Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 315

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Stocking Density and Feed Barrier Design Affect the Feeding and Social Behavior of Dairy Cattle

Open access
Huzzey, J.M., DeVries, T.J., Valois, P., von Keyserlingk, M.A.G.·2006·Journal of Dairy Science

Abstract

The objectives of this study were to: 1) evaluate how stocking density at the feed bunk affects feeding and social behavior of dairy cows; and 2) determine if this effect is further influenced by the type of feed barrier used. Thirty-six lactating Holstein cows, allotted to 4 groups, were subjected to each of 4 stocking density treatments and 2 feed barrier treatments. Initially, 2 groups were assigned to a headlock barrier, and 2 groups to a post-and-rail barrier. Each group was then exposed to 4 stocking density treatments (0.81, 0.61, 0.41, and 0.21 m/cow, corresponding to 1.33, 1.00, 0.67, and 0.33 headlocks/cow), in 4 successive 10-d treatment periods. After these periods, the feed barriers were switched between groups and the 4 stocking density treatments were readministered. Time-lapse video was used to quantify feeding, standing, and aggressive behavior at the feed bunk. Daily feeding times were greater and duration of inactive standing in the feeding area was less when using a post-and-rail compared with a headlock feed barrier. Feeding time decreased and inactive standing increased for both barrier designs as stocking density increased at the feed bunk. Cows were displaced more often from the feeding area when the stocking density was increased, and this effect was greater for cows using the post-and-rail feed barrier. Cows ranked lower in the social hierarchy at the feed bunk were displaced more often when feeding at a post-and-rail barrier, particularly at high stocking densities. Therefore, we recommend avoiding overstocking at the feed bunk to increase feeding activity and reduce competition. Use of a barrier that provides some physical separation between adjacent cows, such as a headlock feed barrier, can be used to further reduce competition at the feed bunk.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(06)72075-6

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 315

Metadata

Authors
Huzzey, J. M., DeVries, T. J., Valois, P., & von Keyserlingk, M. A. G.
Venue
Journal of Dairy Science
Published
2006-01
Volume
89
Issue
1
Pages
126-133
ISSN
0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2163483845
Cited by
315
References
1
FWCI
20.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Stocking Density and Feed Barrier Design Affect the Feeding and Social Behavior of Dairy Cattle. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(06)72075-6
The paper
Huzzey, J. M., DeVries, T. J., Valois, P., & von Keyserlingk, M. A. G. (2006). Stocking Density and Feed Barrier Design Affect the Feeding and Social Behavior of Dairy Cattle. Journal of Dairy Science. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(06)72075-6

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.