Cargando…

Predicting feed intake using modelling based on feeding behaviour in finishing beef steers

Current techniques for measuring feed intake in housed cattle are both expensive and time-consuming making them unsuitable for use on commercial farms. Estimates of individual animal intake are required for assessing production efficiency. The aim of this study was to predict individual animal intak...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Davison, C., Bowen, J.M., Michie, C., Rooke, J.A., Jonsson, N., Andonovic, I., Tachtatzis, C., Gilroy, M., Duthie, C-A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8282503/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34116464
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2021.100231
_version_ 1783723028213923840
author Davison, C.
Bowen, J.M.
Michie, C.
Rooke, J.A.
Jonsson, N.
Andonovic, I.
Tachtatzis, C.
Gilroy, M.
Duthie, C-A.
author_facet Davison, C.
Bowen, J.M.
Michie, C.
Rooke, J.A.
Jonsson, N.
Andonovic, I.
Tachtatzis, C.
Gilroy, M.
Duthie, C-A.
author_sort Davison, C.
collection PubMed
description Current techniques for measuring feed intake in housed cattle are both expensive and time-consuming making them unsuitable for use on commercial farms. Estimates of individual animal intake are required for assessing production efficiency. The aim of this study was to predict individual animal intake using parameters that can be easily obtained on commercial farms including feeding behaviour, liveweight and age. In total, 80 steers were used, and each steer was allocated to one of two diets (40 per diet) which consisted of (g/kg; DM) forage to concentrate ratios of either 494:506 (MIXED) or 80:920 (CONC). Individual daily fresh weight intakes (FWI; kg/day) were recorded for each animal using 32 electronic feeders over a 56-day period, and individual DM intakes (DMI; kg/day) subsequently calculated. Individual feeding behaviour variables were calculated for each day of the measurement period from the electronic feeders and included: total number of visits to the feeder, total time spent at the feeder (TOTFEEDTIME), total time where feed was consumed (TIMEWITHFEED) and average length of time during each visit to the feeder. These feeding behaviour variables were chosen due to ease of obtaining from accelerometers. Four modelling techniques to predict individual animal intake were examined, based on (i) individual animal TOTFEEDTIME relative expressed as a proportion of the dietary group (GRP) and total GRP intake, (ii) multiple linear regression (REG) (iii) random forests (RF) and (iv) support vector regressor (SVR). Each model was used to predict CONC and MIXED diets separately, giving eight prediction models, (i) GRP_CONC, (ii) GRP_MIXED, (iii) REG_CONC, (iv) REG_MIXED, (v) RF_CONC, (vi) RF_MIXED, (vii) SVR_CONC and (viii) SVR_MIXED. Each model was tested on FWI and DMI. Model performance was assessed using repeated measures correlations (R(2)_RM) to capture the repeated nature of daily intakes compared with standard R(2), RMSE and mean absolute error (MAE). REG, RF and SVR models predicted FWI with R(2)_RM = 0.1–0.36, RMSE = 1.51–2.96 kg and MAE = 1.19–2.49 kg, and DMI with R(2)_RM = 0.13–0.19, RMSE = 1.15–1.61 kg and MAE = 0.9–1.28 kg. The GRP models predicted FWI with R(2)_RM = 0.42–0.49, RMSE = 2.76–3.88 kg and MAE = 2.46–3.47 kg, and DMI with R(2)_RM = 0.32–0.44, RMSE = 0.32–0.44 kg, MAE = 1.55–2.22 kg. Whilst more simplistic GRP models showed higher R(2)_RM than regression and machine learning techniques, these models had larger errors, likely due to individual feeding patterns not being captured. Although regression and machine learning techniques produced lower errors associated with individual intakes, overall precision of prediction was too low for practical use.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8282503
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82825032021-07-22 Predicting feed intake using modelling based on feeding behaviour in finishing beef steers Davison, C. Bowen, J.M. Michie, C. Rooke, J.A. Jonsson, N. Andonovic, I. Tachtatzis, C. Gilroy, M. Duthie, C-A. Animal Article Current techniques for measuring feed intake in housed cattle are both expensive and time-consuming making them unsuitable for use on commercial farms. Estimates of individual animal intake are required for assessing production efficiency. The aim of this study was to predict individual animal intake using parameters that can be easily obtained on commercial farms including feeding behaviour, liveweight and age. In total, 80 steers were used, and each steer was allocated to one of two diets (40 per diet) which consisted of (g/kg; DM) forage to concentrate ratios of either 494:506 (MIXED) or 80:920 (CONC). Individual daily fresh weight intakes (FWI; kg/day) were recorded for each animal using 32 electronic feeders over a 56-day period, and individual DM intakes (DMI; kg/day) subsequently calculated. Individual feeding behaviour variables were calculated for each day of the measurement period from the electronic feeders and included: total number of visits to the feeder, total time spent at the feeder (TOTFEEDTIME), total time where feed was consumed (TIMEWITHFEED) and average length of time during each visit to the feeder. These feeding behaviour variables were chosen due to ease of obtaining from accelerometers. Four modelling techniques to predict individual animal intake were examined, based on (i) individual animal TOTFEEDTIME relative expressed as a proportion of the dietary group (GRP) and total GRP intake, (ii) multiple linear regression (REG) (iii) random forests (RF) and (iv) support vector regressor (SVR). Each model was used to predict CONC and MIXED diets separately, giving eight prediction models, (i) GRP_CONC, (ii) GRP_MIXED, (iii) REG_CONC, (iv) REG_MIXED, (v) RF_CONC, (vi) RF_MIXED, (vii) SVR_CONC and (viii) SVR_MIXED. Each model was tested on FWI and DMI. Model performance was assessed using repeated measures correlations (R(2)_RM) to capture the repeated nature of daily intakes compared with standard R(2), RMSE and mean absolute error (MAE). REG, RF and SVR models predicted FWI with R(2)_RM = 0.1–0.36, RMSE = 1.51–2.96 kg and MAE = 1.19–2.49 kg, and DMI with R(2)_RM = 0.13–0.19, RMSE = 1.15–1.61 kg and MAE = 0.9–1.28 kg. The GRP models predicted FWI with R(2)_RM = 0.42–0.49, RMSE = 2.76–3.88 kg and MAE = 2.46–3.47 kg, and DMI with R(2)_RM = 0.32–0.44, RMSE = 0.32–0.44 kg, MAE = 1.55–2.22 kg. Whilst more simplistic GRP models showed higher R(2)_RM than regression and machine learning techniques, these models had larger errors, likely due to individual feeding patterns not being captured. Although regression and machine learning techniques produced lower errors associated with individual intakes, overall precision of prediction was too low for practical use. Elsevier 2021-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8282503/ /pubmed/34116464 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2021.100231 Text en © 2021 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Davison, C.
Bowen, J.M.
Michie, C.
Rooke, J.A.
Jonsson, N.
Andonovic, I.
Tachtatzis, C.
Gilroy, M.
Duthie, C-A.
Predicting feed intake using modelling based on feeding behaviour in finishing beef steers
title Predicting feed intake using modelling based on feeding behaviour in finishing beef steers
title_full Predicting feed intake using modelling based on feeding behaviour in finishing beef steers
title_fullStr Predicting feed intake using modelling based on feeding behaviour in finishing beef steers
title_full_unstemmed Predicting feed intake using modelling based on feeding behaviour in finishing beef steers
title_short Predicting feed intake using modelling based on feeding behaviour in finishing beef steers
title_sort predicting feed intake using modelling based on feeding behaviour in finishing beef steers
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8282503/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34116464
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2021.100231
work_keys_str_mv AT davisonc predictingfeedintakeusingmodellingbasedonfeedingbehaviourinfinishingbeefsteers
AT bowenjm predictingfeedintakeusingmodellingbasedonfeedingbehaviourinfinishingbeefsteers
AT michiec predictingfeedintakeusingmodellingbasedonfeedingbehaviourinfinishingbeefsteers
AT rookeja predictingfeedintakeusingmodellingbasedonfeedingbehaviourinfinishingbeefsteers
AT jonssonn predictingfeedintakeusingmodellingbasedonfeedingbehaviourinfinishingbeefsteers
AT andonovici predictingfeedintakeusingmodellingbasedonfeedingbehaviourinfinishingbeefsteers
AT tachtatzisc predictingfeedintakeusingmodellingbasedonfeedingbehaviourinfinishingbeefsteers
AT gilroym predictingfeedintakeusingmodellingbasedonfeedingbehaviourinfinishingbeefsteers
AT duthieca predictingfeedintakeusingmodellingbasedonfeedingbehaviourinfinishingbeefsteers