Accuracy of heart girth tapes in the estimation of weights of pre-weaned calves.

IF 1.3 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Veterinary Record Open Pub Date : 2021-08-07 eCollection Date: 2021-12-01 DOI:10.1002/vro2.16
Virginia Sherwin, Robert Hyde, Martin Green, John Remnant, Emily Payne, Peter Down
{"title":"Accuracy of heart girth tapes in the estimation of weights of pre-weaned calves.","authors":"Virginia Sherwin, Robert Hyde, Martin Green, John Remnant, Emily Payne, Peter Down","doi":"10.1002/vro2.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Heart girth tapes (HGTs) are often used as an alternative to weight scales for calves. This study investigated the accuracy of HGT in estimating bodyweight and daily liveweight gain (DWLG) of pre-weaned calves, and the impact of inter-observer variation.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In Study 1, 119 calves were weighed using HGT and electronic scales on multiple occasions. Mixed-effects models for both bodyweight and DLWG were used to determine the accuracy of HGT compared to the electronic scales. Simulation data were used to further analyse the accuracy of DLWG estimation including for factors such as the effect of group size on group DLWG estimates.In Study 2, 10 observers weighed 20 pre-weaned calves, using HGT and electronic scales. Mixed-effect model was used to investigate the impact of different observers on the accuracy of HGT on measuring bodyweights.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mixed-effects model results suggest HGT provides a relatively accurate estimation of weight (MAE: 2.66 kg) and relatively inaccurate estimation of DLWG (MAE 0.10 kg/d). Simulated data identified associations between time between weight dates and error in DLWG estimation, with MAE of individual DLWG estimation decreasing from 0.43 kg/d when 14 days apart to 0.08 kg/d when 70 days apart. Increased calf numbers reduced error rates of group DLWG estimation, with <0.05 kg/d error achieved in >90% of simulations when 12 calves were weighed 70 days apart.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>HGTs are relatively accurate at estimating individual bodyweights but are unreliable methods for measuring DLWG in individual calves, particularly weighed within a short-time period. Estimates at group level however are relatively accurate, providing there is a suitable period of time between weigh dates and an appropriate number of calves per group.</p>","PeriodicalId":23565,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Record Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8349223/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Record Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/vro2.16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Heart girth tapes (HGTs) are often used as an alternative to weight scales for calves. This study investigated the accuracy of HGT in estimating bodyweight and daily liveweight gain (DWLG) of pre-weaned calves, and the impact of inter-observer variation.

Method: In Study 1, 119 calves were weighed using HGT and electronic scales on multiple occasions. Mixed-effects models for both bodyweight and DLWG were used to determine the accuracy of HGT compared to the electronic scales. Simulation data were used to further analyse the accuracy of DLWG estimation including for factors such as the effect of group size on group DLWG estimates.In Study 2, 10 observers weighed 20 pre-weaned calves, using HGT and electronic scales. Mixed-effect model was used to investigate the impact of different observers on the accuracy of HGT on measuring bodyweights.

Results: Mixed-effects model results suggest HGT provides a relatively accurate estimation of weight (MAE: 2.66 kg) and relatively inaccurate estimation of DLWG (MAE 0.10 kg/d). Simulated data identified associations between time between weight dates and error in DLWG estimation, with MAE of individual DLWG estimation decreasing from 0.43 kg/d when 14 days apart to 0.08 kg/d when 70 days apart. Increased calf numbers reduced error rates of group DLWG estimation, with <0.05 kg/d error achieved in >90% of simulations when 12 calves were weighed 70 days apart.

Conclusions: HGTs are relatively accurate at estimating individual bodyweights but are unreliable methods for measuring DLWG in individual calves, particularly weighed within a short-time period. Estimates at group level however are relatively accurate, providing there is a suitable period of time between weigh dates and an appropriate number of calves per group.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

估计断奶前犊牛体重时心宽带的准确性。
背景:心围尺(HGT)经常被用来替代犊牛体重秤。本研究调查了心围带在估算断奶前犊牛体重和日活重增重(DWLG)方面的准确性,以及观察者之间差异的影响:在研究 1 中,使用 HGT 和电子秤对 119 头犊牛进行了多次称重。使用体重和DLWG的混合效应模型来确定HGT与电子秤相比的准确性。模拟数据用于进一步分析DLWG估算的准确性,包括群体大小对群体DLWG估算的影响等因素。在研究2中,10名观察员使用HGT和电子秤对20头断奶前犊牛进行了称重。采用混合效应模型研究了不同观察者对 HGT 体重测量准确性的影响:混合效应模型结果表明,HGT 对体重的估计相对准确(MAE:2.66 千克),而对 DLWG 的估计相对不准确(MAE:0.10 千克/天)。模拟数据确定了体重日期间隔时间与 DLWG 估计误差之间的关系,单个 DLWG 估计 MAE 从间隔 14 天的 0.43 千克/天降至间隔 70 天的 0.08 千克/天。犊牛数量的增加降低了群体DLWG估算的误差率,当12头犊牛间隔70天称重时,90%的模拟结果都是如此:HGT在估算个体体重时相对准确,但在测量个体犊牛的DLWG时并不可靠,尤其是在短时间内称重的犊牛。但是,如果称重日期之间有一段适当的时间间隔,且每组犊牛的数量适当,则对群体水平的估计相对准确。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Veterinary Record Open
Veterinary Record Open VETERINARY SCIENCES-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Veterinary Record Open is a journal dedicated to publishing specialist veterinary research across a range of topic areas including those of a more niche and specialist nature to that considered in the weekly Vet Record. Research from all disciplines of veterinary interest will be considered. It is an Open Access journal of the British Veterinary Association.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信