Minimum space requirements for cattle: An approach based on photographic records.

BACKGROUND: The space requirements for accommodating cattle during confinement are based on assessment of both the physical space occupied by the animals and that needed for essential behaviours. The aim of this study was to estimate the area (m2 ) occupied by cattle of different liveweights in the static standing (ST), recumbency (SR) and sleeping (SL) postures. METHODS: The study was conducted in Chile. The area (m2 ) occupied by 26 female beef cross cattle with liveweights between 45 and 642 kg was estimated in the ST, SR and SL postures through planimetry using overhead photographs. The allometric coefficient k value was obtained for each posture using linear regression equations from the measured weight (kg0.66 ) and area occupied. RESULTS: Less but more variable space was occupied by each individual in the ST posture compared to SR or SL posture, with clear correlations between weight and occupied area. The k values obtained were 0.014 (ST), 0.023 (SR) and 0.021 (SL), which are all less than international recommendations for the same postures. LIMITATIONS: The methodology needs refinement to reduce the distance to the object optical effect in the different postures. Further work is also needed to determine additional space requirements for behavioural needs and movements associated with each posture and change of posture, depending on the type of confinement. CONCLUSIONS: We provide a scientific basis on which to objectively establish absolute minimum static space requirements for cattle of different breeds, types, weights and anatomical conformations and calculate k values.

Do faces and body postures integrate similarly for distinct emotions, kinds of emotion and judgent dimensions? / ¿Las caras y posturas corporales se integran de forma similar para distintas emociones, las clases de emoción y dimensiones del juicio?

Faces and bodies are typically seen together in most social interactions, rendering probable that facial and bodily expressions are perceived and eventually processed simultaneously. The methodology of Information Integration Theory and Functional Measurement was used here to address the following questions: Under what rules do facial and bodily information integrate in judgments over different dimensions of so-called basic and self-conscious emotions? How does relative importance of face and body vary across emotions and judgment dimensions? Does the relative importance of face and body afford a basis for distinguishing between basic and self-conscious emotions? Three basic (happiness, anger, sadness) and two social self-conscious emotions (shame and pride) were considered in this study. Manipulated factors were 3-D realistic facial expressions (varied across 5 levels of intensity) and synthetic 3-D realistic body postures (3 levels of intensity). Different groups of participants judged expressed intensity, valence, or arousal of the combined presentations of face and body, meaning that judgment dimension was varied between-subjects. With the exception of arousal judgments, averaging was the predominant integration rule. Relative importance of face and body was found to vary as a function of judgment dimension, specific emotions and, for judgments of arousal only, type of emotion (basic versus self-conscious).

Caras y cuerpos son típicamente observados en conjunto en muchas de las interacciones sociales, haciendo probable que tanto las expresiones faciales como las expresiones corporales sean percibidas y eventualmente procesadas simultaneamente. La metodología de la Teoría de Integración de la Información y la Medición Funcional fue usada en este estúdio para contestar las siguientes preguntas: ¿bajo qué reglas son integradas las informaciones faciales y corporales en los juicios sobre diferentes dimensiones de las llamadas emociones autoconcientes?, ¿cómo la importáncia relativa de la cara y del cuerpo varían a través de las emociones y las dimensiones de los juicios? ¿La importancia relativa de la cara y del cuerpo permiten tener una base para para diferenciar entre las emociones básicas y las autoconcientes? En este estudio se consideraron tres emociones básicas (felicidad, ira y tristeza) y dos emociones autoconcientes (verguenza y orgullo). Los factores manipulados fueron las expresiones faciales realistas en modelos de 3D (variadas a través e 5 niveles de intensidad) y posiciones corporales realistas en modelos de 3D (que variaron en 3 niveles de intensidad). Diferentes grupos de participantes juzgaron la intensidad de las expresiones, la valencia, o la estimulación de las diferentes presentaciones de combinaciones de caras y cuerpos, el significado de las dimesiones del juicio fue variado entre-sujetos. Con excepción de los juicios sobre la estimulación, la regla de integración del promedio fue la predominante. La importancia relativa de la cara y del cuerpo fueron observadas al variar en función de las dimensiones del juicio, de las emociones específicas y, en el caso de los juicios de estimulación solo para un tipo de emoción (básicas versus autoconscientes).