46
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Lameness Detection in Dairy Cows: Part 1. How to Distinguish between Non-Lame and Lame Cows Based on Differences in Locomotion or Behavior

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Simple Summary

          Scoring cattle for lameness based on changes in locomotion or behavior is essential for farmers to find and treat their lame animals. This review discusses the normal locomotion of cows in order to define abnormal locomotion due to lameness. It furthermore provides an overview of various relevant visual locomotion scoring systems that are currently being used as well as practical considerations when assessing lameness on a commercial farm.

          Abstract

          Due to its detrimental effect on cow welfare, health and production, lameness in dairy cows has received quite a lot of attention in the last few decades—not only in terms of prevention and treatment of lameness but also in terms of detection, as early treatment might decrease the number of severely lame cows in the herds as well as decrease the direct and indirect costs associated with lameness cases. Generally, lame cows are detected by the herdsman, hoof trimmer or veterinarian based on abnormal locomotion, abnormal behavior or the presence of hoof lesions during routine trimming. In the scientific literature, several guidelines are proposed to detect lame cows based on visual interpretation of the locomotion of individual cows ( i.e., locomotion scoring systems). Researchers and the industry have focused on automating such observations to support the farmer in finding the lame cows in their herds, but until now, such automated systems have rarely been used in commercial herds. This review starts with the description of normal locomotion of cows in order to define ‘abnormal’ locomotion caused by lameness. Cow locomotion (gait and posture) and behavioral features that change when a cow becomes lame are described and linked to the existing visual scoring systems. In addition, the lack of information of normal cow gait and a clear description of ‘abnormal’ gait are discussed. Finally, the different set-ups used during locomotion scoring and their influence on the resulting locomotion scores are evaluated.

          Related collections

          Most cited references95

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A lameness scoring system that uses posture and gait to predict dairy cattle reproductive performance.

          Lameness has contributed to reproductive inefficiency and increased the risk of culling in dairy cows. We developed a 5-point lameness scoring system that assessed gait and placed a novel emphasis on back posture. Our objective was to determine if this system predicted future reproductive performance and the risk of culling. The study was conducted at a commercial dairy farm with a history of declining reproductive efficiency and an increasing prevalence of lameness. A total of 66 primipara and pluripara calved, received an initial lameness score, and completed their 60-d voluntary waiting period. The overall prevalence of lameness (mean lameness score >2) was 65.2%. Scoring continued at 4-wk intervals and ceased with conception or culling. The percentage of cows confirmed pregnant and culled was 77.3 and 22.7, respectively. For each reproductive endpoint, a 2 x 2 table was constructed with lameness score >2 as the positive risk factor and either performance greater than the endpoint mean or being culled as the positive disease or condition. Positive and negative predictive values, relative risk, Chisquare statistic and regression analysis were used to evaluate the data. The positive predictive values for days to first service, days open, breeding herd days, services per pregnancy and being culled were 58, 68, 65, 39 and 35%, respectively. Similarly, the negative predictive values were 79, 96, 100, 96 and 100%, respectively. Except for one reproductive endpoint, the total number of services, all linear regressions were significant at P 2 predicted that a cow would have extended intervals from calving to first service and to conception, spend or be assigned to (explained herein) more total days in the breeding herd, require more services per pregnancy and be 8.4 times more likely to be culled. We believe that this lameness scoring system effectively identifies lame cows. Observation of the arched-back posture in a standing cow (> or =LS 3) should trigger corrective interventions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effect of hoof pathologies on subjective assessments of dairy cow gait.

            To explore how hoof pathologies affect dairy cattle gait, we studied cows with sole hemorrhages (n = 14), sole ulcers (n = 7), and those with no visible injuries (n = 17). Overall gait assessments, scored from video using a 1 to 5 numerical rating system (1 = sound, 5 = severely lame) and a continuous 100-unit visual analog scale, found cows having sole ulcers had poorer gait than healthy cows (mean +/- SEM: 4.0 +/- 0.13 vs. 3.1 +/- 0.08, and 59 +/- 3 vs. 46 +/- 2, respectively). Six gait attributes (back arch, head bob, tracking-up, joint flexion, asymmetric gait, and reluctance to bear weight) were also assessed using continuous 100-unit scales. Compared with healthy cows, those having sole ulcers walked with a more pronounced back arch (12 +/- 3 vs. 28 +/- 4), more jerky head movement (2 +/- 2 vs. 10 +/- 3), shortened strides (7 +/- 2 vs. 26 +/- 4), and more uneven weighting among the limbs (16 +/- 2 vs. 32 +/- 3). Of all measures, the numerical rating system most effectively discriminated healthy cows from those with sole ulcers (R2 = 0.73), classifying 92% of animals correctly. No differences were detected among cows with and without sole hemorrhages. Intra- and interobserver reliabilities were reasonable for all measures (R2 > or = 0.64) except joint flexion and asymmetric gait. In summary, subjective assessments of dairy cattle gait provide valid and reliable approaches to identifying cattle with sole ulcers.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Behavioural response to humans and the productivity of commercial dairy cows.

              This study examined the relationships between the attitude and the behaviour of the stockperson towards cows and the behavioural response to humans and the milk production of cows at 31 commercial dairy farms over one lactation. The attitude of the stockperson was measured on the basis of the stockperson's opinion of the cow's behaviour and how the stockperson evaluated his own behaviour. The behaviour of the stockperson was measured by recording the nature and frequency of the tactile interactions and some visual and auditory interactions directed towards the cows. The behavioural response of cows to humans was assessed by observing their approach behaviour to an unfamiliar experimenter in a standard test and production records were collected for the entire lactation at each farm. Correlation and regression analyses using farm averages were used to examine relationships between human and cow variables. Several cow behaviour variables, indicative of fear of humans, were moderately (P<0.05) to highly (P<0.01) correlated with milk yield and composition and regression analysis indicated that fear of humans accounted for 19% of the variation in milk yield between farms. The results suggest that at farms where milk yield was low, cows showed less approach to the experimenter in the standard fear test than at farms where milk yield was higher. A composite attitude score, based on the responses of stockpeople to questions about patting and talking to cows, ease of movement of cows and cows recognising unfamiliar stockpeople, was moderately (P<0.05) to highly (P<0.01) correlated with the behaviour of the stockperson. While a number of stockperson behaviour variables were correlated (P<0.05) with milk yield, the former variables were generally poorly correlated with cow behaviour. Therefore these preliminary findings provide evidence that, as seen in the pig industry, sequential relationships may exist between the attitude and behaviour of the stockperson and the behaviour and productivity of commercial dairy cows. Research is required to further examine these relationships because of the possible implications on cow productivity and welfare.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Animals (Basel)
                Animals (Basel)
                animals
                Animals : an Open Access Journal from MDPI
                MDPI
                2076-2615
                28 August 2015
                September 2015
                : 5
                : 3
                : 838-860
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Technology and Food Science Unit–Precision Livestock Farming; The Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), Burgemeester van Gansberghelaan 115 bus 1, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium; E-Mails: ingrid.zwertvaegher@ 123456ilvo.vlaanderen.be (I.Z.); liesbet.pluym@ 123456ilvo.vlaanderen.be (L.P.); stephanie.vanweyenberg@ 123456ilvo.vlaanderen.be (S.V.W.)
                [2 ]INRA, UMR 791 Systemic Modelling of Ruminant Nutrition, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75231 Paris cedex 05, France; E-Mail: vivi.thorup@ 123456agroparistech.fr
                [3 ]AgroParisTech, UMR 791 Systemic Modelling of Ruminant Nutrition, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75231 Paris cedex 05, France
                [4 ]Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Green Technology, Koetilantie 5, 00790 Helsinki, Finland; E-Mail: Matti.pastell@ 123456luke.fi
                [5 ]Animal Sciences Unit, The Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), Scheldeweg 68, 9090 Melle, Belgium; E-Mail: bart.sonck@ 123456ilvo.vlaanderen.be
                [6 ]Department of Biosystems Engineering, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Coupure links 653, 9000 Gent, Belgium
                [7 ]Division Mechatronics, Biostatistics and Sensors (MeBioS), Department of Biosystems, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Kasteelpark Arenberg 30 bus 2456, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium; E-Mail: wouter.saeys@ 123456biw.kuleuven.be
                Author notes
                [* ]Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: annelies.vannuffel@ 123456ilvo.vlaanderen.be .
                Article
                animals-05-00387
                10.3390/ani5030387
                4598709
                26479389
                40effd01-c8b8-4d0e-ac56-e27037d3c7d3
                © 2015 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

                This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 29 May 2015
                : 18 August 2015
                Categories
                Review

                lameness,dairy cattle,cow gait,behavior,visual locomotion scoring

                Comments

                Comment on this article