用于测量泌乳奶牛反刍、采食活动和闲置时间的行为监测项圈的验证和设备间可靠性

JDS communications Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.3168/jdsc.2023-0467

J.V.R. Lovatti , K.A. Dijkinga , J.F. Aires , L.F.C. Garrido , J.H.C. Costa , R.R. Daros

{"title":"用于测量泌乳奶牛反刍、采食活动和闲置时间的行为监测项圈的验证和设备间可靠性","authors":"J.V.R. Lovatti , K.A. Dijkinga , J.F. Aires , L.F.C. Garrido , J.H.C. Costa , R.R. Daros","doi":"10.3168/jdsc.2023-0467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Interdevice precision and accuracy are not investigated for precision livestock farming (PLF) technologies, but are fundamental for the use of data in populational metrics and to compare cows' data. This study aimed to validate a behavior monitoring collar (BMC; CowMed, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil) and its interdevice reliability. First, we compared observations with the BMC, and second the interdevice precision and accuracy for rumination, feeding activity, and idle time of lactating dairy cows. Holstein cows (n = 23) were housed in a voluntary milk system freestall barn and fitted with 2 devices within the same cow. Observations were made over 2 periods of one day (0700 to 1100 h, 1400 to 1700 h); the 7 h per cow were summarized for each behavior to assess the agreement of observed behavior and BMC data. To assess the interdevice reliability, 26 d of BMC data were summarized by day per cow for both devices. Pearson correlation (r), coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>), Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (ρ<sub>c</sub>), linear regression, and Bland-Altman plots (BAP) were calculated for each period of observation. For the validation, we found high correlations for feeding activity, very high for idle time, but low correlations for rumination. The BAP were deemed acceptable and without bias; BAP mean differences ± SD were 0.83 ± 4.01, −0.48 ± 4.15, and 7.17 ± 3.94 min/h for rumination, feeding activity, and idle time, respectively. The slope of the linear regression did not differ from 1 for any behaviors but idle. For interdevice comparison, we found moderate correlations for feeding activity and idle time, and a low correlation for rumination. The BAP was deemed acceptable and without bias; BAP mean differences were −0.36 ± 2.84, 0.45 ± 3.51, and −0.06 ± 2.81 min/h for rumination, feeding activity, and idle time, respectively. All slopes of the linear regressions differed from 1 except feeding time. Thus, the interdevice comparison did not meet the accuracy criteria. In summary, this study validated the precision of the BMC for recording feeding activity of lactating dairy cows.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":94061,"journal":{"name":"JDS communications","volume":"5 6","pages":"Pages 602-607"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation and interdevice reliability of a behavior monitoring collar to measure rumination, feeding activity, and idle time of lactating dairy cows\",\"authors\":\"J.V.R. Lovatti , K.A. Dijkinga , J.F. Aires , L.F.C. Garrido , J.H.C. Costa , R.R. Daros\",\"doi\":\"10.3168/jdsc.2023-0467\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Interdevice precision and accuracy are not investigated for precision livestock farming (PLF) technologies, but are fundamental for the use of data in populational metrics and to compare cows' data. This study aimed to validate a behavior monitoring collar (BMC; CowMed, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil) and its interdevice reliability. First, we compared observations with the BMC, and second the interdevice precision and accuracy for rumination, feeding activity, and idle time of lactating dairy cows. Holstein cows (n = 23) were housed in a voluntary milk system freestall barn and fitted with 2 devices within the same cow. Observations were made over 2 periods of one day (0700 to 1100 h, 1400 to 1700 h); the 7 h per cow were summarized for each behavior to assess the agreement of observed behavior and BMC data. To assess the interdevice reliability, 26 d of BMC data were summarized by day per cow for both devices. Pearson correlation (r), coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>), Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (ρ<sub>c</sub>), linear regression, and Bland-Altman plots (BAP) were calculated for each period of observation. For the validation, we found high correlations for feeding activity, very high for idle time, but low correlations for rumination. The BAP were deemed acceptable and without bias; BAP mean differences ± SD were 0.83 ± 4.01, −0.48 ± 4.15, and 7.17 ± 3.94 min/h for rumination, feeding activity, and idle time, respectively. The slope of the linear regression did not differ from 1 for any behaviors but idle. For interdevice comparison, we found moderate correlations for feeding activity and idle time, and a low correlation for rumination. The BAP was deemed acceptable and without bias; BAP mean differences were −0.36 ± 2.84, 0.45 ± 3.51, and −0.06 ± 2.81 min/h for rumination, feeding activity, and idle time, respectively. All slopes of the linear regressions differed from 1 except feeding time. Thus, the interdevice comparison did not meet the accuracy criteria. In summary, this study validated the precision of the BMC for recording feeding activity of lactating dairy cows.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94061,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JDS communications\",\"volume\":\"5 6\",\"pages\":\"Pages 602-607\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JDS communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666910224000462\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JDS communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666910224000462","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

对于精准牲畜饲养（PLF）技术而言，设备间的精度和准确性尚未得到研究，但这对于在人口指标中使用数据和比较奶牛数据至关重要。本研究旨在验证行为监测项圈（BMC；CowMed，Santa Maria, RS, Brazil）及其设备间可靠性。首先，我们比较了 BMC 的观察结果，其次比较了泌乳奶牛反刍、采食活动和闲置时间的装置间精度和准确性。荷斯坦奶牛（n = 23）饲养在全自动挤奶系统的独立牛舍中，并在同一头奶牛身上安装了两个装置。观察时间为一天中的两个时段（7:00 至 11:00，14:00 至 17:00）；对每头奶牛的 7 小时行为进行总结，以评估观察行为与 BMC 数据的一致性。为了评估设备间的可靠性，按每头奶牛每天汇总了两种设备的 26 天 BMC 数据。计算了每个观察期的皮尔逊相关性 (r)、判定系数 (R2)、林氏协和相关系数 (ρc)、线性回归和布兰-阿尔特曼图 (BAP)。在验证中，我们发现采食活动的相关性很高，闲置时间的相关性很高，但反刍的相关性很低。反刍、采食活动和闲置时间的 BAP 平均差（± SD）分别为 0.83 ± 4.01、-0.48 ± 4.15 和 7.17 ± 3.94 分钟/小时，被认为是可接受的，没有偏差。除闲置外，其他行为的线性回归斜率均与 1 无差异。在设备间比较中，我们发现采食活动和闲置时间的相关性适中，而反刍的相关性较低。反刍、采食活动和闲置时间的 BAP 平均差异分别为 -0.36 ± 2.84、0.45 ± 3.51 和 -0.06 ± 2.81 分钟/小时。除采食时间外，所有线性回归的斜率都不同于 1。因此，设备间比较不符合准确性标准。总之，本研究验证了 BMC 记录泌乳奶牛采食活动的精确性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Validation and interdevice reliability of a behavior monitoring collar to measure rumination, feeding activity, and idle time of lactating dairy cows

Interdevice precision and accuracy are not investigated for precision livestock farming (PLF) technologies, but are fundamental for the use of data in populational metrics and to compare cows' data. This study aimed to validate a behavior monitoring collar (BMC; CowMed, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil) and its interdevice reliability. First, we compared observations with the BMC, and second the interdevice precision and accuracy for rumination, feeding activity, and idle time of lactating dairy cows. Holstein cows (n = 23) were housed in a voluntary milk system freestall barn and fitted with 2 devices within the same cow. Observations were made over 2 periods of one day (0700 to 1100 h, 1400 to 1700 h); the 7 h per cow were summarized for each behavior to assess the agreement of observed behavior and BMC data. To assess the interdevice reliability, 26 d of BMC data were summarized by day per cow for both devices. Pearson correlation (r), coefficient of determination (R²), Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (ρ_c), linear regression, and Bland-Altman plots (BAP) were calculated for each period of observation. For the validation, we found high correlations for feeding activity, very high for idle time, but low correlations for rumination. The BAP were deemed acceptable and without bias; BAP mean differences ± SD were 0.83 ± 4.01, −0.48 ± 4.15, and 7.17 ± 3.94 min/h for rumination, feeding activity, and idle time, respectively. The slope of the linear regression did not differ from 1 for any behaviors but idle. For interdevice comparison, we found moderate correlations for feeding activity and idle time, and a low correlation for rumination. The BAP was deemed acceptable and without bias; BAP mean differences were −0.36 ± 2.84, 0.45 ± 3.51, and −0.06 ± 2.81 min/h for rumination, feeding activity, and idle time, respectively. All slopes of the linear regressions differed from 1 except feeding time. Thus, the interdevice comparison did not meet the accuracy criteria. In summary, this study validated the precision of the BMC for recording feeding activity of lactating dairy cows.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

JDS communications Animal Science and Zoology

CiteScore

2.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量