2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2019.04.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Are automated sensors a reliable tool to estimate behavioural activities in grazing beef cattle?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

4
24
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
4
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“… Werner et al (2018) also found that accelerometer-based detection of standing behavior was possible using the RumiWatch System sensor platform. Similar results were found by Poulopoulou et al (2019) evaluating the ability of a three triaxial accelerometer on predicting behavioral activities in grazing beef cattle. Although these studies all show that wearable technologies have promise as a means to classify standing behavior, the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) to determine the accuracy between readings from the sensor and direct observations of existing evaluations is 0.88–0.97 ( Werner et al, 2018 ; Poulopoulou et al, 2019 ).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“… Werner et al (2018) also found that accelerometer-based detection of standing behavior was possible using the RumiWatch System sensor platform. Similar results were found by Poulopoulou et al (2019) evaluating the ability of a three triaxial accelerometer on predicting behavioral activities in grazing beef cattle. Although these studies all show that wearable technologies have promise as a means to classify standing behavior, the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) to determine the accuracy between readings from the sensor and direct observations of existing evaluations is 0.88–0.97 ( Werner et al, 2018 ; Poulopoulou et al, 2019 ).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…Similar results were found by Poulopoulou et al (2019) evaluating the ability of a three triaxial accelerometer on predicting behavioral activities in grazing beef cattle. Although these studies all show that wearable technologies have promise as a means to classify standing behavior, the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) to determine the accuracy between readings from the sensor and direct observations of existing evaluations is 0.88–0.97 ( Werner et al, 2018 ; Poulopoulou et al, 2019 ). Leveraging this more flexible research platform for sensor evaluation may enable the development of algorithms to more reliably classify standing behavior.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…[37,38]. According to Poulopoulou et al [39], high correlations were confirmed for the activities feeding, ruminating, standing and lying. Significantly reduced motion activity was found in ketotic animals compared to healthy animals [12].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Traditional methods of recording behaviour in animals can be time consuming, laborious and not always suitable for on-farm welfare assessment. The value of accelerometer technology is already well recognised for monitoring behaviour in adult cattle and has benefits over traditional methods of recording behaviour; in particular, the ability to record activity over long periods of time [43] and generate large amounts of data that would be impractical to generate using visual observation techniques [31]. This study has described and evaluated different methods of utilising raw data generated by a commercially available tri-axial accelerometer to detect play behaviour in very young calves without the need for extra software or advanced data manipulation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Accelerometers have been evaluated as tools for identifying many different types of bovine behaviour including lying behaviours [30][31][32][33][34][35], locomotion [34,36,37], feeding/drinking behaviours [35,[38][39][40] and play behaviour [41,42]. Whilst accelerometer generated data have shown good correlation with visual observations for standing and lying behaviours in adult cows [21,32,35,43,44] and lying behaviours in calves [30,45], the reported correlation between accelerometer measurements and locomotor activity in calves is inconsistent. For example, Luu et al [41] reported a good correlation between the number of acceleration peaks and the duration of time engaged in running, jumping/kicking and walking (r = 0.96, 0.86 and 0.75, respectively), whereas Trénel et al [33] reported a low sensitivity (raw data sensitivity = 0.15; filtered data sensitivity = 0.22) for identifying movement in calves.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%