J Dairy Sci; 2021 May; 104(5):6175-6184. PubMed ID: 33612208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Dairy cows welfare quality in tie-stall housing system with or without access to exercise.
    Popescu S; Borda C; Diugan EA; Spinu M; Groza IS; Sandru CD
    Acta Vet Scand; 2013 Jun; 55(1):43. PubMed ID: 23724804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effects of cubicle characteristics on animal welfare indicators in dairy cattle.
    Gieseke D; Lambertz C; Gauly M
    Animal; 2020 Sep; 14(9):1934-1942. PubMed ID: 32264993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A survey of selected animal-based measures of dairy cattle welfare in the Eastern Alps: Toward context-based thresholds.
    Zuliani A; Mair M; Kraševec M; Lora I; Brscic M; Cozzi G; Leeb C; Zupan M; Winckler C; Bovolenta S
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Feb; 101(2):1428-1436. PubMed ID: 29224861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The effects of herd size on the welfare of dairy cows in a pasture-based system using animal- and resource-based indicators.
    Beggs DS; Jongman EC; Hemsworth PH; Fisher AD
    J Dairy Sci; 2019 Apr; 102(4):3406-3420. PubMed ID: 30738685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Symposium review: Animal welfare in free-walk systems in Europe.
    Blanco-Penedo I; Ouweltjes W; Ofner-Schröck E; Brügemann K; Emanuelson U
    J Dairy Sci; 2020 Jun; 103(6):5773-5782. PubMed ID: 32089316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Description and factors of variation of the overall health score in French dairy cattle herds using the Welfare Quality(®) assessment protocol.
    Coignard M; Guatteo R; Veissier I; de Boyer des Roches A; Mounier L; Lehébel A; Bareille N
    Prev Vet Med; 2013 Nov; 112(3-4):296-308. PubMed ID: 23998636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Housing, management characteristics, and factors associated with lameness, hock lesion, and hygiene of lactating dairy cattle on Upper Midwest United States dairy farms using automatic milking systems.
    Salfer JA; Siewert JM; Endres MI
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Sep; 101(9):8586-8594. PubMed ID: 29908801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Associations between on-farm cow welfare indicators and productivity and profitability on Canadian dairies: II. On tiestall farms.
    Villettaz Robichaud M; Rushen J; de Passillé AM; Vasseur E; Haley D; Pellerin D
    J Dairy Sci; 2019 May; 102(5):4352-4363. PubMed ID: 30852008
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Applying animal-based welfare assessments on New Zealand dairy farms: feasibility and a comparison with United Kingdom data.
    Laven RA; Fabian J
    N Z Vet J; 2016 Jul; 64(4):212-7. PubMed ID: 26853816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Prevalence of lameness and leg lesions of lactating dairy cows housed in southern Brazil: Effects of housing systems.
    Costa JHC; Burnett TA; von Keyserlingk MAG; Hötzel MJ
    J Dairy Sci; 2018 Mar; 101(3):2395-2405. PubMed ID: 29274968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An assessment tool to help producers improve cow comfort on their farms.
    Vasseur E; Gibbons J; Rushen J; Pellerin D; Pajor E; Lefebvre D; de Passillé AM
    J Dairy Sci; 2015 Jan; 98(1):698-708. PubMed ID: 25465625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A survey of management practices that influence production and welfare of dairy cattle on family farms in southern Brazil.
    Costa JH; Hötzel MJ; Longo C; Balcão LF
    J Dairy Sci; 2013 Jan; 96(1):307-17. PubMed ID: 23102960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessing whether dairy cow welfare is "better" in pasture-based than in confinement-based management systems.
    Mee JF; Boyle LA
    N Z Vet J; 2020 May; 68(3):168-177. PubMed ID: 31973680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.