Reliability of sampling strategies for measuring dairy cattle welfare on commercial farms

Jennifer M.C. Van Os, Christoph Winckler, Julia Trieb, Soraia V. Matarazzo, Terry W Lehenbauer, John D. Champagne, Cassandra B. Tucker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Our objective was to evaluate how the proportion of high-producing lactating cows sampled on each farm and the selection method affect prevalence estimates for animal-based measures. We assessed the entire high-producing pen (days in milk <100; range = 81-241 cows) on 10 California farms using measures from the Welfare Quality Protocol for Cattle. Cows were restrained in head locks and visually evaluated for body condition, dirtiness, skin alterations (hair loss, lesions, or swelling), discharge (ocular, nasal, vulvar), diarrhea, and impaired respiration. Lameness was scored upon release. Prevalence was calculated as a percentage of assessed cows. The most common conditions were dirty hindquarters (33.5 ± 10.7%, mean ± standard deviation) and lesions or swelling on the carpal joint (34.4 ± 7.0%) and hock (26.4 ± 16.7%). Diarrhea (8.0 ± 5.8%), lameness (moderate = 7.3 ± 4.7%, severe = 2.2 ± 2.2%), and neck (5.8 ± 12.6%), flank (4.5 ± 5.0%), or hindquarter alterations (5.5 ± 3.9%) were less common. Very fat cows, vulvar discharge, and impaired respiration were rare (≤1%) and were excluded from further analysis. Four sampling strategies were used to generate 20 estimates for each animal-based measure. The strategies were (1) selecting every 10th, 5th, 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 2 of 3, or 3 of 4 cows at the feed bunk (7 estimates/measure); (2) randomly selecting 7 matching proportions of the pen; (3) randomly selecting cows using 3 sample size calculations from the Welfare Quality Protocol; and (4) selecting the first, middle, or final third of cows exiting the milking parlor. Estimates were compared with true values using regression analysis and were considered accurate if they met 3 criteria: the coefficient of determination was ≥0.9 and the slope and intercept did not differ significantly from 1 and 0, respectively. All estimates met the slope and intercept criteria, whereas the coefficient of determination increased when more cows were sampled. All estimates were accurate for neck alterations, ocular discharge (22.2 ± 27.4%), and carpal joint hair loss (14.1 ± 17.4%). Selecting a third of the milking order or using the Welfare Quality sample size calculations failed to accurately estimate all measures simultaneously. However, all estimates were accurate when selecting at least 2 of every 3 cows locked at the feed bunk. Using restraint position at the feed bunk did not differ systematically from computer-selecting the same proportion of cows randomly, and the former may be a simpler approach for welfare assessments.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Dairy Science
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Wrist Joint
commercial farms
Alopecia
Sample Size
dairy cattle
Diarrhea
Respiration
Neck
Animal Tarsus
cows
Nose
Milk
feed troughs
Fats
Head
Regression Analysis
sampling
Skin
alopecia
lameness

Keywords

  • Health
  • On-farm assessment
  • Sampling
  • Validation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Food Science
  • Animal Science and Zoology
  • Genetics

Cite this

Van Os, J. M. C., Winckler, C., Trieb, J., Matarazzo, S. V., Lehenbauer, T. W., Champagne, J. D., & Tucker, C. B. (Accepted/In press). Reliability of sampling strategies for measuring dairy cattle welfare on commercial farms. Journal of Dairy Science. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2017-13611

Reliability of sampling strategies for measuring dairy cattle welfare on commercial farms. / Van Os, Jennifer M.C.; Winckler, Christoph; Trieb, Julia; Matarazzo, Soraia V.; Lehenbauer, Terry W; Champagne, John D.; Tucker, Cassandra B.

In: Journal of Dairy Science, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Van Os, Jennifer M.C. ; Winckler, Christoph ; Trieb, Julia ; Matarazzo, Soraia V. ; Lehenbauer, Terry W ; Champagne, John D. ; Tucker, Cassandra B. / Reliability of sampling strategies for measuring dairy cattle welfare on commercial farms. In: Journal of Dairy Science. 2018.
@article{83ff7109d43243e1bcbe6d3278816160,
title = "Reliability of sampling strategies for measuring dairy cattle welfare on commercial farms",
abstract = "Our objective was to evaluate how the proportion of high-producing lactating cows sampled on each farm and the selection method affect prevalence estimates for animal-based measures. We assessed the entire high-producing pen (days in milk <100; range = 81-241 cows) on 10 California farms using measures from the Welfare Quality Protocol for Cattle. Cows were restrained in head locks and visually evaluated for body condition, dirtiness, skin alterations (hair loss, lesions, or swelling), discharge (ocular, nasal, vulvar), diarrhea, and impaired respiration. Lameness was scored upon release. Prevalence was calculated as a percentage of assessed cows. The most common conditions were dirty hindquarters (33.5 ± 10.7{\%}, mean ± standard deviation) and lesions or swelling on the carpal joint (34.4 ± 7.0{\%}) and hock (26.4 ± 16.7{\%}). Diarrhea (8.0 ± 5.8{\%}), lameness (moderate = 7.3 ± 4.7{\%}, severe = 2.2 ± 2.2{\%}), and neck (5.8 ± 12.6{\%}), flank (4.5 ± 5.0{\%}), or hindquarter alterations (5.5 ± 3.9{\%}) were less common. Very fat cows, vulvar discharge, and impaired respiration were rare (≤1{\%}) and were excluded from further analysis. Four sampling strategies were used to generate 20 estimates for each animal-based measure. The strategies were (1) selecting every 10th, 5th, 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 2 of 3, or 3 of 4 cows at the feed bunk (7 estimates/measure); (2) randomly selecting 7 matching proportions of the pen; (3) randomly selecting cows using 3 sample size calculations from the Welfare Quality Protocol; and (4) selecting the first, middle, or final third of cows exiting the milking parlor. Estimates were compared with true values using regression analysis and were considered accurate if they met 3 criteria: the coefficient of determination was ≥0.9 and the slope and intercept did not differ significantly from 1 and 0, respectively. All estimates met the slope and intercept criteria, whereas the coefficient of determination increased when more cows were sampled. All estimates were accurate for neck alterations, ocular discharge (22.2 ± 27.4{\%}), and carpal joint hair loss (14.1 ± 17.4{\%}). Selecting a third of the milking order or using the Welfare Quality sample size calculations failed to accurately estimate all measures simultaneously. However, all estimates were accurate when selecting at least 2 of every 3 cows locked at the feed bunk. Using restraint position at the feed bunk did not differ systematically from computer-selecting the same proportion of cows randomly, and the former may be a simpler approach for welfare assessments.",
keywords = "Health, On-farm assessment, Sampling, Validation",
author = "{Van Os}, {Jennifer M.C.} and Christoph Winckler and Julia Trieb and Matarazzo, {Soraia V.} and Lehenbauer, {Terry W} and Champagne, {John D.} and Tucker, {Cassandra B.}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3168/jds.2017-13611",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Dairy Science",
issn = "0022-0302",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reliability of sampling strategies for measuring dairy cattle welfare on commercial farms

AU - Van Os, Jennifer M.C.

AU - Winckler, Christoph

AU - Trieb, Julia

AU - Matarazzo, Soraia V.

AU - Lehenbauer, Terry W

AU - Champagne, John D.

AU - Tucker, Cassandra B.

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Our objective was to evaluate how the proportion of high-producing lactating cows sampled on each farm and the selection method affect prevalence estimates for animal-based measures. We assessed the entire high-producing pen (days in milk <100; range = 81-241 cows) on 10 California farms using measures from the Welfare Quality Protocol for Cattle. Cows were restrained in head locks and visually evaluated for body condition, dirtiness, skin alterations (hair loss, lesions, or swelling), discharge (ocular, nasal, vulvar), diarrhea, and impaired respiration. Lameness was scored upon release. Prevalence was calculated as a percentage of assessed cows. The most common conditions were dirty hindquarters (33.5 ± 10.7%, mean ± standard deviation) and lesions or swelling on the carpal joint (34.4 ± 7.0%) and hock (26.4 ± 16.7%). Diarrhea (8.0 ± 5.8%), lameness (moderate = 7.3 ± 4.7%, severe = 2.2 ± 2.2%), and neck (5.8 ± 12.6%), flank (4.5 ± 5.0%), or hindquarter alterations (5.5 ± 3.9%) were less common. Very fat cows, vulvar discharge, and impaired respiration were rare (≤1%) and were excluded from further analysis. Four sampling strategies were used to generate 20 estimates for each animal-based measure. The strategies were (1) selecting every 10th, 5th, 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 2 of 3, or 3 of 4 cows at the feed bunk (7 estimates/measure); (2) randomly selecting 7 matching proportions of the pen; (3) randomly selecting cows using 3 sample size calculations from the Welfare Quality Protocol; and (4) selecting the first, middle, or final third of cows exiting the milking parlor. Estimates were compared with true values using regression analysis and were considered accurate if they met 3 criteria: the coefficient of determination was ≥0.9 and the slope and intercept did not differ significantly from 1 and 0, respectively. All estimates met the slope and intercept criteria, whereas the coefficient of determination increased when more cows were sampled. All estimates were accurate for neck alterations, ocular discharge (22.2 ± 27.4%), and carpal joint hair loss (14.1 ± 17.4%). Selecting a third of the milking order or using the Welfare Quality sample size calculations failed to accurately estimate all measures simultaneously. However, all estimates were accurate when selecting at least 2 of every 3 cows locked at the feed bunk. Using restraint position at the feed bunk did not differ systematically from computer-selecting the same proportion of cows randomly, and the former may be a simpler approach for welfare assessments.

AB - Our objective was to evaluate how the proportion of high-producing lactating cows sampled on each farm and the selection method affect prevalence estimates for animal-based measures. We assessed the entire high-producing pen (days in milk <100; range = 81-241 cows) on 10 California farms using measures from the Welfare Quality Protocol for Cattle. Cows were restrained in head locks and visually evaluated for body condition, dirtiness, skin alterations (hair loss, lesions, or swelling), discharge (ocular, nasal, vulvar), diarrhea, and impaired respiration. Lameness was scored upon release. Prevalence was calculated as a percentage of assessed cows. The most common conditions were dirty hindquarters (33.5 ± 10.7%, mean ± standard deviation) and lesions or swelling on the carpal joint (34.4 ± 7.0%) and hock (26.4 ± 16.7%). Diarrhea (8.0 ± 5.8%), lameness (moderate = 7.3 ± 4.7%, severe = 2.2 ± 2.2%), and neck (5.8 ± 12.6%), flank (4.5 ± 5.0%), or hindquarter alterations (5.5 ± 3.9%) were less common. Very fat cows, vulvar discharge, and impaired respiration were rare (≤1%) and were excluded from further analysis. Four sampling strategies were used to generate 20 estimates for each animal-based measure. The strategies were (1) selecting every 10th, 5th, 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 2 of 3, or 3 of 4 cows at the feed bunk (7 estimates/measure); (2) randomly selecting 7 matching proportions of the pen; (3) randomly selecting cows using 3 sample size calculations from the Welfare Quality Protocol; and (4) selecting the first, middle, or final third of cows exiting the milking parlor. Estimates were compared with true values using regression analysis and were considered accurate if they met 3 criteria: the coefficient of determination was ≥0.9 and the slope and intercept did not differ significantly from 1 and 0, respectively. All estimates met the slope and intercept criteria, whereas the coefficient of determination increased when more cows were sampled. All estimates were accurate for neck alterations, ocular discharge (22.2 ± 27.4%), and carpal joint hair loss (14.1 ± 17.4%). Selecting a third of the milking order or using the Welfare Quality sample size calculations failed to accurately estimate all measures simultaneously. However, all estimates were accurate when selecting at least 2 of every 3 cows locked at the feed bunk. Using restraint position at the feed bunk did not differ systematically from computer-selecting the same proportion of cows randomly, and the former may be a simpler approach for welfare assessments.

KW - Health

KW - On-farm assessment

KW - Sampling

KW - Validation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85039070007&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85039070007&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3168/jds.2017-13611

DO - 10.3168/jds.2017-13611

M3 - Article

JO - Journal of Dairy Science

JF - Journal of Dairy Science

SN - 0022-0302

ER -