Between Dec 19, 2024 and Jan 2, 2025, datasets can be submitted to DRUM but will not be processed until after the break. Staff will not be available to answer email during this period, and will not be able to provide DOIs until after Jan 2. If you are in need of a DOI during this period, consider Dryad or OpenICPSR. Submission responses to the UDC may also be delayed during this time.

Browsing by Subject "Hoof Lesion"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Descriptive evaluation of a camera-based dairy cattle lameness detection technology
    (2024-08-29) Cramer, Gerard; Swartz, Drew; Shepley, Elise; Burchard, Javier; Gaddis, Kristen; swart205@umn.edu; Swartz, Drew; Cramer Foot Health Lab
    Lameness in dairy cattle is a clinical sign of impaired locomotion, mainly caused by painful foot lesions, compromising the US dairy industry's economic, environmental, and social sustainability goals. Combining technology and on farm data may be a more precise and less labor-intensive lameness detection tool, particularly for early detection. The objective of this observational study was to describe the association between average weekly autonomous camera-based (AUTO) locomotion scores and hoof trimming (HT) data. The AUTO data were collected from 3 farms from April 2022 to March 2023. Historical farm HT data were collected from March 2016 to March 2023 and used to determine cow lesion history and date of HT event. The HT events were categorized as a regular HT (TRIM; n = 2290) or a HT with a lesion recorded (LESION; n = 670). Events with LESION were sub-categorized based on lesion category: digital dermatitis (DD; n = 276), sole ulcer (SU; n = 79), white line disease (WLD; n = 141), and other (n = 174). The data also contained the leg of the LESION, classified as front left (FL; n = 54), front right (FR; n = 146), rear left (RL; n = 281), or rear right (RR; n = 183) leg with 6 events missing the leg. Cows' HT histories were classified as follows: cows with no previous recorded instance of any lesion were classified as TRIM0 (n = 1554). The first instance of any hoof lesion was classified as LESION1 (n = 238). This classification was retained until a subsequent TRIM occurred - recorded as TRIM1 (n = 632). The next unique instance of any lesion following a TRIM1 was classified as LESION2 (n = 86). Any LESION events occurring after LESION1 or LESION2 without a subsequent TRIM were considered a hoof lesion recurrence and classified as LESIONRE1 (n = 164) and LESIONRE2 (n = 22), respectively. TRIM events after LESION2 or LESION2RE (n = 104) or LESION events after LESIONRE1 or LESIONRE2 were classified as LESION_OTHER (n = 160). The AUTO scores from −28 to −1 days prior to the HT event were summarized into weekly scores and included if cows had at least 1 observation per week in the 4 weeks before the event. For all weeks, LESION cows had a higher median AUTO score than TRIM cows. Cows with TRIM0 had the lowest and most consistent median weekly score compared to LESION and other TRIM classifications. Before HT cows with TRIM0 and TRIM1, both had median score increases of 1 across the 4 weeks, while the LESION categories had an increase of 4 to 8. Scores increased with each subsequent LESION event compared to the previous LESION event. Cows with SU lesions had the highest median score across the 4 weeks, WLD had the largest score increase, and DD had the lowest median score and score increase. When grouping a LESION event by leg the hoof lesion was found on, the AUTO scores for four groups displayed comparable median values. Due to the difference between TRIM and LESION events, this technology shows potential for the early detection of hoof lesions.