Sex and Age Determination of Some Bones and Teeth of Domestic Cattle a Review of the Literature

• Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Size Reduction in Early European Domestic Cattle Relates to Intensification of Neolithic Herding Strategies

• Katie Manning,
• Adrian Timpson,
• Stephen Shennan,
• Enrico Crema

10

• Published: Dec 2, 2015
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141873

Figures

Abstract

Our analysis of over 28,000 osteometric measurements from fossil remains dating betwixt c. 5600 and 1500 BCE reveals a substantial reduction in body mass of 33% in Neolithic primal European domestic cattle. We investigate various plausible explanations for this phenotypic adaptation, dismissing climatic change as a causal factor, and further rejecting the hypothesis that it was caused past an increment in the proportion of smaller adult females in the population. Instead we notice some support for the hypothesis that the size decrease was driven past a demographic shift towards smaller newborns from sub-adult convenance as a result of intensifying meat production strategies during the Neolithic.

Commendation: Manning K, Timpson A, Shennan Southward, Crema E (2015) Size Reduction in Early European Domestic Cattle Relates to Intensification of Neolithic Herding Strategies. PLoS ONE 10(12): e0141873. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141873

Editor: Ron Pinhasi, University College Dublin, IRELAND

Received: July nineteen, 2015; Accepted: October 14, 2015; Published: December two, 2015

Copyright: © 2015 Manning et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Artistic Eatables Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

Data Availability: All data from the original are available from the public information repository of Academy College London. The address is http://discovery.ucl.air-conditioning.uk/1469811/. New data for this revised version are included in the two Supporting Information tables.

Funding: This enquiry was funded by the European Research Council by an Advanced Grant (# 249390) to Stephen Shennan for the EUROEVOL Project. The funders had no role in study pattern, data collection and analysis, determination to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Changes in brute torso size have been shown to correlate with various ecological factors such equally reproductive behaviour and environmental modifications including predator dynamics and rising temperatures [i–5]. All the same, whilst choice can be intense over brusque fourth dimension scales i.eastward. a few generations, its direction may vary through time, cancelling out long-term evolutionary trends [6–ix]. Accessing the sort of long-term datasets required to identify such diachronic trends, however, can be problematic due to taphonomic bias, gaps in the fossil tape, etc. [10]

Archaeozoological assemblages meanwhile offer an intermediate time scale, providing potential insight into inter-generational phenotypic change and underlying evolutionary trends. Size reduction, for instance, has long been recognised as a consequence of the domestication procedure [11–14] and several hypotheses accept been proposed to explain the phenomena, namely deterioration in pasture weather and early on weaning [fourteen], protection from predation and reduction in mobility [15].

It has been suggested that European cattle connected to reduce in size over the course of the Neolithic, Bronze Age, and pre-Roman Atomic number 26 Age [xi, xvi], and this is well documented in several regional instance studies [17–23]. Using archaeological information and more than than 28,000 osteometric measurements, our results ostend a substantial and consistent reduction in domestic cattle size throughout the Neolithic at the sub-continental scale. Nosotros approximate the evolutionary rate of body size change as a function of time, demonstrating the long-term evolutionary development of early domestic cattle. For clarity, we use the term 'evolution' to include selective breeding, by considering humans as but one of many species, thus removing the somewhat philosophically flawed distinction betwixt 'artificial' and 'natural' selection.

We consider a number of hypotheses, which accept previously been proposed to explain the observed tendency, and nosotros specifically exam two of them:

1. The reduction in adult size merely reflects an increase over time in the ratio of the smaller female person adults, as a consequence of changing herding strategies, such as an intensification of dairying practices.
2. The reduction in adult size reflects a shift in the age distribution of the cattle population towards a younger sub-adult reproduction age, causing the offspring to achieve smaller adult size due to the physiological and morphological constraints of the mother giving nativity before having reached adult body size. This miracle has been well documented in the sheep of St Kilda [2–3].

Materials and Methods

Data

This study adopts an inclusive approach to the data in society to formally test patterns in the published literature. As such we have not fabricated judgements about the accuracy of species identification or measuring process [24–25], and take simply excluded samples that researchers take identified as erroneous. In order to guarantee a minimum standardization in the measuring procedure we have applied the criterion of simply using osteometric measurements from fully fused adult remains measured co-ordinate to the von den Driesch [26] standard method. Despite potential errors in the original recording of these information, there is no reason to believe these errors would introduce a systematic bias, therefore this inclusive approach is inherently conservative since random errors in the information would simply serve to add boosted background noise to underlying trends.

Data from the British Isles were excluded, to avert the potential bias of a selective pressure favouring smaller individuals for ease of bounding main transport. Finally, osteometrics with less than ten measurements, and site phases with less than 10 osteometrics were excluded to reduce sampling racket, whilst however ensuring good skeletal, geographic and temporal representation, producing a total sample of 28,266 measurements from 152 postcranial and dental elements for Bos taurus (north = 16,568), Bos primigenius (n = 1119), Sus s. domesticus (n = 5021), Ovis aries (northward = 3394), Capra hircus (n = 714), and Domestic dog (n = 1450). These were obtained from 81 phases identified in 70 archaeological sites in central Europe (Fig i), dating from the Early Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age (c. 5600–1500 BCE). Where bachelor, bones have likewise been allocated a sex nomenclature (male person, female, and desexualize) according to the original annotator's determination in society to examine the size trend for males and females independently. We also utilise boosted published data sex tendency information and age profile information for Bos taurus. The sex trend data comprises 1340 counts of positively identified male, female and castrate bones, based on morphological criteria, from 38 site phases. The age profile data comprises relative proportions of different age groups from 116 site phases. All osteometric, chronological and age contour information were derived from the EUROEVOL database (for details on the projection see http://www.ucl.ac.united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland/euroevol/), which is publicly accessible at http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1469811/, whilst the sex tendency data are provided as an contained csv. file in the SI (S1 Table).

Transformation methods to combine metrics

Archaeological assemblages are typically characterised by but a few measurable bones, and frequently focus on a limited number of osteometrics, considerably restricting the sample size with which to statistically test hypothesised changes in animal body size. In society to overcome this problem, a number of different scaling methods take been proposed to combine different osteometrics (meet Meadow 1999 [27] for a review). Although these techniques hinder the study of shape and proportion, which can be investigated through relative differences in osteometrics [28–29], they have the major do good of generating large sample sizes that provide greater sensitivity in detecting and quantifying the size decrease as well as testing if the decrease is significant. Therefore, nosotros employ a Log Size Index (LSI [thirty, 27]), which is calculated for each osteometric by dividing the measurements by their hateful, then taking the logarithm. LSI takes into business relationship differences in scale, enabling statistical comparison between dissimilar groups, and the assemblage of different osteometrics. The hateful LSI per site phase for each species is reported in S2 Tabular array.

Chronological sequencing

We employ two dating methods for different aspects of our analyses. Firstly, in order to identify wide temporal trends we utilise a fibroid-grained resolution, with all site phases being assigned to an archaeological 'period' i.e. Early Neolithic (c. 5600–4800 BCE), Eye Neolithic (c. 4800–3500 BCE), Late Neolithic (c. 3500–2500 BCE) or Early Bronze Age (c. 2500–1500 BCE). Past using these chronological periods nosotros assess the directional size change in cattle body size, the proportion of adult females in the population, and the proportion of different age groups.

Whilst categorising information into broad archaeological periods is a useful way of identifying an underlying trend, we as well wanted to summate the evolutionary rate of phenotypic change for comparison with different species, which required greater temporal resolution. We therefore developed a method that hierarchically selects from dissimilar sources of chronological evidence. At the highest level, we use the midpoint of the chronological range published in the site report, which often integrates a multifariousness of evidence filtered through the expertise of the author, for instance incorporating Bayesian analysis of both radiocarbon and stratigraphic prove. If this was not available nosotros generated a summed probability distribution from all radiocarbon dates for each site phase with more than five radiocarbon samples (available in the EUROEVOL database), and so used the midpoint of the 95% (2-tails) conviction interval. The tertiary level used the hateful of the Gaussian date estimate for the archaeological civilisation associated with that phase [31]. Finally, if none of the above were available, we resorted to using the midpoint of the standard date range for that culture published in the literature (run into Manning et al. 2014 [31] for a list of the standard engagement ranges used).

Characterising size alter

Using an ANOVA and a Tukey'south post-hoc multiple comparison test nosotros examine the difference in the total distribution of LSI values between each of the four periods for Bos taurus (Table ane). We plot the total distribution of all LSI values for Bos taurus, across the iv periods (Fig 2). We then quantify the overall modify in cattle size through time after applying an inclusion criterion of >25 measurements per osteometric per site phase by using the mean raw measurement per osteometric for each period, which is then divided by the mean for all periods (Table 2). Nosotros refer to this every bit the proportional modify in the hateful. Whilst mean values offer little in the style of demonstrating inside period variability, they provide a useful tool for illustrating the degree of variation betwixt periods. Each osteometric was then colour coded co-ordinate to the three bone axes (length, breadth and depth), in lodge to evaluate potential allometric variation (Fig 3).

Fig 2. Full distribution and box-plot overlay of all LSI transformed measurements for Bos taurus categorized by wide chronological period.

Each measurement is jittered to reveal the distribution of the data.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141873.g002

Fig three. Bos taurus proportional change in the mean of the 20 all-time represented osteometrics coded co-ordinate to axis.

Blue lines represent breadth, ruby-red lines represent length and green lines correspond depth. The dashed line is the mean value for all measurements. The raw osteometrics and their proportional alter are listed in Tabular array 2.

https://doi.org/x.1371/journal.pone.0141873.g003

Tabular array 2. Mean measurement (in mm) per osteometric for each period, n = number of measurements per osteometric, the proportional change in the hateful between periods is shown in parentheses.

This is also averaged for breadth, length and depth measurements, and reported for each menstruation (note, Scapula GLP and Scapula LG accept been grouped with the length osteometrics according to von den Driesch's original anatomical justification, although they could arguably exist considered with the breadth osteometrics).

https://doi.org/x.1371/journal.pone.0141873.t002

Calculating the rate of phenotypic change

Using the fine-scale chronological data, we calculated evolutionary rates for all domestic species and Bos primigenius, in haldanes (h), across the period Early Neolithic to Tardily Neolithic. This was achieved by fitting a least-squares linear model of the ratio betwixt the mean LSI and the pooled standard deviation (known as the Haldane numerator) against time expressed in number of generations [32]. In order to calculate the evolutionary rate of change for each species we used the post-obit generation times: Bos taurus– 7 years [33]; Bos primigenius– seven years [34]; Ovis aries– 2 years [35]; Capra hircus– 2.5 years [36]; Sus s. domesticus– 5 years [37; Canis familiaris– 4 years [38]. The results (Fig 4 and Tabular array 3) provide a measure of absolute change expressed in standard deviations per generation, and are comparable beyond unlike species [39–40].

Estimating changes in the demographic construction of cattle herds`.

Our sex activity trend data, comprising 1340 counts of positively identified male, castrate, or female Bos taurus remains, were based on the original analysts' morphological assessment of long basic and horncores, from 38 site phases (S1 Table). Castrate counts were ignored due to poor representation since they were but present in 7 phases (18%), which may be a effect of differential recording practices rather than whatever genuine presence or absence. We then estimated the proportion of adult females during each flow using a beta distribution with a compatible prior, with the shape parameters α = count of adult females + 1, and β = count of adult males +1, to take into account incertitude in the truthful proportion when sample sizes are pocket-sized (Fig 5).

Fig five. Full distribution and box-plot overlay of all LSI transformed measurements for Bos taurus male (northward = 282) and female (n = 593) categorized past broad chronological period, revealing a synchronous trend (n = number of osteometric measurements per sex per menses).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141873.g005

At that place are a variety of techniques for determining the age-at-death of animals derived from archaeological contexts, including epiphyseal fusion, tooth eruption and wear sequences, cranial sutures and antler or horn development. Due to the varying quantification methods of these dissimilar techniques and the diversity of age groups used past different researchers, we take categorised each of the 116 site phases into either 'predominantly sub-adults (1–3 years)' or non (all other historic period groups, including no age trend, neonates, juveniles (1–12 months) and adults (>3 years). The key stardom is between juveniles who are likewise young to reproduce, sub-adults who are morphologically still immature but are able to reproduce, and adults who have reached maturity, have fully fused bones, and contribute to the osteometric data. These categories were assigned based either on the general trend observed by the original annotator or past binning the raw count information provided in original reports into the corresponding age brackets of each category. The data were and then used in two distinct analyses in gild to investigate our second hypothesis. Firstly, we counted the number of site phases in each broad temporal period that comprised predominantly 'sub-adult' and 'other'. The change over fourth dimension was tested for significance using a Chi-squared test. Furthermore, nosotros used these counts as the shape parameters in a beta distribution in guild to generate estimates of the proportion of sub-adults in the population, allowing for the dubiety of pocket-sized sample sizes (Fig 6).

Fig half-dozen. Top: LSI for all LSI transformed measurements (each blueish dot) for adult Bos taurus; horizontal jittering is just to aid viewing.

Red bar indicates the median. Bottom: relative proportion of site phases with predominantly sub-adult remains over fourth dimension. Sample sizes shown are the total number of site phases in each period. Red dots are random samples from each beta distribution, and are merely to help viewing the incertitude in the proportion estimates. Black bars indicate the 75% highest posterior density.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141873.g006

Results

Directional size change in cattle torso mass

Fig two and Fig 3 illustrate a articulate directionality in size decrease for Neolithic cattle, with an apparent uptick towards the beginning of the Early Bronze Age. Results from the Tukey examination demonstrate that Bos taurus LSI are significantly different between all periods (p<0.00001), with a full difference in the mean LSI between the Early and Late Neolithic of -0.0497 (Table one).

Fig iii and Table 2 show all twenty Bos taurus osteometrics with more than than 25 measurements per period, revealing a synchronous subtract between the Early and Late Neolithic of 12.vi% (mean) varying betwixt 5.3% and 19.ii% size subtract. This tendency appears to slightly contrary towards the Early Bronze Age as some osteometrics evidence an increase (max = 14.8%), whilst others go on to decrease (max = 3.4%). On average this gives an overall increase of two.8%, although without information from subsequent Bronze Age periods it is unclear whether this is the start of a directional upward trend.

Each osteometric is i-dimensional, however both mass and size (volume) are proportional to the cube of these metrics, since they are 3-dimensional. Therefore an average linear reduction of 12.6% equates to 1 - (1–0.126)ⁱⁱⁱ, giving a reduction in size and mass of 33.two%. This assumes the shape of cattle remained approximately similar, which is supported past separate calculations for mean latitude reduction (32.9%) and mean length reduction (32.4%). However we were also able to guess absolute limits in the size subtract given the total volume must be a function of the combination of linear osteometrics. It is not required for this function to be known since the total decrease must be greater than the smallest linear decrease cubed, and also smaller than the greatest linear subtract cubed. This provides absolute limits of 15.one% to 47.2%.

Although analysis of the allometric changes characterising Neolithic cattle populations is beyond the scope of this paper, the separation of breadth, length and depth measurements provide some indication of changes in trunk proportions over time and would clearly do good from a more detailed study that takes into account the effects of sexual dimorphism, too as regional complexities in os allometry.

Rates of Phenotypic change

Since the trend of size reduction during the Neolithic appears to slightly reverse at the Early Bronze Historic period, the Haldane evolutionary rate was only calculated across the Neolithic using the data at the scale of individual phases (Tabular array iii; Fig 4). Only Bos taurus, and no other domestic taxa, showed a significant modify through time (-two.8±0.four haldanes ten x³, p<0.00001, number of phases = 70). Therefore, whilst other species may take undergone more regionally and temporally sensitive changes in size, they do not demonstrate the same scale of directional size alter observed in cattle.

Demographic changes to cattle herds

Using the independent sexual practice data as shape parameters in a beta distribution, we estimated the most likely proportion of adult females in each menses, and the 95% confidence intervals to reverberate the doubt from small samples sizes. These results bear witness a slight decrease in the proportion of developed females from 0.seventy (95% HPD = 0.65–0.75) during the Early Neolithic to 0.62 (95% HPD = 0.58–0.65) by the Late Neolithic (Table four). The lack of overlap between the 95% HPD indicates a statistically significant decrease in the proportion of adult females, corroborated past a Chi-squared exam (p = 0.0075).

Table 4. Raw counts of developed male person and adult female basic identified according to morphological criteria (n = number of phases).

The proportion values and 95% CI are calculated from the beta distribution.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141873.t004

Furthermore an assessment of LSI measurements, which had been positively identified as male (northward = 282) or female person (n = 593) also shows that both sexes undergo synchronous size change. T-tests evidence a decrease of 0.035 in the mean LSI of males between the Early and Late Neolithic (p < 0.00001), and in females an fifty-fifty greater decrease of 0.053 (p < 0.00001) beyond the same period (Fig v). The results of our analysis therefore contradict the hypothesis that the reduction in cattle size was attributable to an increment in the proportion of adult females in the overall population.

Our analysis of the age profile data shows an increase in the proportion of sub-adults, with the proportion of site phases with predominantly sub-adult remains rising from6% during the Early Neolithic to 15% in the Heart Neolithic and 31% in the Late Neolithic, which is synchronous with the refuse in average adult cattle size. The proportion of site phases with predominantly sub-developed remains so decreases during the Early Bronze Age, synchronous with the uptick in cattle size (Fig 6). Chi-squared examination shows a statistically pregnant difference in the proportion of site phases with predominantly sub-adult remains, between the Early and Late Neolithic (p = 0.0132).

Discussion

Summary of results

Information technology has long been recognised that European domestic cattle reduced in size over the course of the Neolithic, and previous studies have demonstrated this trend at different regional and chronological scales e.g. due north/central Europe [11, xvi], the Paris Bowl [21], Poland [22] and Switzerland [23]. Our analysis evaluates size modify at a much broader temporal and spatial scale, and our results strongly support this trend, demonstrating a substantial reduction in domestic cattle size but non any other domestic species during the European Neolithic. This may appear to contradict contempo studies, which have demonstrated a size reduction in other taxa, for example pig [41], although this credible discrepancy is likely due to the spatial and temporal scale of the dissimilar analyses. Whilst other domestic taxa may accept undergone regional or discontinuous variation in body size, they do not exhibit the same sort of long-term and geographically widespread trend observed in Bos taurus. This suggests that only cattle were subject to the sort of consistent evolutionary pressure that resulted in such a directional phenotypic alter.

Our results suggest a substantial reduction in torso mass of c. 33% in only 3100 years. This is supported by the high evolutionary rate estimated from our data (-ii.eight±0.four haldanes ten 10ⁱⁱⁱ), which tin can exist fairly compared with Purugganan and Fuller's [32] haldane rate of change for plant domestication traits. They report a charge per unit of i.3±0.2 haldanes x 10³ for barley (Hordeum vulgare) and 0.9±0.two for einkorn wheat (Triticum monococcum), which is of the aforementioned order of magnitude as our results and suggests a strong selective pressure acting on Neolithic cattle.

A number of different hypotheses take been proposed to explain a reduction in livestock body size, which include: a reduction in mobility, reduced nutritional levels [sixteen], and a reduction in sexual dimorphism, which is a well-studied consequence of the domestication process [42–43]. In the post-obit department nosotros rule out certain proposed causal factors and test ii specific hypotheses, namely an increase in the proportion of the smaller females, and a subtract in the reproduction age.

Ruling out possible causes: Domestication, introgression and climate change

Size reduction and the evolution of other pedomorphic or neotenic features have long been recognised equally consequences of the domestication process [44–46, 42]. Nonetheless, the core package of domestic animals (cattle, sheep, goat, and pigs) were domesticated in the northern Levant during the 10^th-nine^th millennia BCE [43, 46] and subsequently exported to Europe [47]. Hence the size reduction reported here post-dates the domestication process by more than 3000 years, suggesting a phenotypic adaptation singled-out from those associated with domestication. An important cause of initial size reduction during domestication, for example, is a decrease in sexual dimorphism amongst early domesticates. Whilst this has been clearly demonstrated in Early Neolithic contexts in the Eye Euphrates [43], it is notwithstanding possible that the process of decreasing sexual dimorphism continued equally domestic cattle were more intensively exploited over the course of the Neolithic. Still, this does non appear to accept driven the size reduction observed in early on European cattle, as our results bear witness a significant parallel size change in both male person and female person domestic cattle. A subtract in sexual dimorphism over the course of the Neolithic would result in the distribution of the two sexes condign more than like by the Late Neolithic, merely our results evidence that this sexual dimorphism was maintained. Furthermore, the size reduction associated with proto-domestication is also observed in Near Eastern sheep [xiii] caprine animal [48] and pigs [12, 49–50], and yet in Europe these species practice not undergo a directional size decrease over the class of the Neolithic. Therefore our results suggest that the observed size subtract in Neolithic cattle was distinct from the initial procedure of domestication.

In some circumstances introgression with wild cattle may offer some explanation for a size change. Male aurochs were much larger than domestic bulls, and therefore introgression provides a potential caption for the opposite trend of a size increase. Fifty-fifty if introgression was initially prevalent and became less mutual over time, nosotros would expect to run across the rate of size increase gradually retard, until the size remained approximately abiding through time (subject to random drift), but certainly not a size decrease. Furthermore, recent aDNA work corroborates the importation of Near Eastern cattle stock [51], and provides little testify for a genetic contribution of native aurochs to the domestic gene puddle [52–53].

Another possible explanation is that an exogenous force, such as climate, was the underlying cause of the observed size reduction. Bergmann's dominion [54] for example, predicts that populations living in warmer environments will contain smaller individuals than those from a colder environment. Even so, nosotros would wait an exogenous force, such as climate to have a similar result on all species, both domestic and wild. Our analysis shows the directional size reduction simply affected cattle, and therefore we reject climate as a causal factor.

So, why did cattle undergo such a substantial size reduction?

Given the expectation that farmers might meliorate meat yields by increasing the torso mass of their livestock, or increase the number of larger males for traction, information technology is surprising to detect such a dramatic reduction in boilerplate body mass. Indeed, pre-industrial European cattle underwent at least one well-documented size increase during the initial menses of the Roman conquest [55–59]. This is by and large interpreted as a reflection of cattle improvement, linked either to an intensification of arable agriculture, in which more draft oxen were required [57], or the demand for provisioning an increasingly consumer based economic system [threescore]. Why Neolithic farmers apparently bred smaller cattle, only not their other domestic animals, is therefore an intriguing puzzle.

Hypothesis 1: Increase in the proportion of adult females.

Assuming no intrinsic modify in average cattle size through fourth dimension, an increase in the proportion of the smaller adult females in the domestic cattle population might explicate our observed information, and provide evidence for a alter in herding strategies. For case, where milk production is the priority, a herder's objective will be to ensure a large supply of lactating developed females. Hence, young males will oft be culled once the milk yield is assured, which in unimproved African breeds ranges from 139–259 days [61], leading to a higher rate of female survival through adulthood. This sort of 'post-lactation' slaughter pinnacle has been identified in the mortality profile of Neolithic European cattle (e.g. [62–63]). Stable nitrogen isotopic analyses of bone and dentine collagen in modern and ancient samples furthermore suggests that Neolithic cattle were beingness slaughtered at the end of the mothers lactation menses, around the calves weaning age, to assist the milk let-down reflex [63–65]. Our sex ratio information does not support an increase in the survival charge per unit of adult females, in fact showing an overall decrease in the proportion of adult females during the Belatedly Neolithic. Analysis using the positively identified male and female osteometric measurements also contradicts this hypothesis by showing that both sexes underwent a size reduction, indicating a population-level phenotypic accommodation, rather than simply a shift in the sexual activity ratio. Hence, the observed size diminution does not appear to be the result of an increase in the proportion of adult females in the population, although this does not negate dairying practices, nor does it refute a modify in the rate of intensification of dairying over time.

Hypothesis 2: An increment in the proportion of reproductive sub-adults in the population resulted in the offspring achieving smaller adult size.

The age and time of year at which animals give nascency tin can accept a significant impact on the size of their offspring. Some species, for example domestic cows and pigs, do not feel seasonal anoestrus and tin can therefore breed throughout the year, although their reproductive performance will ultimately be influenced by nutritional factors [66]. Equally a consequence, herders can more easily attune the reproductive strategy of these animals in lodge to accommodate changes in the availability of forage or in response to other ecology effects.

Our analysis of the demographic construction of cattle herds reveals a significant increment in the proportion of sub-adults in the population during the Neolithic, synchronous with the decrease in developed size. Because the rate of torso growth significantly slows at maturity (3–four years in cattle), a strategy that maximises meat product will avert retaining surplus stock beyond the sub-adult stage [67]. Consequently, in that location would be fewer reproductive adults and a greater proportion of reproductive sub-adults, resulting in potential lower birth weights due to the physiological and morphological constraints of giving birth before having reached adult body size [2–3].

Intensifying meat production is also suggested by an increase in the relative proportions of domestic hog over fourth dimension [68], which is typically associated with an intensification of animate being production [69]. Cattle, meanwhile, clearly play a central role in the Neolithic livestock economy of Central and northwest Europe [lxx], and are consistently well represented throughout the Neolithic and Early on Bronze Historic period suggesting that any indication of intensification is likely to exist observed in another aspect of their herding regime eastward.one thousand. in body mass, milk production etc. We propose that the credible increase in the proportion of sub-adults, and the turn down in cattle trunk mass are indicative of an underlying alter in the herding economy over fourth dimension, which has a greater emphasis on meat productivity. Recent studies [71–72], have identified an increment in human being population levels post-obit the introduction of agronomics in the local Early Neolithic followed past a refuse towards the end of the Middle Neolithic, and in some cases a secondary population increase during the subsequently Neolithic or Early on Bronze Age. This blast-bust pattern in regional population levels would accept had major implications for the agro-pastoral systems of the time, leading to changes in the demands on fauna productivity and input of labour, which may accept unintentionally led to the size decrease observed here in Neolithic cattle.

Some other factor, which we accept not formally addressed here, is how these broad-scale changes in herding strategies relate to other forms of environmental modification, such every bit deteriorating pasture atmospheric condition. The practice of leafage foddering, as a means of providing dietary compensation has been well documented at Middle Neolithic sites in Switzerland and Denmark [73–74], the Paris Basin [75], and in southern France [76], and may be symptomatic of a change in the availability of nutrient-rich pasture. Similarly, evidence for slash-and-burn cultivation in the Tardily Neolithic in primal Europe [77], would have allowed agriculture to expand into less suitable regions, increasing the availability of lower-quality feed from fallow grazing. As body mass is correlated with provender requirements due to calf weight beingness negatively affected by low food intake in the gestating parent [78], one possible direction for further research would be to investigate links between changing cattle size, regional population pressures and deteriorating pasture conditions.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the exact cause of the observed size subtract remains a puzzle, open to further investigation, requiring loftier-resolution archaeological and palaeoenvironmental data, such equally detailed age-at-expiry profiles, and isotopic data to assess changes in birth seasonality (e.g. [79]). Nonetheless, our analysis provides compelling confirmation of a continental-wide postal service-domestication phenotypic accommodation, showing a size reduction of c.33% in Neolithic domestic cattle. Importantly, this trend is not observed in other domestic species, which may be due to the greater input of labour required in cattle, or a shift in their differential social status, i.e. from being a predominantly prestige resource during the Early on Neolithic to a purely economical resources by the end of the Neolithic. Furthermore, we provide evidence of broad scale changes in the cattle herding strategies of Neolithic farmers, particularly an increase in the number of sub-adults in the expiry aggregation, which may be related to intensifying meat production. This occurs in parallel with an increase in the exploitation of other high meat yielding animals, such every bit the domestic pig, and could reflect a class of intensification driven by college human being populations levels.

Supporting Information

Acknowledgments

This research was funded past the European Enquiry Council past an Advanced Grant (# 249390) to Stephen Shennan for the EUROEVOL Project. We are grateful to Eva Fairnell and Rebecca Rennell for assistance with the data input, and to all those who provided source information, to Sue Colledge for her insights on soil productivity and pasture weather, and to Mark Grand Thomas for his useful statistical advice.

Writer Contributions

Analyzed the data: KM AT EC. Wrote the paper: KM AT SS EC.

References

1. 1. Garel 1000, Cugnasse JM, Maillard D, Gaillard JM, Hewison MAJ, Dubray D. Selective harvesting and habitat loss produce long-term life history changes in a mouflon population. Ecol. Appl. 2007;17:1607–1618. pmid:17913127
   • View Commodity
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
2. two. Ozgul A, Tuljapurkar S, Benton TG, Pemberton JM, Clutton-Brock Thursday, Coulson T. The dynamics of phenotypic change and the shrinking sheep of St Kilda. Scientific discipline 2009;325: 464–467. pmid:19574350
   • View Commodity
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
3. 3. Ozgul A, Childs DZ, Oli MK, Armitage KB, Blumstein DT, Olson LE, et al. Coupled dynamics of body mass and population growth in response to environmental change. Nature 2010;466: 482–487. pmid:20651690
   • View Commodity
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
4. 4. Gardner JL, Peters A, Kearney MR, Joseph L, Heinsohn R. Declining body size: a third universal response to warming? Trends Ecol. Evol. 2011;26, six: 285–291. pmid:21470708
   • View Article
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
5. 5. Giroux MA, Tremblay JP, Anouk Simard Chiliad, Yoccoz NG, Côté SD. Forage-mediated density and climate effects on torso mass in a temperate plant eater: a mechanistic approach. Ecology 2014; 95:1332–1340. pmid:25000764
   • View Article
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
6. 6. Gingerich PD. Rates of development on the time scale of the evolutionary process. Genetica 2001;112–113: 127–144. pmid:11838762
   • View Article
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
7. vii. Kinnison MT, Hendry NG. The pace of modern life II: from rates of contemporary microevolution to pattern and process. Genetica 2001;112–113, 145–164.
   • View Article
   • Google Scholar
8. viii. Grant PR, Grant BR. Unpredictable evolution in a xxx-year report of Darwin's finches. Science 2002; 296: 707–711. pmid:11976447
   • View Article
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
9. 9. Estes S, Arnold SJ. Resolving the paradox of stasis: models with stabilizing selection explain evolutionary departure on all timescales. Am. Nat. 2007;169: 227–244. pmid:17211806
   • View Commodity
   • PubMed/NCBI
   • Google Scholar
10. 10. Riesberg LH, Widmer A, Michele Arntz A, Shush JM. Directional selection is the primary cause of phenotypic diversification. PNAS 2002; 99,nineteen: 12242–12245. pmid:12221290
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
11. xi. Boessneck J, Von Den Driesch A, Meyer-Lemppenau U & Wechsler Von Ohlen E. Dice Tierknochenfunde aud dem Oppidum von Manching. Wiesbaden: Die Ausgrabungen in Manching half dozen; 1971.
12. 12. Bökönyi S. History of domestic animals in cardinal and eastern Europe. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó; 1974.
13. 13. Uerpmann HP. Metrical analysis of faunal remains from the Center East. In Zeder M, Meadow R, editors. Approaches to faunal analysis in the Middle Eastward. Peabody Museum Bulletin i. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1978. pp. 41–45
14. 14. Meadow RH. Osteological prove for the process of animal domestication. In: Clutton-Brock J. editor. The walking larder: Patterns of domestication, pastoralism, and predation. Unwin Hyman: London. 1989. pp. 80–90.
15. 15. Zohary D, Tchernov Eastward, Horwitz LK. The role of unconscious choice in the domestication of sheep and goats. J. Zool. 1998; 245: 129–135.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
16. sixteen. Boessneck J, Von Den Driesch A. Die Tierknochenfunde aus der Neolithischen Siedlung auf dem Fikirtepe bei Madiky am Marmarameer. München: Institut für Palaeoanatomie, Domestikationsforschung und Geschichte der Tiermedizin der Universität München; 1978.
17. 17. Ijzereef GF. Bronze Age animal bones from Bovenkarspel. The earthworks at Het Valkje. Nederlanse oudheden x. Projection Noord-Kingdom of the netherlands 1. Amersfoort: ROB; 1981.
18. 18. Méniel P. Contribution à 50'histoire de l'élevage en Picardie du Néolithique à la fin de l'âge du Fer. Amiens: Revue Archéologique de Picardie; 1984.
19. 19. Poplin F, Poulain T, Méniel P, Vigne JD, Geddes D, Helmer D. Les débuts de l'élevage en France. In Demoule JP, Guilaine J, editors. Le néolithique de la France. Hommage à 1000. Bailloud. Paris: Picard; 1986. p. 37–51.
20. 20. Vigne JD. Les Mammifères post-glaciaires de Corse, étude Archéozoologique (XXVIe supplement aé Gallia Préhistoire). Paris: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; 1988.
21. 21. Tresset A. Early husbandry in Atlantic areas. Animal introductions, diffusion of techniques and native acculturation at the due north-western margin of Europe. In Henderson J, editor. The Prehistory and early History of Atlantic Europe. British Archaeological Reports. International Series; 2000. pp. 17–32
22. 22. Lasota-Moskalewska A. Morphotic changes of domestic cattle skeleton from the Nelithic age to the showtime of the Iron Age. Wiadomści Archeologiczne 1980;45: 119–167.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
23. 23. Schibler J, Schlumbaum A. Geschichte und wirtschaftliche Bedeutung des Hausrindes (Bos taurus L.) in der Schweiz von der Jungsteinzeit bis ins fruhe Mittrlalter. Schweiz Arch Tierh. 2007;149: 23–9. pmid:17243447
    • View Commodity
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
24. 24. Lyman RL, VanPool TL. Metric information in archaeology: a study of intra-annotator and inter-analyst variation. Am. Antiq. 2009;74: 485–504.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
25. 25. Breslawski RP, Byers DA. Assessing measurement error in paleozoological osteometrics with bison remains. J. Curvation. Sci. 2015;53: 235–242.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
26. 26. Von den Driesch A. A guide to the measurement of animate being bones from archaeological sites. Cambridge, Mass: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology; 1976.
27. 27. Meadow RH. The use of size alphabetize scaling techniques for enquiry on archaezoological collections from the Middle East. In: Historia Animalium ex Ossibus. Festschrift für Angela von den Driesch zum 65. Geburtsta. Internationale Archäologie, Bd 8: Studia honoraria. Rahden, Westfalia: Verlag Marie Leidorf; 1999. pp. 285–300
28. 28. Vigne JD, Helmer D, Peters J. New archaeozoological approaches to trace the outset steps of animal domestication: general presentation, reflections and proposals. In Vigne JD, Helmer D, Peters J, editors. First steps of animal domestication. New archaeozoological approaches. Oxford: Oxbow books; 2005. pp.ane–16.
29. 29. Evin A, Cucchi T, Cardini A, Vidarsdottir United states of america, Larson G, Dobney K. The long and winding road: identifying pig domestication through molar size and shape. J. Archaeol. Sci. 2013;40: 735–743
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
30. thirty. Simpson GG, Roe A, Lewontin RC. Quantitative Zoology, revised edition. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World; 1960.
31. 31. Manning Chiliad, Timpson A, Colledge S, Crema E, Edinborough K, Kerig T, et al. The chronology of culture: a comparative cess of European Neolithic dating approaches. Antiquity 2014; 88: 1065–1080.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
32. 32. Purugganan Doctor, Fuller DQ. Archaeological data reveal slow rates of evolution during plant domestication. Development 2010; 65(1): 171–183.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
33. 33. Gautier Yard, Faraut T, Moazami-Goudarzi Grand, Navratil 5. Foglio M, Grohs C, et al. Genetic and haplotypic structure in 144 European and African cattle breeds. Genetics 2007; 177: 1059–1070. pmid:17720924
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
34. 34. Lari Thousand, Rizzi E, Mona S, Corti 1000, Catalano Grand, Chen K, et al. The consummate mitochondrial genome of an xi,450 twelvemonth old aurochsen (Bos primigenius) from Cardinal Italy. Evol. Biol. 2011;11: 32.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
35. 35. Kaeuffer R, Coltman DW, Chapuis JL, Pontier D, Réale D. Unexpected heterozygosity in an island mouflon population founded by a single pair of individuals. Proc. B. Soc. B 2008; 274, 1609: 527–533.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
36. 36. Luikart G, Gielly L, Excoffier L, Vigne JD, Bouvet J, Taberlet P. Multiple maternal origins and weak phylogeographic structure in domestic goats. PNAS 2001; 98(ten): 5927–5932 pmid:11344314
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
37. 37. Groenen MAM, Archibald AL, Uenishi H, Tuggle CK, Takeuchi Y, Rothschild MF, et al. Analyses of grunter genomes provide insight into porcine demography and evolution. Nature 2012; 491: 393–398. pmid:23151582
    • View Commodity
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
38. 38. Sacks BN, Brown SK, Stephens D, Pederson NC, Wu JT, Berry O. Y Chromosome analysis of dingoes and Southeast Asian hamlet dogs suggests a Neolithic continental expansion from Southeast Asia followed by multiple Austronesian dispersals. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2013; thirty(five): 1103–1118. pmid:23408799
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
39. 39. Haldane JBS. The rate of mutation of man genes. Hereditas 1949; 35(1): 267–273.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
40. 40. Hendry AP, Nosil P, Riesberg LH. The speed of ecological speciation. Funct. Ecol. 2007; 21(iii): 455–464. pmid:19096732
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
41. 41. Rowley-Conwy P, Gourichon L, Helmer D, Vigne JD. Early domestic animals in Italian republic, Istria, the Tyrrhenian Islands and southern French republic. In Colledge S, Conolly J, Dobney K, Manning G, Shennan S, editors. The Origins and Spread of Domestic Animals in Southwest Asia and Europe. Walnut Creek: Leftcoast Press. 2013. pp. 161–194.
42. 42. Trut Fifty, Osinka I, Kharlamova A. Animal evolution during domestication: the domesticated play a joke on equally a model. Bioessays 2009; 31(iii): 349–360. pmid:19260016
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
43. 43. Helmer D, Gourichon L, Monchot H, Peters J, Saña-Segui M. Identifying early on domestic cattle from prepottery Neolithic sites on the centre Euphrates using sexual dimorphism. In: Vigne JD, Peters J, Helmer D, editors. The Showtime Steps of Animal Domestication. Oxford: Oxbow Books; 2005. pp 86–95.
44. 44. Bökönyi S. Archeological problems and methods of recognizing animal domestication. In: Ucko PJ & Dimbleby GW. The domestication and exploitation of plants and animals. London: Duckworth. 1969. pp. 219–229.
45. 45. Toll EO. Behavioral aspects of brute domestication. Q. Rev. Biol. 1984;59: 1–32.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
46. 46. Peters J, Helmer D, von den Driesch A, Saña Segui M. Early Animate being Husbandry in the Northern Levant. Paléorient 1999; 25, ii: 27–48.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
47. 47. Colledge S, Conolly J, Dobney K, Manning K, Shennan Due south, editors. The Origins and Spread of Domestic Animals in Western asia and Europe. Walnut Creek: Leftcoast Press; 2013.
48. 48. Meadow RH. Fauna domestication in the Middle East: A view from the eastern margin. In Clutton-Brock J, Grigson C, editors. Animals and archeology, volume iii: Early herders and their flocks. BAR International Serial. Oxford: Archaeopress; 1984. pp. 309–337.
49. 49. Hongo H, Meadow R. Faunal remains from Prepottery Neolithic levels at Çayönü, southeastern Turkey: a preliminary report focusing on pigs (Sus sp.). In Marshkour M, Choyke AM, Buitenhuis H, Poplin F, editors. Archaeozoology of Southwest Asia 4. Groningen: ARC-Publications; 2000. pp. 121–140.
50. 50. Albarella U, Dobney M, Rowley-Conwy P. The domestication of the pig (Sus scrofa): new challenges—and approaches. In Zeder One thousand, Bradley D, Emshwiller East, Smith B, editors. Documenting Domestication: new genetic and archaeological paradigms. Berkeley: University of California Printing; 2006. pp.209–27.
51. 51. Bollongino R, Burger J, Powell A, Mashkour M, Vigne J- D, Thomas MG. Modern Taurine Cattle Descended from Modest Number of Near-Eastern Founders. Mol. Biol. Evol. Letter 2012: 29(9):2101–2104.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
52. 52. Edwards CJ, Bollongino R, Scheu A, Chamberlain A, Tresset A, Vigne JD, et al. Mitochondrial Dna assay shows a Most Eastern Neolithic origin for domestic cattle and no indication of domestication of European aurochs. Proc. R. Soc. B, 2007;274: 1616 1377–1385.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
53. 53. Bollongino R, Elsner J, Vigne JD, Burger J. Y-SNPs exercise not point hybridization between European aurochs and domestic cattle. PlosOne 2008;3(10) e3418.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
54. 54. Bergmann C. Über die Verhältnisse der Wärmeökonomie der Thiere zu ihrer Grösse. Göttinger Studien 1847; 3(1): 595–708.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
55. 55. Audoin-Rouzeau F. La taille des animaux d'élevage é l'époque romaine et leur exportation. In Chevallier R, editor. Homme et animal dans l'antiquité romaine, Actes du colloque de nantes 1991. Tours: Heart de Recherche. 1995. pp. 79–100.
56. 56. Schlumbaum A, Stopp B, Breuer Grand, Rehazek A, Blatter R, Turgay M, et al. Combining archaeozoology and molecular genetics: the reason backside the changes in cattle size between 150BC and 700AD in Northern Switzerland. Antiquity 2003;77, 298: Project Gallery.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
57. 57. Albarella U, Johnstone C, Vickers Grand. 2008. The development of creature husbandry from the belatedly Fe Age to the end of the Roman period: a example study from southward-east Britain. J. Archaeol. Sci. 2008; xx: 1–21.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
58. 58. MacKinnon M. Cattle "breed" variation and comeback in Roman Italy: connecting the zooarchaeological and aboriginal textual evidence. World Archaeol. 2010; 42(one): 55–73.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
59. 59. Colominas L, Schlumbaum A, Saña Thou. The touch on of the Roman Empire on animal husbandry practices: study of the changes in cattle morphology in the north-east of the Iberian Peninsula through osteometric and ancient DNA analyses. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 2014; half-dozen: i–16.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
60. 60. Luff RM. Animal bones from excavations in Colchester, 1971–85. Colch. Archaeol. Rep. 12. Colchester: Colchester Archaeological Trust Ltd; 1993.
61. 61. Dahl G, Hjort A. Having herds: Pastoral herd growth and household economy. Stockholm Studies in Social Anthropology 2. Department of Social Anthropology, University of Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden; 1976.
62. 62. Tresset A. Le rôle des relations homme-beast dans l' évolution économique et culturelle des sociétés des Ve-IVe millénaires en Bassin parisien: Approche ethno-zootechnique fondée sur les ossements animaus. PhD thesis, Université Paris-I Panthéon-Sorbonne. 1996.
63. 63. Gillis R, Bréhard S, Bălăşescu A, Ughetto-Monfrin J, Popovici J, Vigne JD, et al. Sophisticated cattle dairy husbandry at Borduşani-Popină (Romania, fifth millennium BC): the prove from complementary assay of mortality profiles and stable isotopes. Globe Archaeol. 2014; 45:3: 447–472.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
64. 64. Balasse M. Keeping the young alive to stimulate milk production? Differences between cattle and minor stock. Anthropozoologica 2003; 37: 3–37.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
65. 65. Balasse Grand, Tresset A. Early weaning of Neolithic domestic cattle (Bercy, French republic) revealed past intra-molar variation in Nitrogen isotope ratios. J. Curvation. Sci. 2002; 29: 853–9.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
66. 66. Reinhardt C, Reinhardt A, Reinhardt V. Social behavior and reproductive performance in semi-wild Scottish Highland cattle. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1986; fifteen: 125–136.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
67. 67. Payne Southward. Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: The mandibles from Aşvan Kale. Anatol. Stud. 1973; 23: 281–303. DOI: https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3642547
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
68. 68. Schibler J. 2013. Zooarchaeological data from Late Mesolithic and Neolithic sites in Switzerland. In Colledge S, Conolly J, Dobney One thousand, Manning Chiliad, Shennan Due south, editors. The Origins and Spread of Domestic Animals in Western asia and Europe. Walnut Creek: Leftcoast Press. 2013. pp. 253–269.
69. 69. Fraser DG. 2005. Creature welfare and the intensification of brute product: an alternative interpretation (Vol. 2). Food & Agriculture Organisation
70. 70. Manning K, Downey SS, Colledge S, Conolly J, Stopp B, Dobney Grand, et al. 2013. The origins and spread of stock-keeping: the role of cultural and ecology influences on early Neolithic animal exploitation in Europe. Antiquity 87 (338): 1046–1059. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00049851
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
71. 71. Shennan Southward, Downey SS, Timpson A, Edinborough K, Colledge S, Kerig T, et al. Regional population plummet followed initial agriculture booms in mid-Holocene Europe. Nat. Commun. 2013; 4: 2486. pmid:24084891
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
72. 72. Timpson A, Colledge South, Crema Eastward, Edinborough Yard, Kerig T, Manning K, et al. Reconstructing regional demographies of the European Neolithic using 'dates as information': a new case-report using an improved method. J. Arch. Sci. 2014; 52: 549–557.
    • View Commodity
    • Google Scholar
73. 73. Rasmussen P. Leafage foddering in the earliest Neolithic agriculture. Evidence from Switzerland and Kingdom of denmark. Acta Archaeol. 1989; 60: 71–85.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
74. 74. Akeret Ö, Rentzel P. Micromorphology and institute macrofossil assay of cattle dung from the Neolithic lake shore settlement of Arbon Bleiche 3. Geoarchaeology 2001; 16(6): 687–700.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
75. 75. Balasse M, Boury L, Ughetto-Monfrin J, Tresset A. Stable isotope insights (δ ¹⁸ O, δ ¹³C) into cattle and sheep husbandry at Bercy (Paris, France, iv^th millennium BC): birth, seasonality and winter leaf foddering. Environ. Archaeol. 2012; 17(1): 29–44.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
76. 76. Delhon C, Martin 50, Argant J, Thiébault South. Shepherds and plants in the Alps: multi-proxy archaeobotanical analysis of Neolithic dung from La Grande Rivoire' (Isère, France). J. Arch. Sci. 2008; 35: 89–97.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar
77. 77. Rösch Thou. Land apply and food production in Central Europe from the Neolithic to the Medieval period: Change of landscape, soils and agricultural systems according to archaeobotanical data. In Kerig T, Zimmerman A, editors. Economic Archæology: From structure to performance in European Archaeology. Bonn: Habelt; 2013. pp. 109–128.
78. 78. Martin JL, Vonnahme KA, Adams DC, Lardy GP, Funston RN. Effects of dam nutrition on growth and reproductive operation of heifer calves. J. Anim. Sci. 2007; 85: 841–847. pmid:17085735
    • View Article
    • PubMed/NCBI
    • Google Scholar
79. 79. Balasse M, Tresset A. Environmental constraints on the reproductive activeness of domestic sheep and cattle: what breadth for the herder? Anthropozoologica 2007; 42(two): 71–88.
    • View Article
    • Google Scholar

smithcomman.blogspot.com

Source: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0141873

Share this post