2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.compag.2017.06.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Novel approach to determine the influence of pig and cattle ears on the performance of passive UHF-RFID ear tags

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, the RFID transponders used in our system remain perpendicularly oriented to the antenna surface. In comparison, RFID ear tags predominantly used for large animals (pig, cattle, sheep) change orientation to the antenna surface with movement of the animals (Adrion et al, 2017), which leads to more variable detectability of the RFID systems.…”
Section: Apms Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the RFID transponders used in our system remain perpendicularly oriented to the antenna surface. In comparison, RFID ear tags predominantly used for large animals (pig, cattle, sheep) change orientation to the antenna surface with movement of the animals (Adrion et al, 2017), which leads to more variable detectability of the RFID systems.…”
Section: Apms Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The developed APMS in this study showed a much improved performance compared to other RFID systems applied in animal behavior research to date (Li et al, 2017, Adrion et al, 2017, Adrion et al, 2018, Barnes et al, 2018. First and foremost, with the customized antennas, attachment of the transponders, and load cell data correction (or even without the weigh-based correction), this system demonstrates a set of superior performance indicators.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…To date, one of the most popular technologies for identifying individual animals is the RFID technology. It has been applied in animal behavior research of pigs (Adrion et al, 2018), poultry (Li et al, 2017), cattle (Adrion et al, 2017), and sheep (Barnes et al, 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Infrequent visits of certain sows could raise an alert to producers so that health issues or undesirable social behaviors may be addressed early in their progression [51]. Nevertheless, LF-RFID has two major disadvantages: a low read range (<1 m), and the inability to identify more than one animal [52] within range. In order to track multiple animals at a greater range (3 to 10 m), researchers have investigated the commercial feasibility of Ultra-High Frequency (UHF) readers [49,53].…”
Section: Precision Livestock Farming: An Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%