Chen Jennifer M, Schütz Karin E, Tucker Cassandra B
Department of Animal Science, University of California, Davis 95616.
AgResearch Ltd., Hamilton 3240, New Zealand.
J Dairy Sci. 2016 Oct;99(10):8341-8346. doi: 10.3168/jds.2016-11351. Epub 2016 Jul 27.
Recording behavior at fixed intervals (instantaneous sampling) can reduce labor relative to observing continuously. However, instantaneous sampling may inaccurately estimate potentially important responses, such as how frequently cows perform a behavior (i.e., the number of bouts). Our objective was to validate the use of instantaneous sampling for capturing how long and how frequently cows in freestall housing lie down or visit the feed bunk and water trough. We predicted that more frequent sampling would be needed to accurately reflect the behaviors that cows spent less time performing. In addition, we predicted that instantaneous sampling would underestimate how often cows engaged in behaviors that they frequently performed in short bouts or with short intervals between bouts, as some of these events may occur between sample intervals. Continuous video observations of 18 lactating Holstein-Friesian dairy cows were conducted for 48-h periods. Instantaneous samples (1 and 30 s, and 1, 3, 5, 10, 15, and 30 min) were generated from continuous data, with the samples recorded at 1-s intervals representing true values. Estimates from each sample interval ≥30 s were compared pairwise to true values with regression analysis. Sample intervals were considered accurate if they met 3 criteria: coefficient of determination ≥0.9 (i.e., strongly related to true values), slope=1, and intercept=0 (i.e., did not over- or underestimate true values). The amount of time cows spent lying (12.1±1.8h/24h, mean ± standard deviation) or visiting the water trough (1.1±0.8h/24h) and feed bunk (5.6±0.8h/24h) were accurately captured using sample intervals ≤30, 10, and 5 min, respectively. In addition, sample intervals ≤3 min accurately estimated the number of lying bouts (10.3±2.4 per 24h), likely because cows were recumbent for long periods (74.0±17.4 min, on average, with <6% of bouts lasting <5 min) and rarely resumed lying soon after standing up (0.4% of intervals between lying bouts were <30 s). However, shorter sample intervals may be needed in situations where cows more frequently transition between lying and standing. In contrast to lying in this study, cows visited the water trough and feed bunk for shorter periods (3.5±1.7 and 25.6±5.8 min, respectively) and frequently returned to these resources soon after leaving (17 and 7% of intervals between visits were <30 s long). As some of these events likely occurred between sample intervals, all sample intervals ≥30 s underestimated the number of times cows visited the water trough and feed bunk (18.5±6.2 and 14.1±4.4 per 24h, respectively). Therefore, continuous observation is needed to determine how often cows visit these resources.
与连续观察相比,以固定间隔记录行为(即时抽样)可以减少工作量。然而,即时抽样可能会不准确地估计潜在的重要反应,比如奶牛执行某种行为的频率(即发作次数)。我们的目标是验证即时抽样用于获取散栏饲养的奶牛躺卧、前往饲料槽和饮水槽的时长及频率的有效性。我们预测,对于奶牛花费时间较少的行为,需要更频繁的抽样才能准确反映。此外,我们预测即时抽样会低估奶牛频繁进行的短时间发作或发作间隔较短的行为的发生频率,因为其中一些事件可能发生在抽样间隔之间。对18头泌乳期荷斯坦 - 弗里生奶牛进行了为期48小时的连续视频观察。从连续数据中生成即时样本(1秒和30秒,以及1、3、5、10、15和30分钟),以1秒间隔记录的样本代表真实值。通过回归分析将每个≥30秒的样本间隔的估计值与真实值进行两两比较。如果样本间隔满足3个标准,则认为其准确:决定系数≥0.9(即与真实值高度相关)、斜率 = 1且截距 = 0(即没有高估或低估真实值)。分别使用≤30分钟、10分钟和5分钟的样本间隔准确获取了奶牛躺卧的时间(12.1±1.8小时/24小时,均值±标准差)、前往饮水槽的时间(1.1±0.8小时/24小时)和前往饲料槽的时间(5.6±0.8小时/24小时)。此外,≤3分钟的样本间隔准确估计了躺卧发作次数(每24小时10.3±2.4次),这可能是因为奶牛长时间躺卧(平均74.0±17.4分钟,发作持续时间<5分钟的情况<6%),且站立后很少很快再次躺卧(躺卧发作间隔<30秒的情况占0.4%)。然而,在奶牛躺卧和站立之间转换更频繁的情况下,可能需要更短的样本间隔。与本研究中的躺卧行为不同,奶牛前往饮水槽和饲料槽的时间较短(分别为3.5±1.7分钟和25.6±5.8分钟),并且离开后很快又会回到这些地方(访问间隔<30秒的情况分别占17%和7%)。由于其中一些事件可能发生在抽样间隔之间,所有≥30秒的样本间隔都低估了奶牛前往饮水槽和饲料槽的次数(分别为每24小时18.5±6.2次和14.1±4.4次)。因此,需要连续观察来确定奶牛访问这些地方的频率。