Fischer A, Luginbühl T, Delattre L, Delouard J M, Faverdin P
INRA, UMR 1348 PEGASE, F-35590 St-Gilles, France; Agrocampus-Ouest, UMR1348 PEGASE, F-35000 Rennes, France; Institut de l'élevage, F-35650 Le Rheu, France.
3DOuest Lannion, F-22300 Lannion, France.
J Dairy Sci. 2015 Jul;98(7):4465-76. doi: 10.3168/jds.2014-8969. Epub 2015 May 7.
Body condition is an indirect estimation of the level of body reserves, and its variation reflects cumulative variation in energy balance. It interacts with reproductive and health performance, which are important to consider in dairy production but not easy to monitor. The commonly used body condition score (BCS) is time consuming, subjective, and not very sensitive. The aim was therefore to develop and validate a method assessing BCS with 3-dimensional (3D) surfaces of the cow's rear. A camera captured 3D shapes 2 m from the floor in a weigh station at the milking parlor exit. The BCS was scored by 3 experts on the same day as 3D imaging. Four anatomical landmarks had to be identified manually on each 3D surface to define a space centered on the cow's rear. A set of 57 3D surfaces from 56 Holstein dairy cows was selected to cover a large BCS range (from 0.5 to 4.75 on a 0 to 5 scale) to calibrate 3D surfaces on BCS. After performing a principal component analysis on this data set, multiple linear regression was fitted on the coordinates of these surfaces in the principal components' space to assess BCS. The validation was performed on 2 external data sets: one with cows used for calibration, but at a different lactation stage, and one with cows not used for calibration. Additionally, 6 cows were scanned once and their surfaces processed 8 times each for repeatability and then these cows were scanned 8 times each the same day for reproducibility. The selected model showed perfect calibration and a good but weaker validation (root mean square error=0.31 for the data set with cows used for calibration; 0.32 for the data set with cows not used for calibration). Assessing BCS with 3D surfaces was 3 times more repeatable (standard error=0.075 versus 0.210 for BCS) and 2.8 times more reproducible than manually scored BCS (standard error=0.103 versus 0.280 for BCS). The prediction error was similar for both validation data sets, indicating that the method is not less efficient for cows not used for calibration. The major part of reproducibility error incorporates repeatability error. An automation of the anatomical landmarks identification is required, first to allow broadband measures of body condition and second to improve repeatability and consequently reproducibility. Assessing BCS using 3D imaging coupled with principal component analysis appears to be a very promising means of improving precision and feasibility of this trait measurement.
体况是对机体储备水平的一种间接估计,其变化反映了能量平衡的累积变化。它与繁殖性能和健康表现相互作用,这在奶牛生产中很重要,但不易监测。常用的体况评分(BCS)耗时、主观且不太敏感。因此,目的是开发并验证一种利用奶牛后部三维(3D)表面评估BCS的方法。一台相机在挤奶厅出口的称重站距地面2米处捕捉3D形状。BCS由3位专家在进行3D成像的同一天进行评分。必须在每个3D表面上手动识别四个解剖标志,以定义一个以奶牛后部为中心的空间。从56头荷斯坦奶牛中选取了57个3D表面,以涵盖较大的BCS范围(0至5分制下从0.5到4.75),用于校准BCS的3D表面。对该数据集进行主成分分析后,在主成分空间中对这些表面的坐标进行多元线性回归以评估BCS。验证在两个外部数据集上进行:一个数据集包含用于校准但处于不同泌乳阶段的奶牛,另一个数据集包含未用于校准的奶牛。此外,对6头奶牛进行了一次扫描,其表面各处理8次以评估重复性,然后在同一天对这些奶牛各扫描8次以评估再现性。所选模型显示出完美的校准效果,验证效果良好但稍弱(对于使用奶牛进行校准的数据集,均方根误差 = 0.31;对于未使用奶牛进行校准的数据集,均方根误差 = 0.32)。用3D表面评估BCS的重复性比手动评分的BCS高3倍(BCS的标准误差分别为0.075和0.210),再现性高2.8倍(BCS的标准误差分别为0.103和0.280)。两个验证数据集的预测误差相似,这表明该方法对未用于校准的奶牛同样有效。再现性误差的主要部分包含重复性误差。需要实现解剖标志识别的自动化,首先是为了实现体况的广泛测量,其次是为了提高重复性,进而提高再现性。使用3D成像结合主成分分析评估BCS似乎是提高该性状测量精度和可行性的一种非常有前景的方法。