Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Dairy Sci. 2020 Feb;103(2):1566-1582. doi: 10.3168/jds.2019-16888. Epub 2019 Nov 20.

On-farm use of disease alerts generated by precision dairy technology.

Author information

1
Animal Science Department, Institute of Agriculture, University of Tennessee, Knoxville 37996. Electronic address: eeckelka@utk.edu.
2
Alltech, Nicholasville, KY 40356.

Abstract

Wearable precision dairy monitoring (PDM) technologies currently used to detect estrus may provide insight into disease detection. However, the incorporation of PDM into farm management and its perceived usefulness for dairy producers have not been explored. As the targeted end users of these products, information is needed on how producers use generated disease alerts as well as barriers to adoption and usefulness. The objective of this research was to assess the perceived usefulness producers attributed to alerts from a daily generated alert list designed to identify sick or injured cows or cows that experienced a major management change. Data from 1,171 cows on 4 commercial farms in Kentucky were collected from October 2015 to October 2016. Each cow was equipped with 2 PDM technologies: a leg tag (measuring activity in steps/d and lying time in h/d) and a neck collar (measuring eating time in h/d). Alerts were generated based on an individual cow's decrease of ≥30% in activity, lying, and eating time compared with each cow's 10-d moving mean. Producers sorted alerts into 3 overall categories: (1) the cow alert was perceived to be true and the cow was visually checked, (2) the cow alert was perceived to be true, but the cow was not visually checked, and (3) the cow alert behavior change was doubted by the producer and the cow was not visually checked. Further subdivisions were also provided to explain the choice for an overall category. Over the year, 24,012 cow alerts were generated (eating time, n = 9,543; lying time, n = 9,777; activity, n = 1,590; or a combination of behaviors, n = 3,102). Only 8% of the alerts were doubted by the producer. Although 55% of alerts were perceived to be true, producers visually assessed cows based on only 21% of the alerts with a large variation between farms (2 to 45% of the alerts visually assessed). Producers were more likely to completely ignore alerts over time. Producers were more likely to perceive cow alerts to be true and visually check cows when ≤20 alerts occurred per day, cows were fresh or in early lactation, alerts occurred during the work week, or when cow alerts were for eating time, activity, or a combination of multiple behaviors. Behavioral disease alerts must be improved and correspond to an actionable change for producers to use them. Incorporating herd management software, creating and managing alerts by lactation stage, and focusing on behaviors producers already find useful could improve future alert utilization.

KEYWORDS:

disease alert; precision dairy technology; transition cow disorder

PMID:
31759584
DOI:
10.3168/jds.2019-16888

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center