Hostname: page-component-669899f699-chc8l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T16:09:26.557Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A statistical method to standardize and interpret the activity data generated by wireless biosensors in dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2023

Wang-Hee Lee ,
Mingyung Lee ,
Dae-Hyun Lee ,
Jae-Min Jung ,
Hyunjin Cho  and
Seongwon Seo Open the ORCID record for Seongwon Seo [Opens in a new window]
Wang-Hee Lee
Affiliation:
Department of Biosystem Engineering, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Republic of Korea
Mingyung Lee
Affiliation:
Division of Animal and Dairy Sciences, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Republic of Korea
Dae-Hyun Lee
Affiliation:
Department of Biosystem Engineering, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Republic of Korea
Jae-Min Jung
Affiliation:
Department of Biosystem Engineering, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Republic of Korea
Hyunjin Cho
Affiliation:
Division of Animal and Dairy Sciences, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Republic of Korea
Seongwon Seo*
Affiliation:
Division of Animal and Dairy Sciences, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 34134, Republic of Korea
*
Corresponding author: Seongwon Seo; Email: swseo@cnu.kr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Activity biosensors have been used recently to measure and diagnose the physiological status of dairy cows. However, owing to the variety of commercialized activity biosensors available in the market, activity data generated by a biosensor need to be standardized to predict the status of an animal and make relevant decisions. Hence, the objective of this study was to develop a standardization method for accommodating activity measurements from different sensors. Twelve Holstein dairy cows were monitored to collect 12 862 activity data from four types of sensors over five months. After confirming similar cyclic activity patterns from the sensors through correlation and regression analyses, the gamma distribution was employed to calculate the cumulative probability of the values of each biosensor. Then, the activity values were assigned to three levels (i.e., idle, normal and active) based on the defined proportion of each level, and the values at each level from the four sensors were compared. The results showed that the number of measurements belonging to the same level was similar, with less than a 10% difference at a specific threshold value. In addition, more than 87% of the heat alerts generated by the internal algorithm of three of the four biosensors could be assigned to the active level, suggesting that the current standardization method successfully integrated the activity measurements from different biosensors. The developed probability-based standardization method is expected to be applicable to other biosensors for livestock, which will lead to the development of models and solutions for precision livestock farming.

Keywords

activity sensordairy cowprecision livestock farmingprobability functionstandardization
Type
Modelling Animal Systems Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 161 , Issue 5 , October 2023 , pp. 678 - 685
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

Both authors equally contributed to this work as the first author.

References

Bewley, J (2010) Precision dairy farming: advanced analysis solutions for future profitability. In The First North American Conference on Precision Dairy Management pp. 2–5. Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
Borchers, M, Chang, Y, Tsai, I, Wadsworth, B and Bewley, J (2016) A validation of technologies monitoring dairy cow feeding, ruminating, and lying behaviors. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 7458–7466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borchers, M, Chang, Y, Proudfoot, K, Wadsworth, B, Stone, A and Bewley, J (2017) Machine-learning-based calving prediction from activity, lying, and ruminating behaviors in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 100, 5664–5674.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buenger, A, Ducrocq, V and Swalve, H (2001) Analysis of survival in dairy cows with supplementary data on type scores and housing systems from a region of northwest Germany. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 1531–1541.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cabrera, VE and Fadul-Pacheco, L (2021) Future of dairy farming from the Dairy Brain perspective: data integration, analytics, and applications. International Dairy Journal 121, 105069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caja, G, Castro-Costa, A and Knight, CH (2016) Engineering to support wellbeing of dairy animals. Journal of Dairy Research 83, 136–147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carreiro, S, Wittbold, K, Indic, P, Fang, H, Zhang, J and Boyer, EW (2016) Wearable biosensors to detect physiologic change during opioid use. Journal of Medical Toxicology 12, 255–262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dolecheck, K, Silvia, W, Heersche, G Jr, Chang, Y, Ray, D, Stone, A, Wadsworth, B and Bewley, J (2015) Behavioral and physiological changes around estrus events identified using multiple automated monitoring technologies. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 8723–8731.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jónsson, R, Blanke, M, Poulsen, NK, Caponetti, F and Højsgaard, S (2011) Oestrus detection in dairy cows from activity and lying data using on-line individual models. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 76, 6–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalkowska, DA, Boender, GJ, Smit, LA, Baliatsas, C, Yzermans, J, Heederik, DJ and Hagenaars, TJ (2018) Associations between pneumonia and residential distance to livestock farms over a five-year period in a large population-based study. PLoS One 13, e0200813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, M and Seo, S (2021) Wearable wireless biosensor technology for monitoring cattle: a review. Animals 11, 2779.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, W, Mccabe, G, Martin, B and Weaver, C (2011) Validation of a simple isotope method for estimating true calcium fractional absorption in adolescents. Osteoporosis International 22, 159–166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, DH, Lee, SH, Cho, BK, Wakholi, C, Seo, YW, Cho, SH, Kang, TH and Lee, W (2020) Estimation of carcass weight of Hanwoo (Korean native cattle) as a function of body measurements using statistical models and a neural network. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 33, 1633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Løvendahl, P and Chagunda, M (2010) On the use of physical activity monitoring for estrus detection in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 249–259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mottram, T (2016) Animal board invited review: precision livestock farming for dairy cows with a focus on oestrus detection. Animal: An International Journal of Animal Bioscience 10, 1575–1584.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team (2021) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Rutten, C, Velthuis, A, Steeneveld, W and Hogeveen, H (2013) Invited review: sensors to support health management on dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 1928–1952.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shahriar, MS, Smith, D, Rahman, A, Freeman, M, Hills, J, Rawnsley, R, Henry, D and Bishop-Hurley, G (2016) Detecting heat events in dairy cows using accelerometers and unsupervised learning. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 128, 20–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stacy, EW (1962) A generalization of the gamma distribution. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 33, 1187–1192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stangaferro, M, Wijma, R, Caixeta, L, Al-Abri, M and Giordano, J (2016a) Use of rumination and activity monitoring for the identification of dairy cows with health disorders: part III. Metritis. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 7422–7433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stangaferro, M, Wijma, R, Caixeta, L, Al-Abri, M and Giordano, J (2016b) Use of rumination and activity monitoring for the identification of dairy cows with health disorders: part II. Mastitis. Journal of Dairy Science 99, 7411–7421.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thorup, VM, Munksgaard, L, Robert, P-E, Erhard, H, Thomsen, P and Friggens, N (2015) Lameness detection via leg-mounted accelerometers on dairy cows on four commercial farms. Animal: An International Journal of Animal Bioscience 9, 1704–1712.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, J, Zhang, Y, Bell, M and Liu, G (2022) Potential of an activity index combining acceleration and location for automated estrus detection in dairy cows. Information Processing in Agriculture 9, 288–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar