Jump to content

Talk:Goat

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Delete picture Hassanelsayad 10.jpg

[edit]

The animals in this picture are not goats, they are fat-tailed sheep. This picture does not belong on this page. CbonnerNH (talk) 22:22, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - UtherSRG (talk) 01:46, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly Irrelevant Citation in Dog Oxytocin Study

[edit]

In the section regarding domestic goat behavior, there is a line of thinking that I'm not entirely certain is valid:

"The field of anthrozoology has established that domesticated animals have the capacity for complex communication with humans when in 2015 a Japanese scientist determined that levels of oxytocin did increase in human subjects when dogs were exposed to a dose of the "love hormone", proving that a human-animal bond does exist. This is the same affinity that was proven with the London study above; goats are intelligent, capable of complex communication, and able to form bonds."

While both studies are properly cited, I am not entirely sure about the reference to the 2015 Japanese dog experiment. The summary of the experiment is also slightly confusingly worded - researchers in that experiment gave dogs an Oxytocin nasal spray, and then allowed them to maintain eye contact with people for an extended duration. The oxytocin levels were then measured in the humans, and found to be higher as a result of exposure to the Oxytocin-dosed dog. If anything, the experiment was not designed to demonstrate that dogs experience a connection with humans, so much as that humans experience a connection with dogs.

In either case, I can't say I think that study says much of anything about the connection experienced between humans and goats. While it's evident that some humans feel a bond to their goats, I'm not sure the evidence from the dog study proves that goats feel a bond to their people. I'd suggest removing that citation, and perhaps thinking about clarifying the wording of the conclusion at the end of the section to be slightly more evidence-based. I'd love to hear any feedback or critique, though! Have a great day! Phlaximus (talk) 15:28, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeomseo Tang?

[edit]

Heugyeomso-tang Korean Goat stew. While goat isn't common in contemporary Korean cooking, there is a special goat stew for the native goat to the region, so might be worth mentioning on this page about goats? I can provide a picture of the stew, I think. --KimYunmi (talk) 21:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"For other uses" GOAT

[edit]

At the top of the page, consider adding ---

For other uses, see G.O.A.T Nita Peilan (talk) 16:51, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. That's covered under For other uses, see Goat (disambiguation). - UtherSRG (talk) 19:27, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2024

[edit]

The statements regarding polled genetics are incorrect. The reference is obsolete. Polled genetics are reliably established in different goat breeds, in particular Angora Goat and some non-dairy breeds. The intersex and polled genes lie close on the genome but intersex is not an outcome of polled genetics, being present in wild-horned populations (see CSIRO publication Kijas et al 2013 10.1111/age.12011). Please amend accordingly as follows:

Delete: [Unlike cattle, goats have not been successfully bred to be reliably polled, as the genes determining sex and those determining horns are closely linked. Breeding together two genetically polled goats results in a high number of intersex individuals among the offspring, which are typically sterile.[18] ]

Replace: [Goats may be bred to be polled or horned. Incidence of pseudohermaphroditic or intersex occurs equally in either polled or horned populations. The intersex gene lies close to the polled gene, but the polled gene does not cause intersex in goats.[18] (where the reference is Kijas et al 2013 DOI: 10.1111/age.12011)

2406:2D40:20D1:5C00:DD45:2766:8B8:709A (talk) 18:37, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]