Lameness Detection in Dairy Cows: Part 1. How to Distinguish between Non-Lame and Lame Cows Based on Differences in Locomotion or Behavior

Abstract

Simple SummaryScoring cattle for lameness based on changes in locomotion or behavior is essential for farmers to find and treat their lame animals. This review discusses the normal locomotion of cows in order to define abnormal locomotion due to lameness. It furthermore provides an overview of various relevant visual locomotion scoring systems that are currently being used as well as practical considerations when assessing lameness on a commercial farm.AbstractDue to its detrimental effect on cow welfare, health and production, lameness in dairy cows has received quite a lot of attention in the last few decades—not only in terms of prevention and treatment of lameness but also in terms of detection, as early treatment might decrease the number of severely lame cows in the herds as well as decrease the direct and indirect costs associated with lameness cases. Generally, lame cows are detected by the herdsman, hoof trimmer or veterinarian based on abnormal locomotion, abnormal behavior or the presence of hoof lesions during routine trimming. In the scientific literature, several guidelines are proposed to detect lame cows based on visual interpretation of the locomotion of individual cows (i.e., locomotion scoring systems). Researchers and the industry have focused on automating such observations to support the farmer in finding the lame cows in their herds, but until now, such automated systems have rarely been used in commercial herds. This review starts with the description of normal locomotion of cows in order to define ‘abnormal’ locomotion caused by lameness. Cow locomotion (gait and posture) and behavioral features that change when a cow becomes lame are described and linked to the existing visual scoring systems. In addition, the lack of information of normal cow gait and a clear description of ‘abnormal’ gait are discussed. Finally, the different set-ups used during locomotion scoring and their influence on the resulting locomotion scores are evaluated.

Comparison of different applications of automatic herd control systems on dairy farms – a review

“…Basic methods of gait analysis have centered on the relation between limb/hoof events which are described in terms of footfall patterns or phase relationships between limbs …”

“…Lameness can be defined as the clinical manifestation of painful disorders mainly related to the locomotor system and resulting in impaired movement or deviation from normal gait or posture. 61 Lameness is one of the most common diseases in dairy herds and has become a significant problem for animal welfare, herd management and productivity. The occurrence of lameness leads to financial losses resulting from the cost of cattle treatment, lower milk production and reduced reproductive performance.…”

“…Basic methods of gait analysis have centered on the relation between limb/hoof events which are described in terms of footfall patterns or phase relationships between limbs. 61 Pastell et al 10 carried out an experiment in which they selected five sound and six lame cows. They fitted four three-dimensional accelerometers to each limb of every cow proximal to the fetlock joints.…”

Key issues in the welfare of dairy cattle

“…7). It is not uncommon that hoof lesions remain undetected, and thus untreated (Van Nuffel et al, 2015). Likewise, clinical and acute mastitis is common and often painful, although the clinical phase is more likely to be of short duration (Medrano-Galarza et al, 2012).…”

Animal Lameness Detection With Radar Sensing

“…The cows were scored for lameness on a 0 (no lameness) to 3 (severe lameness) by two veterinary clinicians while walking, independently for the anterior and posterior test [18]. This scoring system is a standard approach used in veterinary practice in the UK, although there exist multiple scoring methods worldwide [19]. Three of the five cows were classified as lame (scores of 3, 2.5, and 2 on average), and two as healthy (scored 0.5 and 1) using a binary classification.…”