IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v10y2020i6p246-d376624.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of an Automated Body Condition Scoring System Using 3D Imaging

Author

Listed:
  • Niall O’ Leary

    (Hincks Centre For Entrepreneurial Excellence, Cork Institute of Technology, Cork, T12 P928 Co. Cork, Ireland)

  • Lorenzo Leso

    (Department of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Systems, University of Florence, 50145 Firenze, Italy)

  • Frank Buckley

    (Moorepark Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Fermoy, P61 C997 Co. Cork, Ireland)

  • Jonathon Kenneally

    (Moorepark Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Fermoy, P61 C997 Co. Cork, Ireland)

  • Diarmuid McSweeney

    (Unit 2, True North Technologies, Shannon Business Centre, Shannon, V14 YT99 Co. Clare, Ireland)

  • Laurence Shalloo

    (Moorepark Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Fermoy, P61 C997 Co. Cork, Ireland)

Abstract

Body condition scores (BCS) measure a cow’s fat reserves and is important for management and research. Manual BCS assessment is subjective, time-consuming, and requires trained personnel. The BodyMat F (BMF, Ingenera SA, Cureglia, Switzerland) is an automated body condition scoring system using a 3D sensor to estimate BCS. This study assesses the BMF. One hundred and three Holstein Friesian cows were assessed by the BMF and two assessors throughout a lactation. The BMF output is in the 0–5 scale commonly used in France. We develop and report the first equation to convert these scores to the 1–5 scale used by the assessors in Ireland in this study ((0–5 scale × 0.38) + 1.67 → 1–5 scale). Inter-assessor agreement as measured by Lin’s concordance of correlation was 0.67. BMF agreement with the mean of the two assessors was the same as between assessors (0.67). However, agreement was lower for extreme values, particularly in over-conditioned cows where the BMF underestimated BCS relative to the mean of the two human observers. The BMF outperformed human assessors in terms of reproducibility and thus is likely to be especially useful in research contexts. This is the second independent validation of a commercially marketed body condition scoring system as far as the authors are aware. Comparing the results here with the published evaluation of the other system, we conclude that the BMF performed as well or better.

Suggested Citation

  • Niall O’ Leary & Lorenzo Leso & Frank Buckley & Jonathon Kenneally & Diarmuid McSweeney & Laurence Shalloo, 2020. "Validation of an Automated Body Condition Scoring System Using 3D Imaging," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-8, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:10:y:2020:i:6:p:246-:d:376624
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/10/6/246/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/10/6/246/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:10:y:2020:i:6:p:246-:d:376624. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.