Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Calving alert system - a helping technique or a welfare problem?
RISE - Research Institutes of Sweden, Bioscience and Materials, Agrifood and Bioscience.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0233-1917
RISE - Research Institutes of Sweden, Bioscience and Materials, Agrifood and Bioscience.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3748-3918
2019 (English)In: Precision Livestock Farming 2019 - Papers Presented at the 9th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming, ECPLF 2019, Organising Committee of the 9th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming (ECPLF), Teagasc, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre , 2019, p. 385-388Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

It can be a challenge for beef and dairy farmers to predict when a cow is close to calving, to move her to a calving pen in time and to properly monitor and assist the calving. The objective was to evaluate how a calving alert system, attached to the tail, affects the cow. The system monitors the tail's movements, and the farmer is notified via a text message to the mobile phone approximately one hour before calving. A case-control and an interview study were carried out. In the case-control study, cow behaviour was observed during and after the procedure of attaching the sensor on the tail. Controls were equally prepared, but the sensor was attached and then immediately removed again. The ethogram protocol contained behaviours like, for example, back arching, tail lifting, fidgeting and kicking. The case-control study had to be discontinued due to the sensors causing damage to the cow's tail and therefore, there were too few cows included in the study to be able to determine if there were statistical differences between the test and control cows. In the interview study which included 15 interviewed farmers, 80% stated that the cows' behavioural reaction was negative when the sensor was attached. Almost all farmers had observed damage to the tails after using the sensor and 20% had observed such severe damage that amputation was necessary.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Organising Committee of the 9th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming (ECPLF), Teagasc, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre , 2019. p. 385-388
Keywords [en]
Animal welfare, Behaviour, Cow, Monitoring, Alert systems, Case-control, Case-control study, Interview study, Statistical differences, System monitors, Agriculture
National Category
Natural Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-40621Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85073746769ISBN: 9781841706542 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-40621DiVA, id: diva2:1372909
Conference
9th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming, ECPLF 2019, 26 August 2019 through 29 August 2019
Note

Funding details: Kungl. Skogs- och Lantbruksakademien, KSLA; Funding text 1: This project was funded by the SLO-foundation, administered by the Royal Swedish Academy of Agriculture and Forestry. Thanks to all farmers that participated in the case-control study and the interview study.

Available from: 2019-11-25 Created: 2019-11-25 Last updated: 2019-11-25Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Scopus

Authority records BETA

Lind, Ann-KristinaLindahl, Cecilia

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lind, Ann-KristinaLindahl, Cecilia
By organisation
Agrifood and Bioscience
Natural Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 78 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
v. 2.35.9