<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
    xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/rss/journal/animals">
		<title>Animals</title>
		<link>http://www.mdpi.com/journal/animals</link>
		<description>Latest open access articles published in Animals at http://www.mdpi.com/journal/animals</description>
								<items>
			<rdf:Seq>
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/261" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/243" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/221" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/195" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/184" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/160" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/144" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/127" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/108" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/93" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/85" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/76" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/68" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/55" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/38" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/27" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/25" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/16" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/1" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/433" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/414" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/402" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/396" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/377" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/366" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/343" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/326" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/306" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/291" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/259" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/256" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/2/242" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/2/205" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/200" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/186" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/176" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/161" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/144" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/126" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/116" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/102" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/83" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/69" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/56" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/40" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/27" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/7" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/4" />
            				<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/1" />
                    	</rdf:Seq>
		</items>
				<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
	</channel>

        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/261">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 261-274: Mannan Oligosaccharides in Nursery Pig Nutrition and Their Potential Mode of Action</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/261</link>
	<description>Mannan oligosaccharides (MOSs) are often referred to as one of the potential alternatives for antimicrobial growth promoters. The aim of the paper is to provide a review of mannan oligosaccharide products in relation to their growth promoting effect and mode of action based on the latest publications. We discuss the dietary impact of MOSs on (1) microbial changes, (2) morphological changes of gut tissue and digestibility of nutrients, and (3) immune response of pigs after weaning. Dietary MOSs maintain the intestinal integrity and the digestive and absorptive function of the gut in the post-weaning period. Recent results suggest that MOS enhances the disease resistance in swine by promoting antigen presentation facilitating thereby the shift from an innate to an adaptive immune response. Accordingly, dietary MOS supplementation has a potential growth promoting effect in pigs kept in a poor hygienic environment, while the positive effect of MOS is not observed in healthy pig herds with high hygienic standards that are able to maintain a high growth rate after weaning.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/261</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-05-23</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>261</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>274</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Mannan Oligosaccharides in Nursery Pig Nutrition and Their Potential Mode of Action</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-05-23</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2020261</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Veronika Halas</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Imre Nochta</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/243">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 243-260: A Potential Role for Pro-Inflammatory Cytokines in the Development of Insulin Resistance in Horses</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/243</link>
	<description>Understanding the mechanisms involved in the development of insulin resistance in horses should enable development of effective treatment and prevention strategies. Current knowledge of these mechanisms is based upon research in obese humans and rodents, in which there is evidence that the increased production of pro-inflammatory cytokines by adipose tissue negatively influences insulin signaling in insulin-responsive tissues. In horses, plasma concentrations of the cytokine, tumor necrosis factor-α, have been positively correlated with body fatness and insulin resistance, leading to the hypothesis that inflammation may reduce insulin sensitivity in horses. However, little evidence has documented a tissue site of production and a direct link between inflammation and induction of insulin resistance has not been established. Several mechanisms are reviewed in this article, including the potential for macrophage infiltration, hyperinsulinemia, hypoxia, and lipopolysaccharide to increase pro-inflammatory cytokine production by adipose tissue of obese horses. Clearly defining the role of cytokines in reduced insulin sensitivity of horses will be a very important step in determining how obesity and insulin resistance are related.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/243</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-05-02</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>243</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>260</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>A Potential Role for Pro-Inflammatory Cytokines in the Development of Insulin Resistance in Horses</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-05-02</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2020243</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Jessica K. Suagee</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Benjamin A. Corl</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Raymond J. Geor</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/221">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 221-242: Nutritional Influences on Skatole Formation and Skatole Metabolism in the Pig</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/221</link>
	<description>Skatole is a tryptophan (TRP) metabolite with fecal odor. Together with the testicular steroid androstenone it is regarded as a main determinant of boar taint, even if elevated concentrations of skatole occur occasionally in gilts and barrows. Skatole concentrations in adipose tissue result from a complex process, which includes the availability of TRP and the presence of specialized bacteria in the gut in need of TRP for energy production, as well as absorption, transport and accumulation of skatole in adipose tissue. Several steps of this process are influenced by diet and specific feed compounds. In the present paper the current knowledge about physiological mechanisms of skatole dynamics is summarized. Additionally mechanisms are discussed, by which effective feeding strategies and feed additives exert their influence in the prevention of high skatole concentrations in adipose pig tissue. It was concluded that the most effective measures are those which influence several steps of skatole formation. Despite the numerous studies carried out in the field of skatole physiology, interesting aspects still need clarification, such as the effect of adipose tissue turnover. Reliable control of skatole accretion in fat of boars is one of the main prerequisites for pork production with entire males.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/221</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-05-02</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>221</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>242</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Nutritional Influences on Skatole Formation and Skatole Metabolism in the Pig</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-05-02</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2020221</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Raffael Wesoly</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Ulrike Weiler</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/195">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 195-220: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/195</link>
	<description>A spring calving herd consisting of about 350 beef cows, 14–16 breeding bulls, 60 replacement heifers and 112 steers were used to compare the whole-farm GHG emissions among calf-fed vs. yearling-fed production systems with and without growth implants. Carbon footprint ranged from 11.63 to 13.22 kg CO2e per kg live weight (19.87–22.52 kg CO2e per kg carcass weight). Enteric CH4 was the largest source of GHG emissions (53–54%), followed by manure N2O (20–22%), cropping N2O (11%), energy use CO2 (9–9.5%), and manure CH4 (4–6%). Beef cow accounted for 77% and 58% of the GHG emissions in the calf-fed and yearling-fed. Feeders accounted for the second highest GHG emissions (15% calf-fed; 35–36% yearling-fed). Implants reduced the carbon footprint by 4.9–5.1% compared with hormone-free. Calf-fed reduced the carbon footprint by 6.3–7.5% compared with yearling-fed. When expressed as kg CO2e per kg carcass weight per year the carbon footprint of calf-fed production was 73.9–76.1% lower than yearling-fed production, and calf-fed implanted was 85% lower than hormone-free yearling-fed. Reducing GHG emissions from beef production may be accomplished by improving the feed efficiency of the cow herd, decreasing the days on low quality feeds, and reducing the age at harvest of youthful cattle.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/195</guid>
	<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-04-16</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>195</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>220</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-04-16</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2020195</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>John Basarab</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Vern Baron</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Óscar López-Campos</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Aalhus</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Karen Haugen-Kozyra</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Erasmus Okine</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/184">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 184-194: Supplementation of Ascorbic Acid in Weanling Horses Following Prolonged Transportation</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/184</link>
	<description>Though horses synthesize ascorbic acid in their liver in amounts that meet their needs under normal circumstances, prolonged stress results in low plasma concentrations due to enhanced utilization and renal excretion and can reduce immune function. It was hypothesized that plasma ascorbic acid could be maintained in weanling horses by oral supplementation following prolonged transportation. Weanlings were supplemented with no ascorbic acid (Tx 0: n = 4), 5 grams ascorbic acid twice daily for 5 days (Tx 1: n = 4) or for 10 days (Tx 2: n = 4) following &amp;gt;50 hours of transportation. Supplementation caused slight (P &amp;lt; 0.2) increases in plasma ascorbic acid concentrations. Both supplemented groups had decreased (P &amp;lt; 0.05) plasma concentrations for 1 to 3 weeks following cessation of supplementation, possibly due to increased renal excretion or suppressed hepatic synthesis. Supplementation of ascorbic acid following prolonged stress will increase plasma concentrations, but prolonged supplementation should be avoided.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/184</guid>
	<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-04-16</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>184</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>194</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Supplementation of Ascorbic Acid in Weanling Horses Following Prolonged Transportation</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-04-16</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2020184</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Sarah Ralston</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Michelle Stives</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/160">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 160-183: Methods for Measuring and Estimating Methane Emission from Ruminants</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/160</link>
	<description>This paper is a brief introduction to the different methods used to quantify the enteric methane emission from ruminants. A thorough knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of these methods is very important in order to plan experiments, understand and interpret experimental results, and compare them with other studies. The aim of the paper is to describe the principles, advantages and disadvantages of different methods used to quantify the enteric methane emission from ruminants. The best-known methods: Chambers/respiration chambers, SF6 technique and in vitro gas production technique and the newer CO2 methods are described. Model estimations, which are used to calculate national budget and single cow enteric emission from intake and diet composition, are also discussed. Other methods under development such as the micrometeorological technique, combined feeder and CH4 analyzer and proxy methods are briefly mentioned. Methods of choice for estimating enteric methane emission depend on aim, equipment, knowledge, time and money available, but interpretation of results obtained with a given method can be improved if knowledge about the disadvantages and advantages are used in the planning of experiments.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/160</guid>
	<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2012 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-04-13</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>160</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>183</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Methods for Measuring and Estimating Methane Emission from Ruminants</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-04-13</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2020160</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Ida M. L. D. Storm</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Anne Louise F. Hellwing</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Nicolaj I. Nielsen</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Jørgen Madsen</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/144">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 144-159: Why Did You Choose This Pet?: Adopters and Pet Selection Preferences in Five Animal Shelters in the United States</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/144</link>
	<description>Responses from an adopter survey (n = 1,491) determined reasons for pet selection, type of information received by the adopter, and the context in which the animal’s behavior was observed. Appearance of the animal, social behavior with adopter, and personality were the top reasons for adoption across species and age groups. Most adopters stated that information about the animal from a staff member or volunteer was more important than information on cage cards, and health and behavior information was particularly important. Adopters found greater importance in interacting with the animal rather than viewing it in its kennel. The results of this study can be used by shelters to create better adoption matches, prioritize shelter resources and staff training, and potentially increase adoptions. Additionally, some simple training techniques are suggested to facilitate adopter-friendly behaviors from sheltered dogs and cats.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/144</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-04-10</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>144</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>159</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Why Did You Choose This Pet?: Adopters and Pet Selection Preferences in Five Animal Shelters in the United States</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-04-10</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2020144</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Emily Weiss</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Katherine Miller</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Heather Mohan-Gibbons</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Carla Vela</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/127">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 127-143: Is the Grass Always Greener? Comparing the Environmental Impact of Conventional, Natural and Grass-Fed Beef Production Systems</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/127</link>
	<description>This study compared the environmental impact of conventional, natural and grass-fed beef production systems. A deterministic model based on the metabolism and nutrient requirements of the beef population was used to quantify resource inputs and waste outputs per 1.0 × 109 kg of hot carcass weight beef in conventional (CON), natural (NAT) and grass-fed (GFD) production systems. Production systems were modeled using characteristic management practices, population dynamics and production data from U.S. beef production systems. Increased productivity (slaughter weight and growth rate) in the CON system reduced the cattle population size required to produce 1.0 × 109 kg of beef compared to the NAT or GFD system. The CON system required 56.3% of the animals, 24.8% of the water, 55.3% of the land and 71.4% of the fossil fuel energy required  to produce 1.0 × 109 kg of beef compared to the GFD system. The carbon footprint per 1.0 × 109 kg of beef was lowest in the CON system (15,989 × 103 t), intermediate in the NAT system (18,772 × 103 t) and highest in the GFD system (26,785 × 103 t). The challenge to the U.S beef industry is to communicate differences in system environmental impacts to facilitate informed dietary choice.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/127</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-04-10</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>127</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>143</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Is the Grass Always Greener? Comparing the Environmental Impact of Conventional, Natural and Grass-Fed Beef Production Systems</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-04-10</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2020127</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Judith L. Capper</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/108">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 108-126: Carbon Footprints for Food of Animal Origin: What are the Most Preferable Criteria to Measure Animal Yields?</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/108</link>
	<description>There are increasing efforts to determine the origin of greenhouse gas emissions caused by human activities (including food consumption) and to identify, apply and exploit reduction potentials. Low emissions are generally the result of increased efficiency in resource utilization. Considering climate related factors, the emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and laughing gas are summarized to so-called carbon footprints (CF). The CF for food of animal origin such as milk, eggs, meat and fish depend on a number of influencing factors such as animal species, type of production, feeding of animals, animal performance, system boundaries and outputs of production. Milk and egg yields are more clearly defined animal yields or outcomes of production than food from the carcasses of animals. Possible endpoints of growing/slaughter animals are body weight gain, carcass weight gain (warm or cold), meat, edible fractions or edible protein. The production of edible protein of animal origin may be considered as one of the main objectives of animal husbandry in many countries. On the other hand, the efficiency of various lines of production and the CF per product can also be easily compared on the basis of edible protein. The pros and contras of various outputs of animal production under special consideration of edible protein are discussed in the paper.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/2/108</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-03-27</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>108</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>126</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Carbon Footprints for Food of Animal Origin: What are the Most Preferable Criteria to Measure Animal Yields?</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-03-27</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2020108</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Gerhard Flachowsky</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Josef Kamphues</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/93">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 93-107: Livestock Helminths in a Changing Climate: Approaches and Restrictions to Meaningful Predictions</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/93</link>
	<description>Climate change is a driving force for livestock parasite risk. This is especially true for helminths including the nematodes Haemonchus contortus, Teladorsagia circumcincta, Nematodirus battus, and the trematode Fasciola hepatica, since survival and development of free-living stages is chiefly affected by temperature and moisture. The paucity of long term predictions of helminth risk under climate change has driven us to explore optimal modelling approaches and identify current bottlenecks to generating meaningful predictions. We classify approaches as correlative or mechanistic, exploring their strengths and limitations. Climate is one aspect of a complex system and, at the farm level, husbandry has a dominant influence on helminth transmission. Continuing environmental change will necessitate the adoption of mitigation and adaptation strategies in husbandry. Long term predictive models need to have the architecture to incorporate these changes. Ultimately, an optimal modelling approach is likely to combine mechanistic processes and physiological thresholds with correlative bioclimatic modelling, incorporating changes in livestock husbandry and disease control. Irrespective of approach, the principal limitation to parasite predictions is the availability of active surveillance data and empirical data on physiological responses to climate variables. By combining improved empirical data and refined models with a broad view of the livestock system, robust projections of helminth risk can be developed.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/93</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-03-06</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>93</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>107</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Livestock Helminths in a Changing Climate: Approaches and Restrictions to Meaningful Predictions</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-03-06</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2010093</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Naomi J. Fox</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Glenn Marion</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Ross S. Davidson</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Piran C. L. White</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Michael R. Hutchings</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/85">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 85-92: Bias During the Evaluation of Animal Studies?</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/85</link>
	<description>My recent book entitled The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments seeks to answer a key question within animal ethics, namely: is animal experimentation ethically justifiable? Or, more precisely, is it justifiable within the utilitarian cost:benefit framework that fundamentally underpins most regulations governing animal experimentation? To answer this question I reviewed more than 500 scientific publications describing animal studies, animal welfare impacts, and alternative research, toxicity testing and educational methodologies. To minimise bias I focused primarily on large-scale systematic reviews that had examined the human clinical and toxicological utility of animal studies. Despite this, Dr. Susanne Prankel recently reviewed my book in this journal, essentially accusing me of bias. However, she failed to provide any substantive evidence to refute my conclusions, let alone evidence of similar weight to that on which they are based. Those conclusions are, in fact, firmly based on utilitarian ethical reasoning, informed by scientific evidence of considerable strength, and I believe they are robust.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/85</guid>
	<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-02-23</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Communication</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>85</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>92</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Bias During the Evaluation of Animal Studies?</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-02-23</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2010085</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Andrew Knight</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/76">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 76-84: The Interaction Between Dietary Valine and Tryptophan Content and Their Effect on the Performance of Piglets</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/76</link>
	<description>Four experimental diets for newly weaned pigs were formulated: (1) low valine and low tryptophan; (2) low valine and high tryptophan; (3) high valine and low tryptophan and (4) high valine and high tryptophan. Dietary standardized ileal digestible (SID) lysine content was 1.06 g/kg. The SID valine to SID lysine ratio was 0.58 and 0.67 for the low and high valine diets, respectively, and SID tryptophan to SID lysine ratios were 0.19 and 0.22 for the low and high tryptophan diets, respectively. In total, 64 pens of 6 pigs (3 barrows and 3 gilts) were divided over the four experimental treatments. No interaction between dietary supply of valine and tryptophan was observed (P &amp;gt; 0.1 for all parameters). Increasing the dietary valine content increased the daily feed intake, daily gain and gain:feed (P &amp;lt; 0.001 for all three parameters). Increasing the dietary tryptophan content improved gain:feed during the first 2 weeks (P &amp;lt; 0.05) and overall (P &amp;lt; 0.05). Valine supply had a greater effect on performance results than tryptophan supply. It may thus be beneficial to provide a diet with an optimal dietary concentration of valine even if other amino acids are at suboptimal dietary levels.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/76</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-02-22</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>76</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>84</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>The Interaction Between Dietary Valine and Tryptophan Content and Their Effect on the Performance of Piglets</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-02-22</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2010076</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Sam Millet</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/68">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 68-75: Analysis of Animal Research Ethics Committee Membership at American Institutions</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/68</link>
	<description>Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) were created to review, approve and oversee animal experiments and to balance the interests of researchers, animals, institutions and the general public. This study analyzed the overall membership of IACUCs at leading U.S. research institutions. We found that these committees and their leadership are comprised of a preponderance of animal researchers, as well as other members who are affiliated with each institution; some of whom also work in animal laboratories. This overwhelming presence of animal research and institutional interests may dilute input from the few IACUC members representing animal welfare and the general public, contribute to previously-documented committee bias in favor of approving animal experiments and reduce the overall objectivity and effectiveness of the oversight system.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/68</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-02-22</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>68</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>75</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Analysis of Animal Research Ethics Committee Membership at American Institutions</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-02-22</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2010068</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Lawrence A. Hansen</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Justin R. Goodman</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Alka Chandna</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/55">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 55-67: Effects of Dietary Fatty Acids on Lipid Traits in the Muscle and Perirenal Fat of Growing Rabbits Fed Mixed Diets</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/55</link>
	<description>The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of various raw materials (spirulina, curcuma, tomato pomace, false flax, linseed, chia, perilla seeds) as suitable polyunsaturated fatty acid n-3 (n-3 PUFA) sources, on the lipid traits in the longissimus dorsi muscle and perirenal fat of growing rabbits. The fatty acid (FA) analyses of the diets, carried out by gas chromatography, differed over a wide range on the basis of the highly varied ingredients in 27 experimental formulations. Among the 29 identified FAs, three from feeds were catabolized in the rabbits, five were de novo synthesized and stored chiefly in the muscle. It was possible to linearly characterize the incorporation from the feed to the muscle of 16 FAs. This study has confirmed that the dietary inclusion of various raw materials could be considered as a way of enriching the n-3 PUFA of rabbit meat. A proposal for the prediction of n-3 PUFA from dietary α-linolenic acid (C18:3 n-3) and a panel of another 10 FAs has been made for intramuscular fat (R2 = 0.94) and perirenal fat (R2 = 0.96).</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/55</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-02-22</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>55</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>67</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Effects of Dietary Fatty Acids on Lipid Traits in the Muscle and Perirenal Fat of Growing Rabbits Fed Mixed Diets</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-02-22</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2010055</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Pier Giorgio Peiretti</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/38">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 38-54: Social Environment and Control Status of Companion Animal-Borne Zoonoses in Japan</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/38</link>
	<description>Changing social and environmental factors have been the cause of an increase in the number and variety of animals are being imported into Japan. Moreover, the number of Japanese households are keeping companion animals has also risen. These factors, along with the high density of the Japanese population and the low percentage of registered dogs, have increased the risk of animal-to-human transmission of zoonoses. To control zoonosis outbreaks, the Japanese government has implemented a three-stage approach for the border control of zoonoses and has stipulated the monitoring and reporting of eight companion animal-borne zoonoses under the Rabies Prevention Law and the Infectious Diseases Control Law. The fact that no case of human and animal rabies has been reported over the past 50 years indicates that these measures are highly effective in preventing rabies transmission. Although it is known that the total number of possible companion animal-borne zoonosis outbreaks decreased between 2005 and 2009 when compared with numbers between 2001 and 2004, the number of zoonosis cases that can be attributed to transmission by companion animals remains unclear. Active surveillance should be conducted on a national level to collect the data necessary to determine this number and identify trends in companion-animal transmitted diseases. Using the data collected, regulation systems should be evaluated to determine whether they have met reasonable goals and policy planning conducted for the control of emerging diseases.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/38</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-02-15</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>38</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>54</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Social Environment and Control Status of Companion Animal-Borne Zoonoses in Japan</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-02-15</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2010038</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Hiromi Takahashi-Omoe</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Katsuhiko Omoe</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/27">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 27-37: Prevalence and Incidence of Abnormal Behaviours in Individually Housed Sheep</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/27</link>
	<description>This study examined the prevalence and incidence of abnormal behaviour in sheep housed individually indoors. Ninety-six castrated Merino sheep were observed using 15-min instantaneous sampling between 08:15 and 18:15 h for two consecutive days over a 3-week period. Sheep on average spent 62% of their time idle, 17% feeding, 1% drinking, 5% pacing, 10% chewing pen fixtures and 4% nosing pen fixtures. Pacing behaviour was predominantly seen in the morning with sheep on average spending 14% of their time pacing. Sheep on average spent 4% of their time in the morning and 13% of their time in the afternoon chewing pen fixtures. In the afternoon, the predominant behaviour was idle with sheep on average spending 71% of their time idle. Seventy-one percent of the sheep displayed one or more of the behaviours of pacing, and chewing and nosing pen fixtures for more than 10% of the day and 47% displayed one or more of these behaviours for more than 20% of the day. The prevalence and incidence of these ‘abnormal’ behaviours appears high, especially in relation to that of sheep grazed outdoors on pasture, and raises the question of the welfare risk to these animals. However, without a more comprehensive appreciation of other aspects of the animal’s biology, such as stress physiology and fitness characteristics, it is difficult to understand the welfare implications of these behaviours.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/27</guid>
	<pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-02-06</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>27</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>37</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Prevalence and Incidence of Abnormal Behaviours in Individually Housed Sheep</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-02-06</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2010027</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Mariko Lauber</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Judy A. Nash</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Allan Gatt</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Paul H. Hemsworth</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/25">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 25-26: The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments: An Evaluation with Bias. By Andrew Knight. Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK, 2011; Hardcover, 272 pp; ISBN 978-0-230-57686-5; Paperback, ISBN: 978-0-230-57687-2</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/25</link>
	<description>The book is part of the Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series which was developed with the publisher and the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics. Andrew Knight is a Fellow of the latter. The Centre “aims to demonstrate rigorous intellectual enquiry and the highest standard of scholarship”  (p. xv), and the series aims to satisfy the growing appetite for literature in the field. Knight presents a wealth of data on the issue of costs and benefits associated with animal experiments and the book goes beyond its title: it also imparts some information on alternatives. As the author states in the introduction, it represents an extension of his own published work. It is intended as a critical review of the available evidence, an aim which is somewhat different to the meta-analysis claimed by the publisher. [...]</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/25</guid>
	<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-01-13</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Book Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>25</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>26</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>The Costs and Benefits of Animal Experiments: An Evaluation with Bias. By Andrew Knight. Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK, 2011; Hardcover, 272 pp; ISBN 978-0-230-57686-5; Paperback, ISBN: 978-0-230-57687-2</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-01-13</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2010025</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Susanne Prankel</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/16">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 16-24: Effects of Dietary Yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisia) Supplementation in Practical Diets of Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus)</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/16</link>
	<description>A 51-day feeding trial was carried out to determine the effects of various dietary levels of brewer’s yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, in the growth performance, body composition and nutrient utilization in Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus, juveniles. Fish (7.6 ± 0.3 g) were stocked into eighteen 1,000-L tanks (100 fish per tank; n = 3) and fed to apparent satiation six isonitrogenous (27% crude protein) and isoenergetic (19 kJ/g) diets, formulated to contain different dried yeast levels (0%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 30% or 40% diet) in substitution to fishmeal. Body weight tripled at the end of the feeding trial for fish fed up to 20% dietary yeast incorporation. Daily growth coefficient (DGC, % body weight/day) decreased with increasing dietary yeast level (P &amp;lt; 0.0001). Voluntary feed intake (VFI, %BW/day) did not vary significantly with increasing yeast level. Fish fed 40% yeast showed significant reduction in protein efficiency rate, protein retention and nitrogen gain. Increasing levels of dietary yeast did not significantly affect protein or lipid digestibility. Dietary dried yeast was seemingly palatable to tilapia juveniles and was suitable up to 15% inclusion to promote growth and efficient diet utilization, without affecting body composition.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/16</guid>
	<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2012-01-13</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>16</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>24</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Effects of Dietary Yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisia) Supplementation in Practical Diets of Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus)</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2012-01-13</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2010016</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Rodrigo O. A. Ozório</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Leandro Portz</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Ricardo Borghesi</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>José E. P. Cyrino</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/1">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 2, Pages 1-15: Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Three Cage Layer Housing Systems</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/1</link>
	<description>Agriculture accounts for 10 to 12% of the World’s total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Manure management alone is responsible for 13% of GHG emissions from the agricultural sector. During the last decade, Québec’s egg production systems have shifted from deep-pit housing systems to manure belt housing systems. The objective of this study was to measure and compare carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from three different cage layer housing systems: a deep liquid manure pit and a manure belt with natural or forced air drying. Deep liquid manure pit housing systems consist of “A” frame layer cages located over a closed pit containing the hens’ droppings to which water is added to facilitate removal by pumping. Manure belt techniques imply that manure drops on a belt beneath each row of battery cages where it is either dried naturally or by forced air until it is removed. The experiment was replicated with 360 hens reared into twelve independent bench-scale rooms during eight weeks (19–27 weeks of age). The natural and forced air manure belt systems reduced CO2 (28.2 and 28.7 kg yr−1 hen−1, respectively), CH4 (25.3 and 27.7 g yr−1 hen−1, respectively) and N2O (2.60 and 2.48 g yr−1 hen−1, respectively) emissions by about 21, 16 and 9% in comparison with the deep-pit technique (36.0 kg CO2 yr−1 hen−1, 31.6 g CH4 yr−1 hen−1 and 2.78 g N2O yr−1 hen−1). The shift to manure belt systems needs to be encouraged since this housing system significantly decreases the production of GHG.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/1/1</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-12-27</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>2</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>15</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Three Cage Layer Housing Systems</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-12-27</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani2010001</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Sébastien Fournel</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Frédéric Pelletier</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Stéphane Godbout</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Robert Lagacé</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>John Feddes</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/433">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 433-446: Construction and Operation of a Ventilated Hood System for Measuring Greenhouse Gas and Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Cattle</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/433</link>
	<description>Recent interest in greenhouse gas emissions from ruminants, such as cattle, has spawned a need for affordable, precise, and accurate methods for the measurement of gaseous emissions arising from enteric fermentation. A new head hood system for cattle designed to capture and quantify emissions was recently developed at the University of California, Davis. The system consists of two head hoods, two vacuum pumps, and an instrumentation cabinet housing the required data collection equipment. This system has the capability of measuring carbon dioxide, methane, ethanol, methanol, water vapor, nitrous oxide, acetic acid emissions and oxygen consumption in real-time. A unique aspect of the hoods is the front, back, and sides are made of clear polycarbonate sheeting allowing the cattle a full range of vision during gas sampling. Recovery rates for these slightly negative pressure chambers were measured ranging from 97.6 to 99.3 percent. This system can capture high quality data for use in improving emission inventories and evaluating gaseous emission mitigation strategies.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/433</guid>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-12-08</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>4</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>433</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>446</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Construction and Operation of a Ventilated Hood System for Measuring Greenhouse Gas and Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Cattle</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-12-08</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1040433</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Sara E. Place</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Yuee Pan</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Yongjing Zhao</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Frank M. Mitloehner</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/414">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 414-432: Bridging the Gap Between Validation and Implementation of Non-Animal Veterinary Vaccine Potency Testing Methods</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/414</link>
	<description>In recent years, technologically advanced high-throughput techniques have been developed that replace, reduce or refine animal use in vaccine quality control tests. Following validation, these tests are slowly being accepted for use by international regulatory authorities. Because regulatory acceptance itself has not guaranteed that approved humane methods are adopted by manufacturers, various organizations have sought to foster the preferential use of validated non-animal methods by interfacing with industry and regulatory authorities. After noticing this gap between regulation and uptake by industry, we began developing a paradigm that seeks to narrow the gap and quicken implementation of new replacement, refinement or reduction guidance. A systematic analysis of our experience in promoting the transparent implementation of validated non-animal vaccine potency assays has led to the refinement of our paradigmatic process, presented here, by which interested parties can assess the local regulatory acceptance of methods that reduce animal use and integrate them into quality control testing protocols, or ensure the elimination of peripheral barriers to their use, particularly for potency and other tests carried out on production batches.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/414</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-11-29</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>4</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>414</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>432</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Bridging the Gap Between Validation and Implementation of Non-Animal Veterinary Vaccine Potency Testing Methods</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-11-29</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1040414</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Samantha Dozier</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Brown</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Alistair Currie</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/402">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 402-413: Investigation of an Imported Case of Rabies in a Juvenile Dog with Atypical Presentation</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/402</link>
	<description>Movement of dogs between rabies-endemic and rabies-free countries carries the inherent risk of introducing the disease. In April of 2008, a juvenile dog was imported to the UK from Sri Lanka. It died shortly after transfer to a quarantine facility in the south-east of England following a short history of diarrhoea and convulsions but no overt signs of aggression. Subsequent investigation confirmed that rabies was the cause of death. Rabies virus was isolated from brain samples taken from the dog and the subsequent phylogenetic investigation confirmed that the genomic sequence from this virus shared over 99% homology with endemic rabies viruses from Sri Lanka. Histological examination of the brain demonstrated clear signs of encephalitis and rabies antigenic labeling in numerous neurons. In this particular case, Negri bodies were absent. As this case was diagnosed in a quarantine facility, the ‘rabies-free’ status of the UK was un-affected.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/402</guid>
	<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-11-18</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>4</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>402</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>413</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Investigation of an Imported Case of Rabies in a Juvenile Dog with Atypical Presentation</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-11-18</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1040402</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Nicholas Johnson</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Alex Nunez</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Denise A. Marston</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Graeme Harkess</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Katja Voller</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Trudy Goddard</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Hicks</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Lorraine M. McElhinney</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Anthony R. Fooks</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/396">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 396-401: Signs Observed Among Animal Species Infected with Raccoon Rabies Variant Virus, Massachusetts, USA, 1992–2010</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/396</link>
	<description>We analyzed signs occurring among domestic and wild terrestrial animal species infected with raccoon rabies variant virus (RRV) in Massachusetts, 1992–2010. The clinical sign of aggression was significantly associated with rabid stray cats (odds ratio, OR = 2.3) and RRV affected major wild terrestrial animal species individually, which included raccoons (OR = 2.8), skunks (OR = 8.0), gray foxes (OR = 21.3), red foxes (OR = 10.4), woodchucks (OR = 4.7) and coyotes (OR = 27.6). While aggression is a useful predictor of rabies among wild animals, combinations of other signs such as ataxia, disorientation, and salivation are useful predictors of rabies among domestic animals. Pets reported with multiple clinical signs had significantly higher rabies positive testing result than those reported with single clinical sign (p &amp;lt; 0.001). The result suggested the importance of avoiding aggressive terrestrial wild animals and giving additional attention to pets with multiple clinical signs.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/396</guid>
	<pubDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-11-18</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>4</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>396</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>401</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Signs Observed Among Animal Species Infected with Raccoon Rabies Variant Virus, Massachusetts, USA, 1992–2010</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-11-18</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1040396</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Xingtai Wang</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Barbara G. Werner</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Sandra Smole</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Vasil Pani</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Linda L. Han</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/377">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 377-395: Zoonotic Poxviruses Associated with Companion Animals</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/377</link>
	<description>Understanding the zoonotic risk posed by poxviruses in companion animals is important for protecting both human and animal health. The outbreak of monkeypox in the United States, as well as current reports of cowpox in Europe, point to the fact that companion animals are increasingly serving as sources of poxvirus transmission to people. In addition, the trend among hobbyists to keep livestock (such as goats) in urban and semi-urban areas has contributed to increased parapoxvirus exposures among people not traditionally considered at high risk. Despite the historic notoriety of poxviruses and the diseases they cause, poxvirus infections are often missed. Delays in diagnosing poxvirus-associated infections in companion animals can lead to inadvertent human exposures. Delays in confirming human infections can result in inappropriate treatment or prolonged recovery. Early recognition of poxvirus-associated infections and application of appropriate preventive measures can reduce the spread of virus between companion animals and their owners. This review will discuss the epidemiology and clinical features associated with the zoonotic poxvirus infections most commonly associated with companion animals.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/377</guid>
	<pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-11-17</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>4</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>377</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>395</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Zoonotic Poxviruses Associated with Companion Animals</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-11-17</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1040377</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Danielle M. Tack</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Mary G. Reynolds</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/366">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 366-376: Welfare of Aged Horses</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/366</link>
	<description>Horses form a unique and special part of their owners’ lives and aged horses are no exception. This review considers the health and management of aged horses, including the role of the owner and their perceptions of aged horses, potential threats or risks to their welfare and finally, factors affecting quality of life and euthanasia of aged horses. Owners of aged horses are concerned about the health, welfare and quality of life of their aged animals. Yet surveys of management and preventive healthcare reflect that there may be some limitations to what owners are actually achieving in practice. They show declining management as horses age, particularly for the retired horse and insufficient appropriate preventive healthcare via veterinary surgeons. The veterinary surgeon plays an essential and influential role in preventive healthcare, management of diseases and disorders and ultimately in the decision making process for euthanasia of aged horses at the end of their lives. The value of aged horses should not be underestimated by veterinarians and others working with them and the continuing care of aged horses should be regarded with the same importance as the care of younger horses with more obvious monetary value.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/366</guid>
	<pubDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-10-31</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>4</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>366</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>376</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Welfare of Aged Horses</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-10-31</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1040366</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Catherine McGowan</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/343">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 343-365: Managing Livestock Species under Climate Change in Australia</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/343</link>
	<description>This paper examines the vulnerabilities of major livestock species raised in Australia to climate change using the regional livestock profile of Australia of around 1,400 regions. The number of each species owned, the number of each species sold, and the aggregate livestock revenue across all species are examined. The four major species analyzed are sheep, beef cattle, dairy cattle, and pigs. The analysis also includes livestock products such as wool and milk. These livestock production statistics are regressed against climate, geophysical, market and household characteristics. In contrast to crop studies, the analysis finds that livestock species are resilient to a hotter and more arid climate. Under the CSIRO climate scenario in which temperature increases by 3.4 °C, livestock revenue per farm increases significantly while the number of each species owned increases by large percentages except for dairy cattle. The precipitation reduction by about 8% in 2060 also increases the numbers of livestock species per farm household. Under both UKMO and GISS scenarios, livestock revenue is expected to increase by around 47% while the livestock population increases by large percentage. Livestock management may play a key role in adapting to a hot and arid climate in Australia. However, critical values of the climatic variables for the species analyzed in this paper are not obvious from the regional data.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/343</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2011 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-10-19</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>4</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>343</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>365</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Managing Livestock Species under Climate Change in Australia</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-10-19</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1040343</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>S. Niggol Seo</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Bruce McCarl</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/326">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 326-342: Canine Rabies: A Looming Threat to Public Health</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/326</link>
	<description>Rabies is an acute, fatal viral disease that infects domestic and wild animals and is transmissible to humans. Worldwide, rabies kills over 55,000 people every year. The domestic dog plays a pivotal role in rabies transmission. Domestic dogs are not only part of our daily lives but also of our immediate surroundings, and this is reflected in the rise in pet dog ownership in developed and developing countries. This is important given that more frequent exposures and interactions at the animal-human interface increases the likelihood of contracting zoonotic diseases of companion animals. Despite existing vaccines and post-exposure prophylactic treatment, rabies remains a neglected disease that is poorly controlled throughout much of the developing world, particularly Africa and Asia, where most human rabies deaths occur. It is believed that with sustained international commitments, global elimination of rabies from domestic dog populations, the most dangerous vector to humans, is a realistic goal.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/4/326</guid>
	<pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-09-26</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>4</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>326</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>342</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Canine Rabies: A Looming Threat to Public Health</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-09-26</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1040326</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Sigfrido Burgos-Cáceres</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/306">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 306-325: Vaccines against a Major Cause of Abortion in Cattle, Neospora caninum Infection</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/306</link>
	<description>Neosporosis, caused by the apicomplexan parasite Neospora caninum, represents one of the economically most important causes of abortion in cattle. During pregnancy, the parasite infects the placental tissue and the fetus, which can lead to stillbirth, abortion, or birth of weak calves. Alternatively, calves are born without clinical symptoms, but they can carry over the parasite to the next generation. In addition, N. caninum causes neuromuscular disease in dogs. The economic importance of neosporosis has prompted researchers to invest in the development of measures to prevent infection of cattle by vaccination. A good vaccine must stimulate protective cellular immune responses as well as antibody responses at mucosal sites and, systemically, must activate T-helper cells to produce relevant cytokines, and must elicit specific antibodies that aid in limiting parasite proliferation, e.g., by interference with host cell invasion, activation of complement, and/or opsonization of parasites to have them killed by macrophages. Different types of vaccines have been investigated, either in bovines or in the mouse model. These include live vaccines such as naturally less virulent isolates of N. caninum, attenuated strains generated by irradiation or chemical means, or genetically modified transgenic strains. Live vaccines were shown to be very effective; however, there are serious disadvantages in terms of safety, costs of production, and stability of the final product. Subunit vaccines have been intensively studied, as they would have clear advantages such as reduced costs in production, processing and storage, increased stability and shelf life. The parasite antigens involved in adhesion and invasion of host cells, such as surface constituents, microneme-, rhoptry- and dense granule-components represent interesting targets. Subunit vaccines have been applied as bacterially expressed recombinant antigens or as DNA vaccines. Besides monovalent vaccines also polyvalent combinations of different antigens have been used, providing increased protection. Vaccines have been combined with immunostimulating carriers and, more recently, chimeric vaccines, incorporating immuno-relevant domains of several antigens into a single protein, have been developed.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/306</guid>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-09-08</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>3</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>306</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>325</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Vaccines against a Major Cause of Abortion in Cattle, Neospora caninum Infection</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-09-08</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1030306</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Thierry Monney</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Karim Debache</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Hemphill</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/291">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 291-305: Cosmopolitanism and Biogeography of the Genus Manganonema (Nematoda: Monhysterida) in the Deep Sea</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/291</link>
	<description>Spatial patterns of species diversity provide information about the mechanisms that regulate biodiversity and are important for setting conservation priorities. Present knowledge of the biogeography of meiofauna in the deep sea is scarce. This investigation focuses on the distribution of the deep-sea nematode genus Manganonema, which is typically extremely rare in deep-sea sediment samples. Forty-four specimens of eight different species of this genus were recorded from different Atlantic and Mediterranean regions. Four out of the eight species encountered are new to science. We report here that this genus is widespread both in the Atlantic and in the Mediterranean Sea. These new findings together with literature information indicate that Manganonema is a cosmopolitan genus, inhabiting a variety of deep-sea habitats and oceans. Manganonema shows the highest diversity at water depths &amp;gt;4,000 m. Our data, therefore, indicate that this is preferentially an abyssal genus that is able, at the same time, to colonize specific habitats at depths shallower than 1,000 m. The analysis of the distribution of the genus Manganonema indicates the presence of large differences in dispersal strategies among different species, ranging from locally endemic to cosmopolitan. Lacking meroplanktonic larvae and having limited dispersal ability due to their small size, it has been hypothesized that nematodes have limited dispersal potential. However, the investigated deep-sea nematodes were present across different oceans covering macro-scale distances. Among the possible explanations (hydrological conditions, geographical and geological pathways, long-term processes, specific historical events), their apparent preference of colonizing highly hydrodynamic systems, could suggest that these infaunal organisms are transported by means of deep-sea benthic storms and turbidity currents over long distances.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/291</guid>
	<pubDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2011 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-09-05</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>3</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>291</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>305</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Cosmopolitanism and Biogeography of the Genus Manganonema (Nematoda: Monhysterida) in the Deep Sea</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-09-05</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1030291</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Daniela Zeppilli</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Ann Vanreusel</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Roberto Danovaro</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/259">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 259-290: Bats of the Western Indian Ocean Islands</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/259</link>
	<description>The natural colonisation of many remote oceanic islands by bats, including those of the western Indian Ocean, has been facilitated by their unique capability among mammals for powered flight. In the western Indian Ocean region, only the Malagasy islands of Madagascar and the Comoros archipelago have been naturally colonised by non-volant mammals. Despite their greater potential for inter-island dispersal, and thus gene transfer, endemicity of Chiroptera in the western Indian Ocean islands is high. Given their vulnerability to stochastic and anthropogenic disturbances, greater focus needs to be placed on investigating the demographic and ecological history of bats on Western Indian Ocean islands to safeguard not only their future, but also the ecosystem functioning on these islands, for which they are undoubtedly such an integral part. Here, I summarise the taxonomic and life history information available on bats from Western Indian Ocean islands and highlight knowledge gaps and conservation issues that threaten the continued persistence of some species.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/259</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-08-16</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>3</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>259</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>290</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Bats of the Western Indian Ocean Islands</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-08-16</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1030259</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>John O’Brien</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/256">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 256-258: A Review of Introducing Issues with Opposing Viewpoints: Animal Rights. By Lauri S. Friedman. Greenhaven Press: Farmington   Hills, MI, USA, 2010; Hardcover, 144 pp; Price: $33.58; ISBN: 978-0737749373</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/256</link>
	<description>Given the volatile nature of animal rights issues and the extensive array of writings on the topic, one might expect several introductory anthologies to be available. The only anthologies in print, however, are scholarly tomes (listed below) geared towards more advanced readers. Fortunately, Lauri S. Friedman, author of dozens of anthologies on controversial topics such as gun control, national security, terrorism, fast food, sexually transmitted diseases, and many other topics, fills this void well with her volume titled Introducing Issues with Opposing Viewpoints: Animal Rights. She has included articles by influential authors in a diverse range of lay outlets such as The Wall Street Journal, Slate, Guardian, Christianity Today, Food &amp;amp; Wine, among others. Below, I describe the contents of the book, its strengths and weaknesses, and how educators might use the book in classroom settings.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/3/256</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2011 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-07-06</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>3</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Book Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>256</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>258</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>A Review of Introducing Issues with Opposing Viewpoints: Animal Rights. By Lauri S. Friedman. Greenhaven Press: Farmington   Hills, MI, USA, 2010; Hardcover, 144 pp; Price: $33.58; ISBN: 978-0737749373</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-07-06</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1030256</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Lee J. Markowitz</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/2/242">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 242-255: Plague: Infections of Companion Animals and Opportunities for Intervention</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/2/242</link>
	<description>Plague is a zoonotic disease, normally circulating in rodent populations, transmitted to humans most commonly through the bite of an infected flea vector. Secondary infection of the lungs results in generation of infectious aerosols, which pose a significant hazard to close contacts. In enzootic areas, plague infections have been reported in owners and veterinarians who come into contact with infected pets. Dogs are relatively resistant, but can import infected fleas into the home. Cats are acutely susceptible, and can present a direct hazard to health. Reducing roaming and hunting behaviours, combined with flea control measures go some way to reducing the risk to humans. Various vaccine formulations have been developed which may be suitable to protect companion animals from contracting plague, and thus preventing onward transmission to man. Since transmission has resulted in a number of fatal cases of plague, the vaccination of domestic animals such as cats would seem a low cost strategy for reducing the risk of infection by this serious disease in enzootic regions.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/2/242</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-06-21</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>242</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>255</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Plague: Infections of Companion Animals and Opportunities for Intervention</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-06-21</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1020242</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Petra   C.F. Oyston</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Diane Williamson</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/2/205">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 205-241: Aquatic Biodiversity in the Amazon: Habitat Specialization and Geographic Isolation Promote Species Richness</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/2/205</link>
	<description>The Neotropical freshwater ichthyofauna has among the highest species richness and density of any vertebrate fauna on Earth, with more than 5,600 species compressed into less than 12% of the world’s land surface area, and less than 0.002% of the world’s total liquid water supply. How have so many species come to co-exist in such a small amount of total habitat space? Here we report results of an aquatic faunal survey of the Fitzcarrald region in southeastern Peru, an area of low-elevation upland (200–500 m above sea level) rainforest in the Western Amazon, that straddles the headwaters of four large Amazonian tributaries; the Juruá (Yurúa), Ucayali, Purús, and Madre de Dios rivers. All measures of fish species diversity in this region are high; there is high alpha diversity with many species coexisting in the same locality, high beta diversity with high turnover between habitats, and high gamma diversity with high turnover between adjacent tributary basins. Current data show little species endemism, and no known examples of sympatric sister species, within the Fitzcarrald region, suggesting a lack of localized or recent adaptive divergences. These results support the hypothesis that the fish species of the Fitzcarrald region are relatively ancient, predating the Late Miocene-Pliocene (c. 4 Ma) uplift that isolated its several headwater basins. The results also suggest that habitat specialization (phylogenetic niche conservatism) and geographic isolation (dispersal limitation) have contributed to the maintenance of high species richness in this region of the Amazon Basin.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/2/205</guid>
	<pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-04-29</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>2</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>205</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>241</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Aquatic Biodiversity in the Amazon: Habitat Specialization and Geographic Isolation Promote Species Richness</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-04-29</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1020205</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>James S. Albert</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Tiago P. Carvalho</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Paulo Petry</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Meghan A. Holder</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Emmanuel L. Maxime</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Jessica Espino</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Isabel Corahua</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Roberto Quispe</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Blanca Rengifo</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Hernan Ortega</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Roberto E. Reis</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/200">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 200-204: The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition or Regulation?</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/200</link>
	<description>The simple, but quite unusual plan, promised much: two leading academics (Gary Francione and Robert Garner) prepared to make their respective cases with conviction and candour, followed by a lively debate between them, during which no stone need be left unturned. In prospect, then, was an opportunity for nuances to be clarified, misunderstandings dispelled and some common ground established. But while it proved to be an enthralling engagement, the apparent inability of one author to concede even an inch of ground to the other’s case meant that the divide between the viewpoints was, regrettably, no narrower at the end than at the beginning. [...]</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/200</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-03-15</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Book Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>200</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>204</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition or Regulation?</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-03-15</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010200</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Ben Mepham</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/186">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 186-199: Silence and Denial in Everyday Life—The Case of Animal Suffering</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/186</link>
	<description>How can we make sense of the fact that we live in a world where good people co-exist in silence about widespread animal suffering. How is it that sites of suffering such as laboratories, factory farms, abattoirs and animal transportation are all around us and yet we ‘do not, in a certain sense, know about them’ [1]. This ‘not knowing’ is one of the most difficult barriers for animal activists who must constantly develop new strategies in an attempt to catch public attention and translate it into action. Recent contributions from the ‘sociology of denial’ have elucidated many of the mechanisms involved in ‘not knowing’ in relation to human atrocities and genocide. In this context, ‘denial’ refers to the maintenance of social worlds in which an undesirable situation is unrecognized, ignored or made to seem normal [2]. These include different types of denial: personal, official and cultural, as well as the process of normalization whereby suffering becomes invisible through routinization, tolerance, accommodation, collusion and cover up. Denial and normalization reflect both personal and collective states where suffering is not acknowledged [3]. In this paper, I will examine insights from the sociology of denial and apply them to human denial and normalization of animal suffering. This will include an examination of denial which is both individual and social and the implications of these insights for theory and practice in the human/animal relationship.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/186</guid>
	<pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-02-21</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>186</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>199</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Silence and Denial in Everyday Life—The Case of Animal Suffering</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-02-21</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010186</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Deidre Wicks</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/176">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 176-185: A Conservation Ethic and the Collecting of Animals by Institutions of Natural Heritage in the Twenty-First Century: Case Study of the Australian Museum</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/176</link>
	<description>Collecting of animals from their habitats for preservation by museums and related bodies is a core operation of such institutions. Conservation of biodiversity in the current era is a priority in the scientific agendas of museums of natural heritage in Australia and the world. Intuitively, to take animals from the wild, while engaged in scientific or other practices that are supposed to promote their ongoing survival, may appear be incompatible. The Australian Museum presents an interesting ground to consider zoological collecting by museums in the twenty-first century. Anderson and Reeves in 1994 argued that a milieu existed that undervalued native species, and that the role of natural history museums, up to as late as the mid-twentieth century, was only to make a record the faunal diversity of Australia, which would inevitably be extinct. Despite the latter, conservation of Australia’s faunal diversity is a key aspect of research programmes in Australia’s institutions of natural heritage in the current era. This paper analyses collecting of animals, a core task for institutions of natural heritage, and how this interacts with a professed “conservation ethic” in a twenty-first century Australian setting.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/176</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-02-15</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>176</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>185</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>A Conservation Ethic and the Collecting of Animals by Institutions of Natural Heritage in the Twenty-First Century: Case Study of the Australian Museum</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-02-15</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010176</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Timothy Ikin</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/161">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 161-175: Countering Brutality to Wildlife, Relationism and Ethics: Conservation, Welfare and the ‘Ecoversity’</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/161</link>
	<description>Wildlife objectification and cruelty are everyday aspects of Australian society that eschew values of human kindness, empathy, and an understanding of the uniqueness and importance of non-human life in the natural world. Fostered by institutional failure, greed and selfishness, and the worst aspects of human disregard, the objectification of animals has its roots in longstanding Western anthropocentric philosophical perspectives, post colonialism, and a global uptake of neoliberal capitalism. Conservation, animal rights and welfare movements have been unable to stem the ever-growing abuse of wildlife, while ‘greenwash’ language such as ‘resource use’, ‘management’, ‘pests’, ‘over-abundance’, ‘conservation hunting’ and ‘ecology’ coat this violence with a respectable public veneer. We propose an engaged learning approach to address the burgeoning culture of wildlife cruelty and objectification that comprises three elements: a relational ethic based on intrinsic understanding of the way wildlife and humans might view each other [1-3]; geography of place and space [4], where there are implications for how we ascribe contextual meaning and practice in human-animal relations; and, following [5], engaged learning designed around our ethical relations with others, beyond the biophysical and novel and towards the reflective metaphysical. We propose the ‘ecoversity’ [6], as a scholarly and practical tool for focusing on the intersection of these three elements as an ethical place-based learning approach to wildlife relationism. We believe it provides a mechanism to help bridge the gap between human and non-human animals, conservation and welfare, science and understanding, and between objectification and relationism as a means of addressing entrenched cruelty to wildlife.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/161</guid>
	<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-01-27</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>161</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>175</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Countering Brutality to Wildlife, Relationism and Ethics: Conservation, Welfare and the ‘Ecoversity’</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-01-27</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010161</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Steve Garlick</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Julie Matthews</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Carter</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/144">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 144-160: Conceptualising Animal Abuse with an Antisocial Behaviour Framework</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/144</link>
	<description>This paper reviews current findings in the human aggression and antisocial behaviour literature and those in the animal abuse literature with the aim of highlighting the overlap in conceptualisation. The major aim of this review is to highlight that the co-occurrence between animal abuse behaviours and aggression and violence toward humans can be logically understood through examination of the research evidence for antisocial and aggressive behaviour. From examination through this framework, it is not at all surprising that the two co-occur. Indeed, it would be surprising if they did not. Animal abuse is one expression of antisocial behaviour. What is also known from the extensive antisocial behaviour literature is that antisocial behaviours co-occur such that the presence of one form of antisocial behaviour is highly predictive of the presence of other antisocial behaviours. From such a framework, it becomes evident that animal abuse should be considered an important indicator of antisocial behaviour and violence as are other aggressive and antisocial behaviours. The implications of such a stance are that law enforcement, health and other professionals should not minimize the presence of animal abuse in their law enforcement, prevention, and treatment decisions.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/144</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-01-26</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Review</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>144</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>160</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Conceptualising Animal Abuse with an Antisocial Behaviour Framework</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-01-26</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010144</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Eleonora Gullone</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/126">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 126-143: Integrating Values and Ethics into Wildlife Policy and Management—Lessons from North America</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/126</link>
	<description>Few animals provoke as wide a range of emotions as wolves. Some see wolves as icons of a lost wilderness; others see them as intruders. As the battle continues between wolf proponents and opponents, finding solutions that resolve conflicts while supporting the integrity of nature is challenging. In this essay we argue that we need to make room for wolves and other native carnivores who are re-colonizing areas from which they were extirpated. Strategies that foster coexistence are necessary and wildlife agencies must consider all stakeholders and invest adequate resources to inform the public about how to mitigate conflicts between people/domestic animals, and predators. Values and ethics must be woven into wildlife policy and management and we must be willing to ask difficult ethical questions and learn from past mistakes.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/126</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-01-25</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>126</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>143</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Integrating Values and Ethics into Wildlife Policy and Management—Lessons from North America</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-01-25</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010126</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Camilla H. Fox</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Marc Bekoff</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/116">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 116-125: What’s in a Name?—Consequences of Naming Non-Human Animals</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/116</link>
	<description>The act of naming is among the most basic actions of language. Indeed, it is naming something that enables us to communicate about it in specific terms, whether the object named is human or non-human, animate or inanimate. However, naming is not as uncomplicated as we may usually think and names have consequences for the way we think about animals (human and non-human), peoples, species, places, things etc. Through a blend of history, philosophy and representational theory—and using examples from, among other things, the Bible, Martin Luther, colonialism/imperialism and contemporary ways of keeping and regarding non-human animals—this paper attempts to trace the importance of (both specific and generic) naming to our relationships with the non-human. It explores this topic from the naming of the animals in Genesis to the names given and used by scientists, keepers of companion animals, media etc. in our societies today, and asks the question of what the consequences of naming non-human animals are for us, for the beings named and for the power relations between our species and the non-human species and individuals we name.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/116</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-01-19</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>116</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>125</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>What’s in a Name?—Consequences of Naming Non-Human Animals</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-01-19</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010116</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Sune Borkfelt</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/102">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 102-115: Animal Rights as a Mainstream Phenomenon</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/102</link>
	<description>Businesses and professions must stay in accord with social ethics, or risk losing their autonomy.A major social ethical issue that has emerged in the past four decades is the treatment of animals in various areas of human use. Society’s moral concern has outgrown the traditional ethic of animal cruelty that began in biblical times and is encoded in the laws of all civilized societies. There are five major reasons for this new social concern, most importantly, the replacement of husbandry-based agriculture with industrial agriculture. This loss of husbandry to industry has threatened the traditional fair contract between humans and animals, and resulted in significant amounts of animal suffering arising on four different fronts. Because such suffering is not occasioned by cruelty, a new ethic for animals was required to express social concerns. Since ethics proceed from preexisting ethics rather than ex nihilo, society has looked to its ethic for humans, appropriately modified, to find moral categories applicable to animals. This concept of legally encoded rights for animals has emerged as a plausible vehicle for reform.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/102</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-01-19</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>102</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>115</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Animal Rights as a Mainstream Phenomenon</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-01-19</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010102</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Bernard E. Rollin</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/83">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 83-101: From “Animal Machines” to “Happy Meat”? Foucault’s Ideas of Disciplinary and Pastoral Power Applied to ‘Animal-Centred’ Welfare Discourse</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/83</link>
	<description>Michel Foucault’s work traces shifting techniques in the governance of humans, from the production of ‘docile bodies’ subjected to the knowledge formations of the human sciences (disciplinary power), to the facilitation of self-governing agents directed towards specified forms of self-knowledge by quasi-therapeutic authorities (pastoral power). While mindful of the important differences between the governance of human subjects and the oppression of nonhuman animals, exemplified in nonhuman animals’ legal status as property, this paper explores parallel shifts from disciplinary to pastoral regimes of human-‘farmed’ animal relations. Recent innovations in ‘animal-centred’ welfare science represent a trend away from the ‘disciplinary’ techniques of confinement and torture associated with ‘factory farms’ and towards quasi-therapeutic ways of claiming to know ‘farmed’ animals, in which the animals themselves are co-opted into the processes by which knowledge about them is generated. The new pastoral turn in ‘animal-centred’ welfare finds popular expression in ‘happy meat’ discourses that invite ‘consumers’ to adopt a position of vicarious carer for the ‘farmed’ animals who they eat. The paper concludes that while ‘animal-centred’ welfare reform and ‘happy meat’ discourses promise a possibility of a somewhat less degraded life for some ‘farmed’ animals, they do so by perpetuating exploitation and oppression and entrenching speciesist privilege by making it less vulnerable to critical scrutiny.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/83</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2011-01-11</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>83</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>101</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>From “Animal Machines” to “Happy Meat”? Foucault’s Ideas of Disciplinary and Pastoral Power Applied to ‘Animal-Centred’ Welfare Discourse</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2011-01-11</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010083</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Matthew Cole</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/69">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 69-82: Challenges to the Development and Implementation of Public Policies to Achieve Animal Welfare Outcomes</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/69</link>
	<description>Although there is a long-established tradition of concern for the welfare of animals, it was not until the mid 1800’s that governments sought to enact legislation to protect animals from cruelty. In the 1950’s, questions concerning animal welfare re-emerged and in the ensuing years have been an on-going focus of government activities. These developments occurred against a backdrop of significant social change but there are important differences in what now underpins and informs these considerations. In the formulation and implementation of public policies, governments look for a course of action that represents and protects the interests of the community; the process may be challenging with competing interests but the final determination seeks a middle ground that best meets the needs and interests of the community as a whole. When policy development concerns our relationship with other animals, the complexity of this relationship presents particular challenges not only to the formulation of policies but also to the evaluation of outcomes. Notably, the depth of feelings and diversity of views in our community reflect the complex social, cultural and personal dimensions of this relationship. The use of animals for scientific purposes remains one of the most contentious animal welfare issues primarily because when animals are used for these purposes, accepted animal welfare benchmarks cannot always be met. Based on the Australian experience, this paper will discuss the influences in and on-going challenges to the development and implementation of public policy when animals are used for these purposes.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/69</guid>
	<pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2010 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2010-12-31</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>69</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>82</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Challenges to the Development and Implementation of Public Policies to Achieve Animal Welfare Outcomes</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2010-12-31</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010069</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Margaret Rose</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/56">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 56-68: The Mirror Has Two Faces: Contradictory Reflections of Donkeys in Western Literature from Lucius to Balthazar</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/56</link>
	<description>How we represent animals both reflects our attitudes towards them and affects our treatment of them. The donkey has lived alongside humans, bearing their burdens since the time of their domestication over 10,000 years ago. Despite this, they have invariably enjoyed a low status in human cultures, received little appreciation and been treated harshly. We view some animals as being more worthy than others and represent them accordingly: donkeys have been ridiculed and derided. Literary representations of donkeys from the fables of Ancient Greece to contemporary iconic texts are explored to follow the donkey through the human imaginary. These representations derive from two main, conflicting sources, Greek literature and the Bible. Examining these cultural representations may lead towards a greater understanding of the way they affect the actual animal and lead to a greater understanding of that animal and, ultimately, to better treatment of them.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/56</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2010 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2010-12-14</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>56</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>68</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>The Mirror Has Two Faces: Contradictory Reflections of Donkeys in Western Literature from Lucius to Balthazar</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2010-12-14</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010056</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Jill Bough</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/40">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 40-55: An Inclusive Re-Engagement with our Nonhuman Animal Kin: Considering Human Interrelationships with Nonhuman Animals</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/40</link>
	<description>As humans increasingly acknowledge the effects that they are having on the planet, there is a realisation implicit in these effects that human interrelationships with nature are actually arbitrated and expedited exploitatively. Understanding how the different discourses and histories through which the interrelationships with nature are mediated and actually told and then retold is fundamental to appreciating how humans may relate with nature less exploitatively and in ways that are more inclusionary, particularly with nonhuman animals. Humans perceive nature and individual nonhuman animals in various ways. This paper provides an investigation of how humans have socially constructed nature and their place as either within or outside of it. Such constructions are elaborated conceptually and through narrative. More pertinently, this paper examines how nature and nonhuman animals are perceived and placed within those narratives that humans construct from reality. It is stressed here that such constructions have, and may continue, to lead to a worsening of the effects that humans have on the planet if there is no acceptance or recognition that certain realities exist beyond the exploitative bounds of any human-inspired concept or narrative. This paper therefore provides the groundwork for the foundations of an ethic that is both socially and ecologically inclusive and is based on a soft realist approach.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/40</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2010 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2010-12-14</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>40</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>55</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>An Inclusive Re-Engagement with our Nonhuman Animal Kin: Considering Human Interrelationships with Nonhuman Animals</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2010-12-14</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010040</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Rod Bennison</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/27">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 27-39: A Translocal Perspective: Mustang Images in the Cultural, Economic and Political Landscape</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/27</link>
	<description>Translocal spaces are created out of the process of globalization whereby interventions such as electronic media and migration radically change social relations and breakdown the isomorphism of space, place, and culture [1]. This approach is useful in examining the controversy surrounding the mustang. This paper explores how different social constructions influence the management of mustangs as they move between the local and national level. At each cultural level, political, economic, and environmental issues converge encouraging the emphasis of some cultural constructions over others. These socially constructed images give insight into what the mustang means to a post-industrial culture and it may simultaneously contribute to the animal’s eventual demise.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/27</guid>
	<pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2010 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2010-12-14</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>27</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>39</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>A Translocal Perspective: Mustang Images in the Cultural, Economic and Political Landscape</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2010-12-14</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010027</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Karen Dalke</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/7">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 7-26: An International Comparison of Female and Male Students’ Attitudes to the Use of Animals</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/7</link>
	<description>Previous research has demonstrated that in households where the male partner is more dominant, there is convergence in male and female attitudes towards animals, whereas if the female partner is empowered they exhibit greater empathy towards animals than the male partner. We tested this theory of ‘female empowered empathy’ internationally in a survey of female and male students’ attitudes towards use of animals, conducted in 11 Eurasian countries: China, Czech Republic, Great Britain, Iran, Ireland, South Korea, Macedonia, Norway, Serbia, Spain and Sweden. Gender empowerment was estimated for each country using the Gender Empowerment Measure designed by the United Nations. The survey was administered via the internet in universities within countries, and 1,902 female and 1,530 male student responses from 102 universities were received. Respondents rated the acceptability of 43 major concerns about human use of animals, and the importance of 13 world social issues, including animal protection, environmental protection and sustainable development. Females had greater concern for animal welfare and rights than males. There was a positive correlation between the Gender Empowerment Measure and the ratio of female to male concern for animal welfare and rights, but not for other world issues. Thus in countries where females were more empowered, principally Sweden, Norway and Great Britain, females had much greater concern than males for animal issues, whereas in other countries the responses of males and females were more similar. Across countries female students were more likely to avoid meat and less likely to avoid eggs, milk and seafood than male students, and were more likely to have kept pets than males. Females rated cats as more sentient than males did. The results demonstrate that females have greater concern for animal welfare and rights than males, and that this is more likely to be expressed in countries where females are relatively empowered, suggesting that ‘emancipated female empathy’ operates across countries as well as at a local level.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/7</guid>
	<pubDate>Thu, 09 Dec 2010 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2010-12-09</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>7</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>26</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>An International Comparison of Female and Male Students’ Attitudes to the Use of Animals</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2010-12-09</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010007</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Clive Phillips</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Serdar Izmirli</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Javid Aldavood</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Marta Alonso</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Bi Choe</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Alison Hanlon</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Anastasija Handziska</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Gudrun Illmann</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Linda Keeling</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Mark Kennedy</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Gwi Lee</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Vonne Lund</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Cecilie Mejdell</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Veselinas Pelagic</dc:creator>
		<dc:creator>Therese Rehn</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/4">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 4-6: Minding Animals: A Transdisciplinary Approach for Furthering Our Understanding of Animals in Society</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/4</link>
	<description>I&#039;m honored to be the guest editor of this volume of Animals. The essays included here are in the spirit of this new and forward-looking journal http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/1/pdf. They stem from a precedent setting gathering of scholars from all over the world representing many different disciplines at a meeting called ‘Minding Animals’, held in Newcastle, Australia in July 2009 (http://www.mindinganimals.com//index.php?option=com_content&amp;amp;task=view&amp;amp;id=210&amp;amp;Itemid=236). All of the delegates who journeyed from varying distances, sometimes huge, to be part of this unique gathering, shared a deep interest in learning more about who nonhuman animals (hereafter, animals) are from colleagues studying them from various perspectives, representing disciplines including biology, psychology, anthropology, and the social sciences and humanities. Not surprisingly, the meeting was characterized by great enthusiasm, lots of discussion often bordering on the frenetic since people would soon be dispersing to their homelands and not be readily accessible, and a commitment to continue learning more about animals in society.</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/4</guid>
	<pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 00:00:00 CET</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2010-12-08</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Editorial</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>4</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>6</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Minding Animals: A Transdisciplinary Approach for Furthering Our Understanding of Animals in Society</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2010-12-08</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010004</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Marc Bekoff</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/1">
	<title>Animals, Vol. 1, Pages 1-3: Animals, Quo Vadis? Welcome to a New, Multidisciplinary, Integrated, Open Access Journal: Animals</title>
	<link>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/1</link>
	<description>Without animals this planet would be a very different place, indeed many of the remaining life forms could not exist. As animals ourselves we are linked to a vast network of moving, living, reproducing organisms that form an essential part of the various ecosystems that are themselves competing for survival. By virtue of our large cognitive capacity and complex societal living structures, we manage and influence many of these ecosystems, in the most extreme way by keeping animals captive for our own benefit. [...]</description>
	
	<guid>http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/1/1/1</guid>
	<pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2010 00:00:00 CEST</pubDate>
	
	<prism:publicationName>Animals</prism:publicationName>
	<prism:publicationDate>2010-09-24</prism:publicationDate>
	<prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
	<prism:number>1</prism:number>
	<prism:section>Editorial</prism:section>
	<prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
		<prism:endingPage>3</prism:endingPage>
		<prism:issn>2076-2615</prism:issn>
	
	<dc:title>Animals, Quo Vadis? Welcome to a New, Multidisciplinary, Integrated, Open Access Journal: Animals</dc:title>
	<dc:date>2010-09-24</dc:date>
	<dc:identifier>doi: 10.3390/ani1010001</dc:identifier>
    	<dc:creator>Clive Phillips</dc:creator>
	
	<cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" />
</item>
    
<cc:License rdf:about="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">
	<cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Reproduction" />
	<cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Distribution" />
	<cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#DerivativeWorks" />
</cc:License>

</rdf:RDF>

