MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920987154 · doi:10.3168/jds.2018-15221

Infrared thermography and behavioral biometrics associated with estrus indicators and ovulation in estrus-synchronized dairy cows housed in tiestalls

2019· article· en· W2920987154 on OpenAlexafffundabout
H.J. Perez Marquez, D.J. Ambrose, A. L. Schaefer, N.J. Cook, C.J. Bench

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsAlberta Ministry of Agriculture and ForestryAgriculture Food and Rural DevelopmentUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta Livestock and Meat AgencyAlberta Agriculture and ForestryUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsEstrous cycleOvulationRumpAnimal scienceThermographyDairy cattleMedicineBiologyInternal medicineInfraredPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most Canadian dairy herds operate in tiestall housing (61%), where average estrus detection rates may be lower than 54%. The objective of this study was to evaluate infrared thermography and behavioral biometrics as indicators of estrus in dairy cows. Eighteen cyclic multiparous cows (Synch) were subjected to an estrus synchronization protocol, and 18 pregnant cows (control) received a sham protocol on the same schedule and frequency as the cyclic cow treatment. A decline in plasma concentrations of progesterone and the appearance of a dominant follicle using transrectal ultrasonography were used as indirect indicators of estrus, and the disappearance of a dominant follicle was used to confirm ovulation. All cows were monitored via visual cameras to determine the frequency of treading, drinking, neighbor interaction, tail movement, lying, and shifting behaviors. Infrared thermograms were recorded at the eye, muzzle, cheek, neck, front right foot, front left foot, rump, flank, vulva area, tail head, and withers. To evaluate the accuracy of behavioral and thermal parameters, a predefined minimum acceptable value (i.e., threshold) for estrus alerts (>0.30 Youden J index and >0.60 area under the curve) was used. Ovulation was confirmed in 14 (77.7%) out of 18 Synch cows. Eye, cheek, neck, rump, flank, vulva area, and wither thermograms exhibited higher temperatures at 48 h [cycle threshold (Δt) = +0.30 to 1.20°C] and 24 h before ovulation compared with 4 d prior to ovulation (Δt = 0.06 to 0.11°C) and during ovulation day (Δt = 0.03 to 0.32°C) in the Synch group. In addition, control cows exhibited greater treading activity per day compared with Synch cows (20.84 ± 0.39 vs. 16.35 events/5 min ± 0.34), and tail movement frequency was greater in Synch cows compared with control cows (14.84 ± 2.7 vs. 10.11 ± 4.7 events/5 min). However, within Synch cows, tail movement was the only behavior that significantly increased in frequency 2 d before ovulation (11.81 ± 1.71 events/5 min) followed by a decrease in frequency 1 d before ovulation (4.67 ± 1.05 events/5 min) compared with ovulation day (0 d; 6.10 ± 1.25 events/5 min) and during luteolysis (3 d before ovulation; 6.01 ± 1.25 events/5 min). Upon evaluation of all variables (thermograms and behavior frequencies) as estrus indicators at 48 and 24 h before ovulation, treading and tail movements before milking and 9 thermal locations satisfied the predefined minimum acceptable value for estrus alerts. This study demonstrates that fluctuations in radiated temperature measured at specific anatomical locations and the frequency of tail movements and treading behaviors can be used as a noninvasive estrus alerts in multiparous cows housed in a tiestall system.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207