25.12.2013 Views

novel approaches to expression and detection of oestrus in dairy cows

novel approaches to expression and detection of oestrus in dairy cows

novel approaches to expression and detection of oestrus in dairy cows

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

averaged 70% which was lower than the match<strong>in</strong>g rate <strong>of</strong> visually<br />

observed mounts <strong>and</strong> mounts recorded by UWB. The au<strong>to</strong>mated match<strong>in</strong>g<br />

rate was perhaps lower because one function <strong>of</strong> the script was <strong>to</strong> detect<br />

only mounts <strong>of</strong> >3 seconds. This is because there is a pattern <strong>of</strong> UWB error<br />

<strong>of</strong> short spik<strong>in</strong>g similar <strong>to</strong> mounts <strong>of</strong> short duration. However, this does not<br />

pose a problem for the <strong>detection</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>oestrus</strong> as most ‘true’ mounts were<br />

detected, demonstrat<strong>in</strong>g that for <strong>cows</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>oestrus</strong> mount<strong>in</strong>g lasted longer<br />

than 2 seconds, ensur<strong>in</strong>g more robust <strong>detection</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>cows</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>oestrus</strong>.<br />

Average duration <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual mount<strong>in</strong>g events has been reported as 3.20<br />

<strong>to</strong> 3.36 seconds (At-Taras <strong>and</strong> Spahr, 2001) which can be easily identified<br />

by UWB. The match<strong>in</strong>g rate between declared <strong>and</strong> visually observed<br />

mounts is also perhaps lower as one cow (Cow 48) was elim<strong>in</strong>ated from the<br />

au<strong>to</strong>mated analysis due <strong>to</strong> a function <strong>of</strong> the script. The script detects<br />

<strong>oestrus</strong> by the position<strong>in</strong>g relationship between 2 <strong>cows</strong>, both equipped with<br />

UWB; however when Cow 48 was <strong>in</strong> <strong>oestrus</strong> it was the only cow with a<br />

UWB MU <strong>in</strong> <strong>oestrus</strong> at the time.<br />

Script accuracy <strong>in</strong> identify<strong>in</strong>g actual mounts concurr<strong>in</strong>g with visual records<br />

was lower (averag<strong>in</strong>g only 53.7%; see Table 5.3 <strong>and</strong> 5.4). A larger<br />

proportion <strong>of</strong> mounts are declared by the script than actually occurred, <strong>and</strong><br />

only 50% <strong>of</strong> the script declared mounts match with visual observation <strong>of</strong><br />

mounts. This <strong>in</strong>dicates that specificity <strong>of</strong> the script for correct mounts <strong>and</strong><br />

st<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>to</strong> be mounted is lower. The number <strong>of</strong> mounts that are not<br />

identified is relatively low which is promis<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g that most oestrous<br />

behaviour can be recorded. As previously mentioned UWB errors occur due<br />

<strong>to</strong> the early stage <strong>of</strong> development <strong>of</strong> the technology, <strong>and</strong> a proportion <strong>of</strong><br />

mounts are unable <strong>to</strong> be detected as their limits are out <strong>of</strong> the boundaries<br />

set by the script. Limits were as follows; m<strong>in</strong>imum mount<strong>in</strong>g height at<br />

1.3m <strong>and</strong> maximum mount<strong>in</strong>g height at 2.6m, or when the relative position<br />

<strong>of</strong> the 2 MUs were outside <strong>of</strong> the set limits for X <strong>and</strong> Y: X(Y)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!