Descriptive evaluation of a camera-based dairy cattle lameness detection technology
Loading...
Persistent link to this item
Statistics
View StatisticsCollection period
2016-03-07
2023-03-06
2023-03-06
Date completed
2024-07-14
Date updated
Time period coverage
Geographic coverage
Source information
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Title
Descriptive evaluation of a camera-based dairy cattle lameness detection technology
Published Date
2024-08-29
Author Contact
Swartz, Drew
swart205@umn.edu
swart205@umn.edu
Type
Dataset
Observational Data
Observational Data
Abstract
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.
Description
This readme.txt file was generated on 20240826 by Drew Swartz
Recommended citation for the data: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2024-24851
-------------------
GENERAL INFORMATION
-------------------
1. Title of Dataset
Descriptive evaluation of a camera-based dairy cattle lameness detection technology
2. Author Information
Principal Investigator Contact Information
Name:Gerard Cramer
Institution: University of Minnesota
Address: 1365 Gortner Ave, St Paul, MN 55108
Email: gcramer@umn.edu
ORCID: 0000-0003-2691-3417
Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information
Name: Drew Swartz
Institution: University of Minnesota
Address: 1365 Gortner Ave, St Paul, MN 55108
Email: swart205@umn.edu
ORCID: 0000-0003-3619-7055
Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information
Name: Elise Shepley
Institution: University of Minnesota
Address: 1365 Gortner Ave, St Paul, MN 55108
Email: eshepley1@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0002-9663-7385
Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information
Name: Javier Burchard
Institution: Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding
Address: Bowie, MD, US
Email: javier.burchard@uscdcb.com
ORCID: 0000-0002-6412-7647
Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information
Name: Kristen Gaddis
Institution: Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding
Address: Bowie, MD, US
Email: kristen.gaddis@uscdcb.com
ORCID: 0000-0003-1234-1075
3. Date published or finalized for release:July 19, 2024
4. Date of data collection (single date, range, approximate date) 20160307 - 2023-03-06
M
5. Geographic location of data collection (where was data collected?): Minnesota and Iowa
6. Information about funding sources that supported the collection of the data:
This research was supported by the Council of Dairy Cattle Breeding, the University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine and Agricultural Experiment Station funding program (Signature Program Funding, accession number 1026927). Drew Swartz was partially funded by the USDA NIFA Food and Agricultural Science National Needs Graduate Fellowship in Dairy Production Systems, proposal number 2020-08149 and accession number 1025222. The funding partners had no input into the study design.
7. Overview of the data (abstract): 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.
--------------------------
SHARING/ACCESS INFORMATION
--------------------------
1. Licenses/restrictions placed on the data:
This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
2. Links to publications that cite or use the data:
https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(24)01017-8/fulltext#%20
3. Was data derived from another source?
If yes, list source(s):
4. Terms of Use: Data Repository for the U of Minnesota (DRUM) By using these files, users agree to the Terms of Use. https://conservancy.umn.edu/pages/policies/#drum-terms-of-use
---------------------
DATA & FILE OVERVIEW
---------------------
1. File List
A. Filename:0000_SourceData
Short description: Contains 3 sub folders CE, LESION, NEW_CE. These contain the raw data used for the projects
B. Filename:000_code_files
Short description: This contains the .rda files used to save and load in data after processing
C. Filename: 00_DataManipulation
Short description:These contains the files that are used to create data manipulation for each farm
D. Filename: 01_Output
Short description:These contain the results R files that are used to craft each output
2. Relationship between files: The order of the files are dependent where it must go A then B then C then D
--------------------------
METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION
--------------------------
1. Description of methods used for collection/generation of data: Collected data from 3 farms using their farm software, online downloads.
2. Methods for processing the data:Annotated in Materials and methods and annotated in the R file
3. Instrument- or software-specific information needed to interpret the data: Use R studio
4. Standards and calibration information, if appropriate:
5. Environmental/experimental conditions:
6. Describe any quality-assurance procedures performed on the data:
7. People involved with sample collection, processing, analysis and/or submission:Authors
Referenced by
https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2024-24851
Related to
Replaces
item.page.isreplacedby
Publisher
Collections
Funding information
This research was supported by the Council of Dairy Cattle Breeding, the University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine and Agricultural Experiment Station funding program (Signature Program Funding, accession number 1026927). Drew Swartz was partially funded by the USDA NIFA Food and Agricultural Science National Needs Graduate Fellowship in Dairy Production Systems, proposal number 2020-08149 and accession number 1025222. The funding partners had no input into the study design.
item.page.sponsorshipfunderid
item.page.sponsorshipfundingagency
item.page.sponsorshipgrant
Previously Published Citation
Other identifiers
Suggested citation
Cramer, Gerard; Swartz, Drew; Shepley, Elise; Burchard, Javier; Gaddis, Kristen. (2024). Descriptive evaluation of a camera-based dairy cattle lameness detection technology. Retrieved from the Data Repository for the University of Minnesota (DRUM), https://hdl.handle.net/11299/265220.
View/Download File
Content distributed via the University Digital Conservancy may be subject to additional license and use restrictions applied by the depositor. By using these files, users agree to the Terms of Use. Materials in the UDC may contain content that is disturbing and/or harmful. For more information, please see our statement on harmful content in digital repositories.