title: Rear shape in 3 dimensions summarized by principal component analysis is a good predictor of body condition score in Holstein dairy cows.
abstract: 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.
authors.affiliation: 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.
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Fischer
authors.affiliation: 3DOuest Lannion, F-22300 Lannion, France.
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Luginbühl
authors.affiliation: 3DOuest Lannion, F-22300 Lannion, France.
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Delattre
authors.affiliation: 3DOuest Lannion, F-22300 Lannion, France.
authors.forename: J M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Delouard
authors.affiliation: INRA, UMR 1348 PEGASE, F-35590 St-Gilles, France; Agrocampus-Ouest, UMR1348 PEGASE, F-35000 Rennes, France. Electronic address: philippe.faverdin@rennes.inra.fr.
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Faverdin
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001823:Body Composition / Q000502:physiology*; D002417:Cattle / Q000033:anatomy & histology* / Q000502:physiology*; D003612:Dairying / Q000379:methods; D004734:Energy Metabolism; D005260:Female; D006304:Health Status; D021621:Imaging, Three-Dimensional / Q000662:veterinary*; D007774:Lactation; D016014:Linear Models; D008892:Milk; D025341:Principal Component Analysis; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012098:Reproduction / Q000502:physiology
keywords: 3-dimensional imaging; body condition score; precision livestock farming; principal component analysis