Literature DB >> 23462176

Invited review: sensors to support health management on dairy farms.

C J Rutten1, A G J Velthuis2, W Steeneveld2, H Hogeveen3.   

Abstract

Since the 1980s, efforts have been made to develop sensors that measure a parameter from an individual cow. The development started with individual cow recognition and was followed by sensors that measure the electrical conductivity of milk and pedometers that measure activity. The aim of this review is to provide a structured overview of the published sensor systems for dairy health management. The development of sensor systems can be described by the following 4 levels: (I) techniques that measure something about the cow (e.g., activity); (II) interpretations that summarize changes in the sensor data (e.g., increase in activity) to produce information about the cow's status (e.g., estrus); (III) integration of information where sensor information is supplemented with other information (e.g., economic information) to produce advice (e.g., whether to inseminate a cow or not); and (IV) the farmer makes a decision or the sensor system makes the decision autonomously (e.g., the inseminator is called). This review has structured a total of 126 publications describing 139 sensor systems and compared them based on the 4 levels. The publications were published in the Thomson Reuters (formerly ISI) Web of Science database from January 2002 until June 2012 or in the proceedings of 3 conferences on precision (dairy) farming in 2009, 2010, and 2011. Most studies concerned the detection of mastitis (25%), fertility (33%), and locomotion problems (30%), with fewer studies (16%) related to the detection of metabolic problems. Many studies presented sensor systems at levels I and II, but none did so at levels III and IV. Most of the work for mastitis (92%) and fertility (75%) is done at level II. For locomotion (53%) and metabolism (69%), more than half of the work is done at level I. The performance of sensor systems varies based on the choice of gold standards, algorithms, and test sizes (number of farms and cows). Studies on sensor systems for mastitis and estrus have shown that sensor systems are brought to a higher level; however, the need to improve detection performance still exists. Studies on sensor systems for locomotion problems have shown that the search continues for the most appropriate indicators, sensor techniques, and gold standards. Studies on metabolic problems show that it is still unclear which indicator reflects best the metabolic problems that should be detected. No systems with integrated decision support models have been found.
Copyright © 2013 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23462176     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2012-6107

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dairy Sci        ISSN: 0022-0302            Impact factor:   4.034


  43 in total

1.  Factors associated with the adoption of technologies by the Canadian dairy industry.

Authors:  Murray D Jelinski; David F Kelton; Chris Luby; Cheryl Waldner
Journal:  Can Vet J       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 1.008

2.  Update on demographics of the Canadian Dairy Industry for the period 2011 to 2016.

Authors:  Christopher D Luby; Cheryl Waldner; Murray D Jelinski
Journal:  Can Vet J       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 1.008

3.  Efficacy of statistical process control procedures to identify deviations in continuously measured physiological and behavioral variables in beef heifers resulting from an experimentally combined viral-bacterial challenge.

Authors:  William Christian Kayser; Gordon E Carstens; Ira Loyd Parsons; Kevin E Washburn; Sara D Lawhon; William E Pinchak; Eric Chevaux; Andrew L Skidmore
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 3.338

4.  Integrating diverse data sources to predict disease risk in dairy cattle-a machine learning approach.

Authors:  Jana Lasser; Caspar Matzhold; Christa Egger-Danner; Birgit Fuerst-Waltl; Franz Steininger; Thomas Wittek; Peter Klimek
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 3.338

5.  The Influence of Environmental Conditions on Intake Behavior and Activity by Feedlot Steers Fed Corn or Barley-Based Diets.

Authors:  Hannah M DelCurto-Wyffels; Julia M Dafoe; Cory T Parsons; Darrin L Boss; Timothy DelCurto; Samuel A Wyffels; Megan L Van Emon; Janice G P Bowman
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 2.752

6.  Disentangling data dependency using cross-validation strategies to evaluate prediction quality of cattle grazing activities using machine learning algorithms and wearable sensor data.

Authors:  Leonardo Augusto Coelho Ribeiro; Tiago Bresolin; Guilherme Jordão de Magalhães Rosa; Daniel Rume Casagrande; Marina de Arruda Camargo Danes; João Ricardo Rebouças Dórea
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 3.338

Review 7.  Control of sheep flystrike: what's been tried in the past and where to from here.

Authors:  A C Kotze; P J James
Journal:  Aust Vet J       Date:  2021-11-10       Impact factor: 1.343

Review 8.  Lameness Detection in Dairy Cows: Part 2. Use of Sensors to Automatically Register Changes in Locomotion or Behavior.

Authors:  Annelies Van Nuffel; Ingrid Zwertvaegher; Stephanie Van Weyenberg; Matti Pastell; Vivi M Thorup; Claudia Bahr; Bart Sonck; Wouter Saeys
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 2.752

9.  Social Networks and Welfare in Future Animal Management.

Authors:  Paul Koene; Bert Ipema
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2014-03-17       Impact factor: 2.752

Review 10.  Invited review: overview of new traits and phenotyping strategies in dairy cattle with a focus on functional traits.

Authors:  C Egger-Danner; J B Cole; J E Pryce; N Gengler; B Heringstad; A Bradley; K F Stock
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.