By Amigo, J. M. and Bro, R. and Enevoldsen, C. and Garcia, E. and Klaas, I., Journal of Dairy Science, 2014
Research Paper Web Link / URL:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030214006614
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030214006614
Description
Lameness causes decreased animal welfare and leads to higher production costs. This study explored data from an automatic milking system (AMS) to model on-farm gait scoring from a commercial farm. A total of 88 cows were gait scored once per week, for 2 5-wk periods. Eighty variables retrieved from AMS were summarized week-wise and used to predict 2 defined classes: nonlame and clinically lame cows. Variables were represented with 2 transformations of the week summarized variables, using 2-wk data blocks before gait scoring, totaling 320 variables (2 × 2 × 80). The reference gait scoring error was estimated in the first week of the study and was, on average, 15%. Two partial least squares discriminant analysis models were fitted to parity 1 and parity 2 groups, respectively, to assign the lameness class according to the predicted probability of being lame (score 3 or 4/4) or not lame (score 1/4). Both models achieved sensitivity and specificity values around 80%, both in calibration and cross-validation. At the optimum values in the receiver operating characteristic curve, the false-positive rate was 28% in the parity 1 model, whereas in the parity 2 model it was about half (16%), which makes it more suitable for practical application; the model error rates were, 23 and 19%, respectively. Based on data registered automatically from one AMS farm, we were able to discriminate nonlame and lame cows, where partial least squares discriminant analysis achieved similar performance to the reference method.
Lameness causes decreased animal welfare and leads to higher production costs. This study explored data from an automatic milking system (AMS) to model on-farm gait scoring from a commercial farm. A total of 88 cows were gait scored once per week, for 2 5-wk periods. Eighty variables retrieved from AMS were summarized week-wise and used to predict 2 defined classes: nonlame and clinically lame cows. Variables were represented with 2 transformations of the week summarized variables, using 2-wk data blocks before gait scoring, totaling 320 variables (2 × 2 × 80). The reference gait scoring error was estimated in the first week of the study and was, on average, 15%. Two partial least squares discriminant analysis models were fitted to parity 1 and parity 2 groups, respectively, to assign the lameness class according to the predicted probability of being lame (score 3 or 4/4) or not lame (score 1/4). Both models achieved sensitivity and specificity values around 80%, both in calibration and cross-validation. At the optimum values in the receiver operating characteristic curve, the false-positive rate was 28% in the parity 1 model, whereas in the parity 2 model it was about half (16%), which makes it more suitable for practical application; the model error rates were, 23 and 19%, respectively. Based on data registered automatically from one AMS farm, we were able to discriminate nonlame and lame cows, where partial least squares discriminant analysis achieved similar performance to the reference method.
We welcome and encourage discussion of our linked research papers. Registered users can post their comments here. New users' comments are moderated, so please allow a while for them to be published.