A field study using different technologies to detect calving at a large‐scale hungarian dairy farm

Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate three different calving detection systems in order to assess and compare their efficiency. The study was conducted at a large‐scale dairy farm involving 54 Holstein‐Friesian dairy cows and heifers. Animals were fitted with multiple devices: a rumination measuring device (Ruminact® (RA)), an intravaginal thermometer (Vel’Phone® (VP)) and a tail movement sensor (Moocall® (MC)) 5 to 7 days before expected calving and were removed after parturition. RA detects rumination time (RT) and calculates it in 2‐hr intervals. VP detects a decrease in vaginal temperature that might indicate calving within 48 hr and the drop in temperature resulting from the expulsion of the device at calving (EXP message). MC detected increased tail movements and if they persisted for one hour, 1HA message was sent. If they continued during the subsequent hour, then 2HA message was sent. Messages sent by MC within 4 hr before calving (C4) were selected retrospectively as true positives for the prediction of calving, using the significant changes in RT as a baseline. All other messages were categorized as false positive. The mean value of RT decreased in a non‐significant manner between interval −22 and −4 before calving. Significant decrease of RT was detectable between the two intervals of −4 and −2 before calving (24.7 ± 18.6 min/2 hr and 14.0 ± 13.0 min/2 hr, respectively). There was no significant difference between RT of primiparous and multiparous animals. EXP messages were accurate (positive predictive value 100%) indicators of the onset of calving. We received on average 12.7 ± 15.2 messages/animal (11.0 ± 10.1 and 16.6 ± 22.2 for cows and heifers, respectively). Positive predictive value was 12.6%. The number of false‐positive messages was significantly higher in heifers. All three automatic systems could be used in a large‐scale farm environment.

Assessment of Sensitivity and Profitability of an Intravaginal Sensor for Remote Calving Prediction in Dairy Cattle

“…However, they reported that in a high temperature climate, the difference between internal and external temperature was sometimes not enough to generate the alert. Another intravaginal calving alarm device is the Medria Vel'Phone ® [21,24,40]. This system, which is equipped only with temperature sensors, can send two different alarms; the former is due to a physiological decrease in vaginal temperature around 48 h before calving, while the latter is due to the expulsion of the device at the beginning of labor.…”

“…In the last decade, several sensors have been developed to improve herd management, as have methods to assess their performance [12,13]. Regarding the calving period, different strategies for imminent calving prediction have also been developed, such as automated remote sensors which can be fixed to the animal body to monitor the variation in behavior [14][15][16][17], rumination measures [18][19][20], body temperature [21,22] and tail movement [23,24] around calving. Information from these wearable sensors could be combined in machine-learning algorithms to refine their precision [25].…”

“…Automatic sensors for body temperature and motor activity generally show good sensitivity and specificity, but a certain number of false alarms are reported [24]. In fact, reliability of these systems could be affected by conditions which interfere with body temperature (fever, heat stress), the cow's ability to move, feed and ruminate (lameness, uncomfortable flooring, systemic diseases), and tail movement (social interactions, regrouping, nuisance insects) [26].…”

Sensor and Video: Two Complementary Approaches for Evaluation of Dairy Cow Behavior after Calving Sensor Attachment

“…Only one gentle pushing (cow 8; time slot t − 16 to t − 12) and one head butting (cow 5; time slot t + 8 to t + 12) were observed as agonistic social interactions. Compared to the pre-sensor time slots, less social interaction was observed in the post-sensor time slots in five cows (1,4,6,7,9) and more social interaction was observed in four cows (2,3,5,8). However, Wilcoxon testing did not indicate any significant mean differences between the respective compared pre-and post-sensor time slots (see Figure 3).…”

“…Parameters such as activity, temperature, or rumination are used for this purpose. The available literature shows that some sensors on the market have the potential to achieve satisfying results in the early detection of calving [5][6][7][8][9]. Studies on tail-attached sensors have reported sensitivities of up to 95% [5].…”