Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-02T20:40:07.146Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Relationship between lameness and lying behaviour of zero-grazed Holstein dairy cattle recorded using an activity monitor

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 November 2017

N. Blackie*
Affiliation:
Writtle College, Chelmsford, Essex, United Kingdom
E.C.L. Bleach
Affiliation:
Writtle College, Chelmsford, Essex, United Kingdom
J.R. Amory
Affiliation:
Writtle College, Chelmsford, Essex, United Kingdom
J.R. Scaife
Affiliation:
Writtle College, Chelmsford, Essex, United Kingdom
Get access

Extract

Lameness can be assessed using locomotion scoring; however, this method is time consuming and an automated method of detecting lameness is needed. Studies have shown that in conventionally-managed dairy herds, lame cows spend more time lying down than non-lame cows (e.g. Singh et al, 1993). However, there are limited data available for high producing zero-grazed dairy cattle in the UK. IceTags are activity monitors which use an electronic accelerometer to determine the percent of time spent standing, lying or active and have been validated in a study by Munksgaard et al (2006). The aim of the present study was to assess the impact of lameness on lying behaviour of high yielding, zero-grazed, Holstein dairy cows and to assess the potential use of lying time to detect lameness.

Type
Theatre Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Flower, F.C. and Weary, D.M. 2006. Journal of Dairy Science. 89, 139–146.Google Scholar
Munksgaard, L., van Reenen, C.G. and Boyce, R. 2006. Journal of Dairy Science. Volume 89/84, Supplement 1Google Scholar
Singh, S.S., Ward, W.R., Lautenbach, K. and Murray, R.D. 1993. The Veterinary Record. 133, 204–208.Google Scholar