Category: Zoology

The primary goal of the article analyzed was to define the patterns of inactivation of the infectious proteins knows as prions of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) from cattle, mice, hamsters, and humans. The hypothesis outlined by the researchers was the assumption that the inactivation of the aforementioned prions had to be approached differently regarding the prion strain carrier (Giles et al., 2008). The importance of such analysis is caused by the fact that, in recent years, some of the most developed states, such as the US and the UK, have faced the issue of BSE infection dissemination.

One of the most outstanding aspects of the following research is the scope of the prion strain examination. Previously, researchers pooled the effort in identifying the way to inactivate the BSE prion strain in separate species (Giles et al., 2008). This study, however, aims at presenting a full-scale comparative analysis in order to emphasize the difference between inactivation in cattle when compared to any other infection carrier.

Despite the scope of the empirical research conducted throughout the study, the article structure itself may be confusing even for a scholar examining the issue. The coherent methodology description of the research, along with the hypothesis outlined, are difficult to identify prior to familiarizing oneself with the whole work. No other weaknesses were identified in terms of the analysis, as the article was not biased by any commercial enterprise, and the visual material was cohesive and comprehensive.

Having taken the article content into consideration, it may be concluded that the research itself is extremely useful. First, the idea of comparative studies provides the researchers with a better perspective on the future of prion inactivation and dissemination prevention. Secondly, both the scope and the structure of the research allow future scholars to elaborate on the data with further implications. Hence, the study may serve as a beneficial assisting tool in terms of BSE control and prevention.

Reference

Giles, K., Glidden, D. V., Beckwith, R., Seoanes, R., Peretz, D., DeArmond, S. J., & Prusiner, S. B. (2008). Resistance of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) prions to inactivation. PLoS Pathogens, 4(11), e1000206. Web.

Gammon, D. E., & Tovsky, A. C. (2021). A cross-sectional field study of fall song in Northern Mockingbirds Mimus polyglottos. Journal of Ornithology, 162(2), 461-468.

There are several reasons why the current article can be considered a reliable source for my project. First of all, the Journal of Ornithology is one of the most influential journals in the field of ornithology. It was first published in 1853 and still exists today as the official journal of the German Ornithologists Society (Springer, n.d.). Moreover, it is ranked as the 5th most important journal in the field by Google Scholar (n.d.). Secondly, the article presents a thorough methodology part where the data collection and analysis are explained in detail. Although the sample size of 37 mockingbirds is not representative enough to draw more general conclusions, it is still reliable enough to make conclusions concerning the behavior of Mimus polyglottos.

Singing is one of the important parts of Northern Mockingbirds existence in nature and same species groups. For this reason, understanding how the mimicry and, therefore, the prevalence of stereotypy in the songs of these birds is related to the age and the communication of ones reproductive activity is very important. Thus, the current article would be useful for my research and project.

Peltier, S. K., Wilson, C. M., & Godard, R. D. (2019). Wing-flashing by northern mockingbirds while foraging and in response to a predator model. Northeastern Naturalist, 26(2), 251-260.

Although not as influential as the Journal of Ornithology, Northeastern Naturalist is still a reliable source of information. It has been published since the year 2000 and currently has the Web of Science impact factor (the index that reflects how often the journals articles are cited) of 0.538 (SCI Journal, n.d.). Moreover, similarly to the previous article, Peltier et al. also thoroughly explain the methods of data collection and analysis.

The current article examines another frequently observable pattern of behavior that Mimus polyglottos exhibit, which is wing-flashing. In this regard, the authors conduct a profound literature review that seeks to explain the antecedents of this practice and present their own investigation results.

References

Google Scholar. (n.d.). Top publications. Web.

SCI Journal. (n.d.). SCI Journal impact factor database: Northeastern Naturalist. Web.

Springer. (n.d.). Journal of Ornithology. Web.

Article Similarities and Differences

The three articles reviewed give different approaches to optimal udder preparation practices before and after milking to obtain high-quality milk. The papers involve primary studies investigating teat disinfection practices that affect iodine levels in milk. In all three studies, the variable measured in milk iodine content following pre- and post-milking teat preparation and dietary iodine consumption. Two of the articles involve two independent variables  dietary iodine and teat disinfection (Castro, Berthiaume, Robichaud, & Lacasse, 2012; ZliwiDski, Brzóska, Wglarzy, SzybiDski, & KBopotek, 2015).

In contrast, in Galton, Petersson, Merrill, Bandler, and Shusters (1984) study, the only independent variable considered is under preparation. The three articles make a similar finding, which is that iodine spraying, 1% iodophor treats, and iodine-rich salt licks raise iodine levels in milk. Further, pre-dipping of teats in iodine-based disinfectants (1% iodophor) followed by drying with a paper towel was found to decrease iodine levels in milk.

The articles differ regarding study aims, design, sample size, and procedures Castro et al. (2012) sought to assess how iodine intake and teat-disinfection practices (dipping) affect iodine levels in milk. In contrast, Galton et al. (1984) compared different teat preparation methods  water hose, soaked towel, and iodophor treat dip  concerning their effects on the microbial count and iodine concentration in milk. ZliwiDski et al. (2015) investigated the levels of iodine in cows milk and blood after iodine intake and teat disinfection.

Castro et al. (2012) use a 3 × 3 factorial design for experiment 1 (n=63) and experimental design (4 treatments) in experiment 2 (n=32) and a total sample size of 95 lactating cows. Galton et al. (1984) employed a generalized randomized block design with a sample of 276 cows assigned to six experiments. In their part, ZliwiDski et al. (2015) used a three-group experimental design involving experiment 1 (n=60) and experiment 2 (n=28). Unlike in the other two studies, Galton et al. (1984) measured bacterial counts (Staphylococcus spp.) after each teat disinfection method. Further, they also investigated sediment in milk after disinfection. Of the three articles, only ZliwiDski et al.s (2015) study investigates plasma iodine content after teat disinfection.

Method Comparisons

The first study (Castro et al., 2012) performed two experiments to determine the influence of dietary iodine and teat-dipping on the concentration of iodine in cows milk. In the first experiment, the study randomly assigned 63 cows in their mid-lactating periods to 3 by 3 factorial design. The main effects were dietary iodine at 0.3, 0.6, and 0.9 mg/kg while the minor effects are teat-dipping post-managements with chlorhexidine, 1% iodine dip, and 1% iodine spray. In the second experiment, the study randomly assigned 32 cows in their mid-lactating periods to four treatment groups, namely, no pre-dip, 0.5% iodine pre-dip with a complete cleaning, 1% iodine pre-dip with complete cleaning, and 0.5% iodine pre-dip with incomplete cleaning.

In the second article, Galton et al. (1984) undertook series of experiments to determine the effects of different methods of udder preparations on the population of bacteria, amount of sediments, and concentration of iodine. In the first experiment, 39 cows were randomly assigned to 13 groups formed from the combination of udder preparation methods relating to the use of water, wet towel, and sanitizer with or without drying.

The second experiment added pre- and post-milking disinfectant dip to selected groups in experiment one. The third experiment assigned seven cows to udder preparations that involve the use of sanitizer, disinfectant, and forest ripe. To determine sediments, 39 cows were assigned to 13 groups with different combinations of udder preparations in the fourth experiment. In the fifth experiment, the study determined the effect of post-milking iodine teat-dip among 70 cows assigned to four groups, namely, no treatment, pre-milking teat-dip, pre- and post-milking teat-dip, and pre-milking teat-dip without drying.

In the last experiment to determine the effect of post-milking teat-dip on iodine residue, the study assigned 76 cows to four groups of no treatment, 0.5% iodine pre- and post-milking teat-dip, 1% iodine post-milking teat-dip, and 1% iodine pre- and post-milking teat-dip.

The third article performed two experiments to determine the influence of teat dipping and iodized salts on the concentration of iodine in blood plasma and milk (Sliwinki et al., 2015). In the first experiment, the study assigned 66 cows in their mid-lactating periods to three groups under the dietary intake of zero iodine, 150 mg/kg, and 300 mg/kg. In the second experiment, the experiment assigned 28 cows to two groups, the control group under the chorine teat dip and the experimental group under iodine solution.

A comparison of the methods shows that they are not similar regarding the number of sampled cows, experimental period, dietary intake, and methods of udder preparations. Castro et al. (2012) sampled 63 cows, performed the experiment in about 15 days, fed cows with 0.3, 0.6, and 0.9 mg/kg of iodine, and prepared udder with pre-dip iodine. Galton et al. (1984) sampled a variable number of cows ranging from 60 to 7, undertook the experiment in about 23 days, did not feed cows with iodine, and used 13 combinations of udder preparation methods.

Sliwinki et al. (2015) sampled 60 and 28 cows, performed the experiment in 90 days, fed cows with 0, 150, and 300 mg/kg of iodine, and washed udder with iodine and chlorine solutions. To address the issue of dissimilarity in methodology, future study should consider an adequate sample of cows, extended experiment period, standard dietary intake of iodine, and conventional methods of udder preparation.

Results and Research Question Comparison

The analysis and comparison of results from the three papers show that they do support their respective research questions. The results of Castro et al. (2013) support the research question for they indicate that iodine concentration in milk increased with diet as 0.9 mg/kg resulted in 341 µg/kg of iodine in milk. Moreover, the use of iodine teat dip and inappropriate udder preparation practices increased iodine concentration in milk from 164 to 252 µg/kg level.

The results of Galton et al. (1984) also do support the research question because they illustrate that pre- and post-milking teat dipping with a 1% iodine solution significantly increases the concentration of iodine solution by up to 84.2 µg/100ml (p<0.01). In their results, Sliwinki et al. (2015) supported their research question by stating that dietary intake does not influence plasma levels of iodine significantly, but teat dipping did increase the concentration of iodine in milk from by about 15 µg/L from 44 to 59.3 µg/L.

A comparison of results demonstrates that both dietary intakes of iodine and teat dipping increase the concentration of iodine in milk significantly. In this view, the results suggest a reduction of dietary intake of iodine and the adoption of appropriate teat dipping practices to reduce the residue of iodine, and consequently the concentration of iodine in milk.

Impacts of the Articles

The three articles findings that teat disinfection  through either teat dips or sprays  and dietary iodine affect milk iodine levels will impact pre- and post-milking teat disinfection practices. Castro et al.s (2012) finding that milk iodine levels rise with increasing amounts of dietary iodine has implications for the production of cattle feeds and licks. Nutritional iodine should be within the recommended limits (<1mg/kg DM) for high-quality milk. Further, post-milking teat disinfection with iodine is only useful when it involves teat dips. The finding that iodine-based sprays increase milk iodine content implies that these sanitizers should be avoided during spraying.

Galton et al.s (1984) article will impact udder cleaning and post- and pre-milking disinfectant practices aimed at reducing sediment and iodine levels in milk. Teat cleaning using water or pre-milking disinfectant dips (1% iodophor) and drying for <10s can help minimize iodine levels in milk and environmental bacteria causing udder infection or mastitis. Therefore, pre- and post-milking disinfectant teat dips should be followed by drying.

Besides, reduced sediment in dairy products can be achieved through adequate teat cleaning (Galton et al., 1984). ZliwiDski et al.s (2015) article have implications for iodine-based disinfectant use by farmers and cattle feed content. Increasing iodine levels in salt licks by 150-300mg I/kg results in 65 to 85 ¼g I/1000 mL in the milk (ZliwiDski et al., 2015, p. 249). This concomitant increase implies that the recommended iodine levels in milk can be attained by reducing iodine content in cattle feeds. Pre-milking teat dips should be iodine-free, as iodine-based sanitizers raise milk iodine levels by up to 35% (ZliwiDski et al., 2015).

The overall conclusion made based on the results of the articles reviewed is that post-milking teat disinfection through dips results in elevated milk iodine levels. Similarly, giving cows iodine-based diets results in a concomitant increase of iodine in milk. Therefore, effective techniques in reducing iodine residues include post-milking teat treatment based on iodine-free disinfectants, reducing nutritional iodine levels, and teat drying after pre-milking dips.

References

Castro, S., Berthiaume, R., Robichaud, A., & Lacasse, P. (2012). Effects of iodine intake and teat-dipping practices on milk iodine concentrations in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 95(1), pp. 213-220. Web.

Galton, D., Petersson, L., Merrill, W., Bandler, D., & Shuster, D. (1984). Effects of premilking udder preparation on bacteria population, sediment, and iodine residue in milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 67(11), pp. 2580-2589. Web.

Sliwinki, B., Brzoska, F., Weglarzy, K., Klopotek, E. (2015). The effects of iodized salt licks and teat-dipping on the iodine content of cows milk and blood plasma. Endokrynologia Polska, 66(3), pp. 244-250. Web.

Background

For over half a century now, governments around the globe have legislated against specific dog breeds for various reasons, particularly based on the vicious attacks on human beings and other domesticated animals. The increasing dog population up to about 68 million in the United States has escalated the fear of dangerous dog bites amongst the Americans.

According to Hussain (2849), children are the most affected with almost half of all American children experiencing dog bite by the age of twelve. In addition, the rising incidences of dog bites have affected the insurance sector with most companies rephrasing their insurance policies on cases related to perceived dangerous dogs such as pit bulls. Most cases of dog bites have been reported to happen within the owners premises.

The enclosed or rather caged dogs have been observed to be more violent as compared to those kept under free range. A troublesome or dangerous dog is furious and it can cause injuries or kill without being provoked (Hussain 2849). Due to the outcry from the public, most governments have been compelled to enact legislation against specific breeds, which are defined as dangerous. This paper argues that apartments should ban dogs based on breed as a step forward to curbing bite-related cases by specific vicious breeds.

Contentions

Breed specific legislation has been hit by several controversies with one group encouraging the enforcement of such laws as an immediate solution to the fatal attacks linked to specific breeds. This aspect does not necessarily alleviate the fears and attacks from the dog breed not covered in the legislation, but it reduces the prevalence of dog attacks acting as preliminary measures to finding permanent solutions. Critics argue that bans aiming at certain breeds infringe on the owners rights to equality (Campbell 56).

Proponents and particularly lawmakers argue that certain dog breeds such as pit bulls are restrained on the rationale that they have caused substantial damage and fear among the members of public, and thus it is legitimate for the welfare of the majority to regulate the fatal breeds (Hussain 2862).

In the eyes of the opponents, this argument is erroneous as the perception that the ban is rational is inconsistent and in a bid to rationalize it, the categorization must not be overestimated or underestimated. However, as much as the situation might appear to be rambling, the cases of dog bite prohibitively transgress and injure humanity and efforts to alleviate such dangers are worth this kind of legislation.

Common ground

Both the proponents and opponents agree that dog breeds classified as dangerous are indeed aggressive. The two sides agree that the categorization is determined by the lawful governmental concerns in outlawing violent dogs for the good of members of the public.

According to Hussain (2862), the issuance of ban on fatal dog breed in Greenwood sought to regulate pit bulls as dangerous pets. Pit bulls owners refuted the law by arguing that it was biased since it classified these dogs and other few breeds as vicious, yet there was sufficient proof that other excluded breeds were potentially dangerous and aggressiveness is not a certain breed trait.

The court agreed that viciousness was not hereditary trait in pit bulls and other breeds not included in the law were as well substantially dangerous. Nonetheless, this aspect does not stand the chance to demean the essentiality of the legislation against specific breeds since claimants have been unsuccessful in showing that the categorization has failed to adhere to the expectations of the law and the majority public.

Arguments against

The opponents argue that the legislation has acted erroneously with no adequate research to support the decision, as medical studies do not state breed as an influencing factor of viciousness. On the contrary, research shows that hereditary traits, sex, quality of handling, and the victims response towards the dogs are the main causes of aggressiveness (McGreevy et al. 7).

Probably, this assertion holds since male dogs are more aggressive and stronger as compared to their female counterparts regardless of the breed. In addition, an experiment on early socialization based on handlers who present various stimuli linked to desired experiences to a dog, has shown minimal vicious behavior in a dogs later life in case of fear or anticipation.

For instance, a study by Berg et al. (884) shows that Golden Retrievers and other groups falling under the regulation displayed anxiety and aggression as key determinants of dogs reaction rather than breed classification. Apparently, these claims are valid, but the current statistics indicate that specific breeds such as pit bulls dominate the cases of dog bites in the United States, and this factor cannot be overlooked (Hussain 2863).

Since the issue of legislation is not a short term agenda whilst the magnitude and acuteness of the danger is given priority, the legislation takes one step at a time and deals with the situation that requires prior action holding on other factors that are not regarded as emergencies.

Secondly, opponents argue that legislation against few specific breeds does not reduce substantial attacks or eliminate dog bites. For instance, in 2001, Diane Whipple died after being attacked by the Presa Canario breed, which is not under the legislation of the specific dangerous dog breeds (Hussain 2847). Breed specific legislation might not contain all violent breeds, but the prevalence of their attack has been identified moderate as for the restrained breeds.

Perhaps, this case is one of the many examples, but it is understandably clear that the law is open to contain the breeds that show potential threats to individuals in the long term. A wholesale legislation merely to bring equality among dog owners cannot be achieved since governments do not intend to eliminate dog pets, but they respond legitimately to the outcry of the public on what disturbs their lifestyle and the challenges in finding alternatives. The leveling ground should be focusing on what benefits the welfare of humans and at the same time encouraging the adoption of alternative dog pets with fair reactions towards human beings and other animals.

Thirdly, opponents claim that the enforcement costs are very high. For instance, many cities have revoked breed specific laws based on the costs, which are very high. This assertion holds due to the high costs of recruiting trained staff to handle the dogs and veterinary services for the caged dogs.

The costs of holding dogs, especially awaiting determination of cases by courts, are high and in most cases, governments do not anticipate such cases, and thus they fail to allocate enough money to cater for such expenses (McGreevy et al. 7). However, cases dealing with life of human beings are highly complicated and anything less than prioritizing the welfare of humans is unthinkable.

Refutation

According to Mann (45), foreigners and gang members intentionally own the outlawed breeds. Since the law enforcers rely on self-reporting and neighbors claims, reaching these individuals becomes a challenge. The argument that restricting specific breeds does not reduce dog bites is highly unsubstantiated since restriction happens after certain breeds show consistency in aggressiveness.

Perhaps, cases may be over-reported, but this assumption can reasonably be revoked in the sense that why should people over-report on certain cases, but not others. Foreigners and gang members owning these vicious breeds deliberately undermine the efforts by the government to safeguard the lives of its citizens.

Huss (70) suggests that pets perceived as companion animals develop emotional attachments with the owners and act as therapeutics when the owners are stressed. In addition, all pets should be trained as companion animals, but not service animals since they will always provoke conflicts.

The move to have incentives on government spending by avoiding extra expenditures on kenneling dogs and staffing is refutable; however, it is hard to figure out the economic importance of these dogs that surpass the welfare of human beings. Those who oppose the move to specific breed regulation are biased since they rarely mind the welfare of fellow residents.

However, the government should not relent in finding more solutions to protecting the wellbeing of all people. Those that fancy dog pets should show the resilience and skills to contain them not only in the parks, but also within the apartments (Jackson 255).

Arguing for

According to Mann (6), an article in the Washington Post indicated that attacks and killings of people by specific breeds have caused unimaginable fears amongst Germans. Legislating against certain breeds is a possible solution as well as enacting laws that prohibit dogfights.

However, the media has caused hype, thus exacerbating fear by occasionally reporting every case showing details and discouraging people to avoid such breeds. This move is plausible, but it does not help to solve the problem as it increases tension among the public. Nelson (12) talks of how people abruptly changed their moods when talking of the pit bulls that they owned in their families. Nonetheless, the tension is real and the government needs to incorporate laws that encourage dog owners to adopt friendly breeds.

On the creation of social conflicts, Mann (7) argues that some people confront pet owners on the streets and express their fears. In essence, dog owners should be careful when handling their pets. For instance, in the case of Dianne Whipple in 2001, the two dogs executing the attack overpowered the owner before launching the attack (Hussain 2847).

This case is complex and it is unfair to argue that the owner failed to demonstrate his capability to handle the dogs. Therefore, in a bid to avoid such cases, it is appropriate to restrain the breeds that are perceived as dangerous at the same time ensuring that the responsibility demonstrated by dog owners in public premises is maintained or even bettered in private areas to avoid conflicts between pet owners and other people (Jackson 255).

The argument on minimizing cases of fatal attacks and deaths lies within a common ground, but the opponents go ahead to claim that when the specific breeds are restrained, dog holders train the perceived mild breeds to learn aggressive traits and serve their intended purpose of defense. Not all people fancy keeping pets and even most people do not have any attachments to pets, but everyone should appreciate the value and relevance of human life.

This assertion highlights the need to restrict some breeds and avoid potential dangers. Corduroy (22) suggests that outlawing dogs based on breed cannot eliminate dog attacks, since the law does not address the matter sufficiently. At least, Corduroy (22) acknowledge that matters of dog bites have reduced albeit unsatisfactorily.

Supporting the argument of this paper

Banning dogs based on breeds may not be the only way to finding sustainable solution for the dog bite menace, but apparently, the government and the courts have shown that it is the most viable means to protect the members of public from dangerous attacks.

However, the governments should understand that there is still fear amongst the public due to rising cases of intentionally trained dogs by their owners to become aggressive. All dog owners should be trained skillfully to avoid dog accidents just as drivers are trained to manage their cars (Mann 11).

Conclusion

Jackson (267) indicates that during his study in a public park, a huge dog knocked a man, after which dog owners within the park reiterated that while at the park, it is the mandate of owners to ensure that their dogs insurances are valid. This assertion means that dog handlers understand the potential damage that dogs can cause.

Given that not all dogs can cause fatal accidents, then the baseline should be agreeing on restraining dog breeds that demonstrate viciousness causing fear to the people. Going forward, the government should uphold its primary duty, which is to protect citizens, whether from terrorists, gangs, or hostile dogs. Therefore, apartments should ban dogs based on breed.

Works Cited

Berg, Linda, Matthijs Schilder, Han Vries, Peter Leegwater, and Bernard Oost. Phenotyping of aggressive behavior in golden retriever dogs with a questionnaire. Behavioral Genetics 36.1 (2006): 882-902. Print.

Campbell, Dana. Pit Bull Bans: The State of BreedSpecific Legislation. GP-Solo 26.5 (2009): 52-57. Print.

Corduroy, Amy. Newsmaker  The Pitbull. The Sydney Morning. The Sydney Morning Herald 3 Sept. 2011: 22. Print.

Huss, Rebecca. No pets allowed: Housing issues and companion animals. Animal Law 11.69 (2005): 69-129. Print.

Hussain, Gray. Attacking the dog-bite epidemic: Why breed-specific legislation wont solve the dangerous-dog dilemma. Fordham Law Review 74.5 (2006): 2847  2887. Print.

Jackson, Patrick. Situated activities in a dog park: Identity and conflict in human-animal space. Society & Animals 20.1 (2012): 254  272. Print.

Mann, Judy. Dogs as scapegoats for social problems. The Washington Post 7 Jul. 2000: 48. Print.

McGreevy, Paul, Dana Georgevsky, Johanna Carrasco, Michael Valenzuela, Deborah Duffy, and James Serpell. Dog behavior co-varies with height, bodyweight and skull shape. PLOS ONE 8.12 (2013): 1  8. Print.

Nelson, Kory. One citys experience: why pit bulls are more dangerous and why breed-specific legislation is justified. Municipal Lawyer 46.6 (2005): 1215. Print.