Monitoring cattle liveweight using a mobile, in-paddock weigh platform: Validation, attendance and utility
Cattle liveweight (LW) monitoring is essential for the effective management of animal productivity and welfare, particularly in decision-making on farms. Traditional static weigh (SW) systems require animals to be moved to fixed scales, posing challenges in extensive beef systems due to labour deman...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2024-12-01
|
| Series: | Smart Agricultural Technology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772375524002442 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850061632213876736 |
|---|---|
| author | Faysal M. Hasan Peter C. Thomson Mohammed R. Islam Cameron E.F. Clark Anna Chlingaryan Sabrina Lomax |
| author_facet | Faysal M. Hasan Peter C. Thomson Mohammed R. Islam Cameron E.F. Clark Anna Chlingaryan Sabrina Lomax |
| author_sort | Faysal M. Hasan |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Cattle liveweight (LW) monitoring is essential for the effective management of animal productivity and welfare, particularly in decision-making on farms. Traditional static weigh (SW) systems require animals to be moved to fixed scales, posing challenges in extensive beef systems due to labour demands, costs, stress, and weight loss during muster. This study evaluated the relationship between LW measured by a SW system and a mobile in-field weighing system, Optiweigh (OW), in 65 weaners (Angus, Shorthorn, and Angus-Shorthorn cross) grazing on forage oats at a commercial beef property in north-west NSW, Australia. Over 22 weeks, cattle were weighed fortnightly using SW scales in the cattle yards while OW continuously monitored LW in the paddock. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient showed a strong association between OW and SW liveweight (CCC = 0.97; P < 0.001), with no influence from breed or sex. However, OW slightly over-predicted LW for lighter cattle (≤ 382 kg) and under-predicted for heavier cattle (> 382 kg), prompting the development of a correction. Further research is needed to understand the reasons for these discrepancies, potentially related to diet. Additionally, cattle attendance at OW was affected by size, season, and individual variation (P < 0.001). Overall, the OW system simply and accurately monitored the temporal changes in cattle LW through voluntary animal attendance in remote systems. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-bc6a67166a2d4b0b91ee8b002b0f0b67 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2772-3755 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-12-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Smart Agricultural Technology |
| spelling | doaj-art-bc6a67166a2d4b0b91ee8b002b0f0b672025-08-20T02:50:09ZengElsevierSmart Agricultural Technology2772-37552024-12-01910063910.1016/j.atech.2024.100639Monitoring cattle liveweight using a mobile, in-paddock weigh platform: Validation, attendance and utilityFaysal M. Hasan0Peter C. Thomson1Mohammed R. Islam2Cameron E.F. Clark3Anna Chlingaryan4Sabrina Lomax5Livestock Production and Welfare Group, Sydney Institute of Agriculture, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Camden, NSW 2570, Australia; Department of Livestock Services, Krishi Khamar Sarak, Farmgate, Dhaka 1207, Bangladesh; Corresponding author.Livestock Production and Welfare Group, Sydney Institute of Agriculture, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Camden, NSW 2570, Australia; Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Camden, NSW 2570, AustraliaLivestock Production and Welfare Group, Sydney Institute of Agriculture, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Camden, NSW 2570, AustraliaLivestock Production and Welfare Group, Sydney Institute of Agriculture, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Camden, NSW 2570, Australia; Gulbali Institute for Agriculture, Water and Environment, Charles Sturt University, 250 Boorooma St North- Wagga, AustraliaLivestock Production and Welfare Group, Sydney Institute of Agriculture, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Camden, NSW 2570, AustraliaLivestock Production and Welfare Group, Sydney Institute of Agriculture, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Sydney, Camden, NSW 2570, AustraliaCattle liveweight (LW) monitoring is essential for the effective management of animal productivity and welfare, particularly in decision-making on farms. Traditional static weigh (SW) systems require animals to be moved to fixed scales, posing challenges in extensive beef systems due to labour demands, costs, stress, and weight loss during muster. This study evaluated the relationship between LW measured by a SW system and a mobile in-field weighing system, Optiweigh (OW), in 65 weaners (Angus, Shorthorn, and Angus-Shorthorn cross) grazing on forage oats at a commercial beef property in north-west NSW, Australia. Over 22 weeks, cattle were weighed fortnightly using SW scales in the cattle yards while OW continuously monitored LW in the paddock. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient showed a strong association between OW and SW liveweight (CCC = 0.97; P < 0.001), with no influence from breed or sex. However, OW slightly over-predicted LW for lighter cattle (≤ 382 kg) and under-predicted for heavier cattle (> 382 kg), prompting the development of a correction. Further research is needed to understand the reasons for these discrepancies, potentially related to diet. Additionally, cattle attendance at OW was affected by size, season, and individual variation (P < 0.001). Overall, the OW system simply and accurately monitored the temporal changes in cattle LW through voluntary animal attendance in remote systems.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772375524002442Precision agricultureCattleLiveweightMobile weigh platformGrowth monitoring |
| spellingShingle | Faysal M. Hasan Peter C. Thomson Mohammed R. Islam Cameron E.F. Clark Anna Chlingaryan Sabrina Lomax Monitoring cattle liveweight using a mobile, in-paddock weigh platform: Validation, attendance and utility Smart Agricultural Technology Precision agriculture Cattle Liveweight Mobile weigh platform Growth monitoring |
| title | Monitoring cattle liveweight using a mobile, in-paddock weigh platform: Validation, attendance and utility |
| title_full | Monitoring cattle liveweight using a mobile, in-paddock weigh platform: Validation, attendance and utility |
| title_fullStr | Monitoring cattle liveweight using a mobile, in-paddock weigh platform: Validation, attendance and utility |
| title_full_unstemmed | Monitoring cattle liveweight using a mobile, in-paddock weigh platform: Validation, attendance and utility |
| title_short | Monitoring cattle liveweight using a mobile, in-paddock weigh platform: Validation, attendance and utility |
| title_sort | monitoring cattle liveweight using a mobile in paddock weigh platform validation attendance and utility |
| topic | Precision agriculture Cattle Liveweight Mobile weigh platform Growth monitoring |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772375524002442 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT faysalmhasan monitoringcattleliveweightusingamobileinpaddockweighplatformvalidationattendanceandutility AT petercthomson monitoringcattleliveweightusingamobileinpaddockweighplatformvalidationattendanceandutility AT mohammedrislam monitoringcattleliveweightusingamobileinpaddockweighplatformvalidationattendanceandutility AT cameronefclark monitoringcattleliveweightusingamobileinpaddockweighplatformvalidationattendanceandutility AT annachlingaryan monitoringcattleliveweightusingamobileinpaddockweighplatformvalidationattendanceandutility AT sabrinalomax monitoringcattleliveweightusingamobileinpaddockweighplatformvalidationattendanceandutility |