2015Journal of Dairy ScienceOpen access

Comparison of rumination activity measured using rumination collars against direct visual observations and analysis of video recordings of dairy cows in commercial farm environments

V. Ambriz‐Vilchis, N.S. Jessop, R.H. Fawcett, Darren J. Shaw, Alastair Macrae

Open full text 55 citations

Abstract

Automated systems for monitoring the behavior of cows have become increasingly important for management routines and for monitoring health and welfare. In the past few decades, various devices that record rumination have been developed. The aim of the present study was to compare rumination activity measured with a commercially available rumination collar (RC) against that obtained by direct visual observations and analysis of video recordings in commercial dairy cows. Rumination time from video recordings was recorded by a trained observer. To assess observer reliability, data were recorded twice, and the duration of recorded behaviors was very similar and highly correlated between these 2 measurements (mean=39±4 and 38±4 min/2 h). Measurements of rumination time obtained with RC when compared with analysis of video recordings and direct observations were variable: RC output was significantly positively related to observed rumination activity when dealing with animals housed indoors (trial 1 video recordings: slope=1.02, 95% CI=0.92-1.12), and the limits of agreement method (LoA) showed differences (in min per 2-h block) to be within -26.92 lower and 24.27 upper limits. Trial 1 direct observations: slope=1.08, 95% CI=0.62-1.55, and the LoA showed differences to be within -28.54 lower and 21.98 upper limits. Trial 2: slope=0.93, 95% CI=0.64-1.23, and the LoA showed differences to be within -32.56 lower and 19.84 upper limits. However, the results were poor when cows were outside grazing grass (trial 3: slope=0.57, 95% CI=0.13-1.02, and the LoA showed differences to be within wider limits -51.16 lower and 53.02 upper). Our results suggest that RC can determine rumination activity and are an alternative to visual observations when animals are housed indoors. However, they are not an alternative to direct observations with grazing animals on pasture and its use is not advisable until further research and validation are carried out.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Automated systems for monitoring the behavior of cows have become increasingly important for management routines and for monitoring health and welfare. In the past few decades, various devices that record rumination have been developed. The aim of the present study was to compare rumination activity measured with a commercially available rumination collar (RC) against that obtained by direct visual observations and analysis of video recordings in commercial dairy cows. Rumination time from video recordings was recorded by a trained observer. To assess observer reliability, data were recorded twice, and the duration of recorded behaviors was very similar and highly correlated between these 2 measurements (mean=39±4 and 38±4 min/2 h). Measurements of rumination time obtained with RC when compared with analysis of video recordings and direct observations were variable: RC output was significantly positively related to observed rumination activity when dealing with animals housed indoors (trial 1 video recordings: slope=1.02, 95% CI=0.92-1.12), and the limits of agreement method (LoA) showed differences (in min per 2-h block) to be within -26.92 lower and 24.27 upper limits. Trial 1 direct observations: slope=1.08, 95% CI=0.62-1.55, and the LoA showed differences to be within -28.54 lower and 21.98 upper limits. Trial 2: slope=0.93, 95% CI=0.64-1.23, and the LoA showed differences to be within -32.56 lower and 19.84 upper limits. However, the results were poor when cows were outside grazing grass (trial 3: slope=0.57, 95% CI=0.13-1.02, and the LoA showed differences to be within wider limits -51.16 lower and 53.02 upper). Our results suggest that RC can determine rumination activity and are an alternative to visual observations when animals are housed indoors. However, they are not an alternative to direct observations with grazing animals on pasture and its use is not advisable until further research and validation are carried out.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 55 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Automated systems for monitoring the behavior of cows have become increasingly important for management routines and for monitoring health and welfare. In the past few decades, various devices that record rumination have been developed. The aim of the present study was to compare rumination activity measured with a commercially available rumination collar (RC) against that obtained by direct visual observations and analysis of video recordings in commercial dairy cows. Rumination time from video recordings was recorded by a trained observer. To assess observer reliability, data were recorded twice, and the duration of recorded behaviors was very similar and highly correlated between these 2 measurements (mean=39±4 and 38±4 min/2 h). Measurements of rumination time obtained with RC when compared with analysis of video recordings and direct observations were variable: RC output was significantly positively related to observed rumination activity when dealing with animals housed indoors (trial 1 video recordings: slope=1.02, 95% CI=0.92-1.12), and the limits of agreement method (LoA) showed differences (in min per 2-h block) to be within -26.92 lower and 24.27 upper limits. Trial 1 direct observations: slope=1.08, 95% CI=0.62-1.55, and the LoA showed differences to be within -28.54 lower and 21.98 upper limits. Trial 2: slope=0.93, 95% CI=0.64-1.23, and the LoA showed differences to be within -32.56 lower and 19.84 upper limits. However, the results were poor when cows were outside grazing grass (trial 3: slope=0.57, 95% CI=0.13-1.02, and the LoA showed differences to be within wider limits -51.16 lower and 53.02 upper). Our results suggest that RC can determine rumination activity and are an alternative to visual observations when animals are housed indoors. However, they are not an alternative to direct observations with grazing animals on pasture and its use is not advisable until further research and validation are carried out.

Key concepts: Rumination, Animal science, Limits of agreement, Ruminating, Confidence interval, Video recording, Psychology, Mathematics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of rumination activity measured using rumination collars against direct visual observations and analysis of video recordings of dairy cows in commercial farm environments — Research Paper | ScholarLens