Топоздордун (Bos grunniens) иерархиялык мамилелерин аныктоодо туз берүү процессин колдонуу

Öz

Кыргыз популяциясындагы топоздордун бийик тоолуу жайыттардын шарттарындагы иерархиялык мамилелери визуалдык байкоолорду жүргүзүү менен изилденди. Изилдөө объектиси катары ар кандай курактагы 60 баштан турган кыргыз популяциясындагы топоздордун үйүрү алынды. Топоздор жайытта күнү-түнү болушуп, эркин оттошуп, сууну каалаган убагында ичишип, колдон болгону аш туз алып турушту. Топоздордун үйүрүндөгү иерархиялык даражалар «туз берүү процесси» колдонулуп аныкталды. Жүрүш-туруш иерархиясын аныктоодо ар бир топоз үчүн ийгилик көрсөткүчү катары орун которуштуруу индекси эсептелип (иерархия индекси, ИИ), үч категорияга бөлүндү: төмөн, орточо жана жогорку. Топоз үйүрүндөгү абсолюттук басымдуулукка бука топоздор ээ болушту (ИИ=0,80–1,0, n=5). Бука топоздордун арасында дагы ирилери жана мүйүздүүлөрү артыкчылыкка ээ экендиги байкалды (ИИ=1,0, n=2). Бука топоздордон кийинки басымдуулук рангын инек топоздор ээлешкени менен, алардын арасында дагы ирилери жана мүйүздүүлөрү артыкчылыкка ээ болушса, жаш жана орточо салмактагы инек топоздор алардан кийинки рангды ээлегендиги ортого чыкты (ИИ=0,67–0,80, n=12). Бул топтогу топоздордон кийинки иерархиялык тепкичти мамалактар ээлешсе, ал эми эң акыркы иерархиялык рангда 6 айга чейинки мамалактуу инек топоздор жайланышаары такталды (ИИ=0,34–0,66 (n=27). Ал эми мамалактары бир айга чейинки курактагы инек топоздор мамалактары менен үйүрдөн бир аз окчундап жүрүшкөнү байкалды (ИИ=0,0–0,33 (n =8). Алынган материалдар топоздордун бийик тоолуу жайыт шарттарында кунардуулугун оптималдаштыруу, бакубаттуулугун жакшыртуу жана айлана-чөйрөгө тийгизген таасирин азайтуу үчүн колдонууга сунушталат.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• топоз
• жүрүш-туруш
• жайыт
• жеке жүрүш-туруш
• социалдык жүрүш-туруш

Destekleyen Kurum

Кыргыз-Түрк “Манас” университети

Proje Numarası

KTMU-BAP-2025.FB.01

Etik Beyan

Тажрыйбалык изилдөө ишинин протоколун Кыргыз-Түрк «Манас» университетинин жаныбарларга тажрыйба жүргүзүү боюнча этикалык комитети жактырган (№2024/08, 27.11.2024).

Teşekkür

Изилдөөлөр Кыргыз-Түрк “Манас” университети тарабынан каржыланган “Кыргызстандын тоолуу жайыттарында топоздордун (Bos grunniens) жана уйлардын (Bos taurus) жүрүш-турушун салыштырмалуу изилдөө” (KTMU-BAP-2025.FB.01) илимий долбоорунун алкагында аткарылган. Кыргыз-Түрк “Манас” университетинин жетекчилигине, КТМУнун Долбоорлорду кординациялоор башкармалыгына жана изилдөөлөрдү ишке ашырууда ар тараптуу жардам көрсөткөн инсандарга көрсөткөн көмөктөрү үчүн терең ыраазычылык билдиребиз.

Using the process of salt distribution to determine hierarchical relationships in domestic yaks (Bos grunniens)

Öz

The aim of the study was to investigate the hierarchical relationships of the Kyrgyz yak population on high-mountain pastures using visual observations. The study involved a herd of 60 Kyrgyz yaks of varying ages. The yaks grazed freely on pastures day and night, drinking spring water and receiving only salt licks from their hands. Hierarchical relationships within the yak herd in high-altitude pastures were determined using a process called "salt distribution." To determine the behavioral hierarchy, a displacement index (hierarchy index, HI) was calculated for each yak as an indicator of success, categorized into three categories: low, medium, and high. In the yak herd, bulls were absolutely dominant (HI=0.80–1.0, n=5). Among them, large and horned yaks had a clear advantage (HI=1.0, n=2). Although females were second in dominance after bulls, it was clear that large and horned females had an advantage, and the next hierarchical position was occupied by young and medium-weight females (HI=0.67–0.80, n=12). The next hierarchical position was occupied by young yaks, and the last position was occupied by females with calves up to 6 months of age (HI = 0.34–0.66 (n=27). And females with calves up to one month of age tried to keep a certain distance from the herd (HI=0.0–0.33 (n=8). As a result; the obtained materials are recommended for use in optimizing yak productivity in high-altitude pastures, improving their well-being, and reducing their impact on the environment.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• yak
• behavior
• pasture
• egocentric behavior
• social behavior

Destekleyen Kurum

Kyrgyz-Turkish Manas University

Proje Numarası

KTMU-BAP-2025.FB.01

Etik Beyan

The protocol for the experimental study was approved by the Ethics Committee for Animal Experiments at the Kyrgyz-Turkish “Manas” University (No. 2024/08, November 27, 2024).

Teşekkür

The study “Кыргызстандын тоолуу жайыттарында топоздордун (Bos grunniens) жана уйлардын (Bos taurus) жүрүш-турушун салыштырмалуу изилдөө" (KTMU-bap-2025), funded by the Kyrgyz-Turkish University “Manas".FB.01) was carried out as part of a scientific project. We would like to express our deep gratitude to the leadership of the Kyrgyz-Turkish Manas University, the KSMU Project Coordination Department and the individuals who provided comprehensive assistance in the implementation of research.

Kaynakça

1. Anderson, D.M., Estell, R.E., Cibils, A.F. (2013). Spatiotemporal Cattle Data – A Plea for Protocol Standardization. Positioning, 4(1): 115 136. https://doi.org/10.4236/pos.2013.41012.
2. Barnard, S., Calderara, S., Pistocchi, S. et al. (2016). Quick, Accurate, Smart: 3D Computer Vision Technology Helps Assessing Confined Animals' Behaviour. PloS one, 11 (7), e0158748. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158748.
3. Barroso, F.G., Alados, C.L., & Boza, J. (2000). Social hierarchy in the domestic goat: Effect on food habits and production. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 69, 35 53. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00113-1.
4. Batista, P., Almeida, G., Sarmento, R., Pandorfi, H., Melo, A., Monteiro, M., Medeiros, V., Gonçalves, G. (2019). Monitoring the bovine activity in grazing by an electronic sensing device based on GPS. Revista de Ciencias Agrarias, 42. 31 40. https://doi.org/10.19084/rca.17264.
5. Bello, Rotimi-W., Abubakar, S. (2020). Framework for Modeling Cattle Behavior through. Grazing Patterns, 4. 75 79. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3813680.
6. Bennett, I.L. & Holmes, C.R. (1987). Formation of a feeding order in a group of cattle and its relationship with grazing behaviour, heat-tolerance and production. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 17, 9 18. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(87)90003-7.
7. Broom, D.M. & Leaver, J.D. (1978). Effects of group-rearing or partial isolation on later social behaviour of calves. Animal Behaviour, 26, 1255 1263. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(78)90116-1.
8. Chillo, V., Ojeda, R. (2014). Disentangling ecosystem responses to livestock grazing in drylands. Agric Ecosyst Environ, 197:271 7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2014.08.011.

9. Chysyma, R.B. (2006). Hozyajstvenno-biologicheskie osobennosti yakov v razlichnyh ekologicheskih usloviyah respubliki Tyva. Avtoreferat dissertacii na soiskanie uchenoj stepeni doktora biologicheskih nauk. 06.02.01- Razvedenie, selekciya, genetika i vosproizvodstvo selskohozyajstvennyh zhivotnyh i 03.00.16-Ekologiya. Novosibirsk, 39. (In Russ.). https://www.dissercat.com/content/khozyaistvenno-biologicheskie-osobennosti- yakov-v-razlichnykh-ekologicheskikh-usloviyakh-res.
10. Cote, S. & Festa-Bianchet, M. (2001). Reproductive success in female mountain goats: the influence of age and social rank. Animal Behaviour, 62, 173 181. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2001.1719.
11. DeVries, T.J. and Von Keyserlingk, M.A.G. (2006). Feed Stalls Affect the Social and Feeding Behavior of Lactating Dairy Cows. Journal of Dairy Science. 89, 9: 3522 3531. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(06)72392-X.
12. Forbes, J.M. (1995). Voluntary Food Intake and Diet Selection in Farm Animals. CAB International. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=186729.
13. Francis, R.C. (1988). On the relationship between aggression and social dominance. Animal Behaviour, 78, 223 237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.1988.tb00233.x.
14. González, M., Yabuta, A. K. & Galindo, F. (2003). Behaviour and adrenal activity of first parturition and multiparous cows under a competitive situation. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 83, 259–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(03)00037-6.
15. Hubbard, A.J., Foster M.J. and Daigle C.L. (2021). Social Dominance in Beef Cattle – A Scoping Review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 241: 105390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105390.
16. Jochims, F., Soares, E.M., de Oliveira, L.B., Kuinchtner, B.C., Casanova, P.T., Marin, L. et al. (2020). Timing and duration of observation periods of foraging behavior in natural grasslands. Front Vet Sci, 7:519698. https://doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.519698.
17. Lei, G., Li A., Zhang, Z., Bian, J., Hu, G., Wang, C., Nan, X., Wang, J., Tan, J., Liao, X. (2020). The Quantitative Estimation of Grazing Intensity on the Zoige Plateau Based on the Space-Air-Ground Integrated Monitoring Technology. Remote Sensing, 12(9):1399. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12091399.
18. Lin, L.J., Dickhoefer, U., Müller, K., Wurina, S., Susenbeth, A. (2011). Grazing behavior of sheep at different stocking rates in the inner Mongolian steppe, China. Appl Anim Behav Sci, 129:36 42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2010.11.002.
19. Manning, J.K., Cronin, G.M., González, L.A., Hall, E.J.S., Merchant, A., Ingram, L.J. (2017). The effects of global navigation satellite system (GNSS) collars on cattle (Bos taurus) behaviour. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci, 187, 54 59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2016.11.013.
20. McDonald, P., Edwards R.A., Greenhalgh J.F.D. et al. (2011). Animal Nutrition. 7th ed. Pearson. https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9781408204276_A25051376/preview- 9781408204276_A25051376.pdf.
21. McDowell, L.R. (1996). Feeding Minerals to Cattle on Pasture. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 60, 3 4: 247 271. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401(96)00983-2.
22. Mendl, M., Zanella A.J. and Broom D.M. (1992). Physiological and Reproductive Correlates of Behavioural Strategies in Female Domestic Pigs. Animal Behaviour. 44, 6: 1107–1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003- 3472(05)80323-9.
23. Miranda‐de la Lama, G.C., Pascual‐Alonso M., Guerrero A., et al. (2013). Influence of Social Dominance on Production, Welfare and the Quality of Meat From Beef Bulls. Meat Science. 94, 4:432–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.03.026.
24. Miranda-de la Lama, G.C. & Mattiello, S. (2010). The importance of social behaviour for goat welfare in livestock farming. Small Ruminant Research, 90, 1 10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2010.01.006.
25. Neave, H.W., Lomb, J., Weary, D.M., LeBlanc, S.J., Huzzey, J.M., von Keyserlingk, M.A.G. (2018). Behavioral changes before metritis diagnosis in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci, 101, 4388 4399. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13078.
26. Riaboff, L., Couvreur, S., Madouasse, A., Roig-Pons, M., Aubin, S., Massabie, P., Chauvin, A., Bédère, N., Plantier, G. (2020). Use of Predicted Behavior from Accelerometer Data Combined with GPS Data to Explore the Relationship between Dairy Cow Behavior and Pasture Characteristics. Sensors, 20. 4741. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20174741.
27. Rivero, M.J., Grau-Campanario, P., Mullan, S., Held, S.D., Stokes, J.E., Lee, M.R., Cardenas, L.M. (2021). Factors affecting site use preference of grazing cattle studied from 2000 to 2020 through GPS tracking: A review. Sensors, 21, 2696. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21082696.
28. Rodrigues Silva, R., Nunes do Prado, I., Giordano Pinto de Carvalho, G., Almeida de Santana Junior, H., Ferreira da Silva, F., Lucas Santos Dias, D. (2008). Efeito da utilização de três intervalos de observações sobre a precisão dos resultados obtidos no estudo do comportamento ingestivo de vacas leiteiras em pastejo. Ciência Anim Brasil, 9:319 26. https://doi.org/10.5216/cab.v9i2.1205.
29. Shermatova, Ch.S. (2015). Ecology environment province Ak-Tuz. Izvestiya VUZov Kyrgyzstana, 4, S. 68 70. https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=24292802.
30. Sun, D., Camerlink, I. (2025). Ethology at the Roof of the World: A cross-language systematic review of the behaviour and welfare of yaks (Bos mutus and Bos grunniens). Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 285, 106587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2025.106587.
31. Sun, G., Liu, T., Zhang, H., Tan, B., Li, Y. (2023). Basic behavior recognition of yaks based on improved SlowFast network. Ecological Informatics, 78, 102313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2023.102313.
32. Tulobaev, A., Sen, I., Ari, H.H., Aldayarov, N., Salykov, R., Dzhalmagombetova, A. (2025). A systematic review of research on the behavioral acts of yaks (Bos grunniens). Manas Journal of Agriculture Veterinary and Life Sciences, 15(2), 321-336. https://doi.org/10.53518/mjavl.1736485.
33. Ulimbasheva, R.A., Ulimbashev, M.B., Dubrovin, A.I. (2016). Seasonal Variability of Behavioral Responses of Yaks in High-Mountain Areas of the North Caucasian Region. Vestnik Altajskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta, 6 (140), 104 107. (In Russ.). https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/povedencheskie-reaktsii-yakov-pri- adaptatsii-v-vysokogornyh-urochischah-severo-kavkazskogo-regiona.
34. Val-Laillet, D., de Passillé, A.P., Rushen, J. & von Keyserlingk, M. (2008). The concept of social dominance and the social distribution of feeding-related displacements between cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 111, 158 172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2007.06.001.
35. Wang, H., Liu Z., Huang M. et al. (2016). Effects of Long‐Term Mineral Block Supplementation on Antioxidants, Immunity, and Health of Tibetan Sheep. Biological Trace Element Research. 172, 2: 326 335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12011-015-0593-z.
36. Yang, X., Daraz, U., Ma, J., Lu, X., Feng, Q., Zhu, H., Wang, X.B. (2024). Temporal–spatial variability of grazing behaviors of yaks and the drivers of their intake on the eastern Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau. Front. Vet. Sci, 11:1393136. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2024.1393136.