Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T13:29:45.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gait and posture discrimination in sheep using a tri-axial accelerometer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2016

M. Radeski  and
V. Ilieski
M. Radeski*
Affiliation:
Animal Welfare Centre, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ss Cyril and Methodius University, Lazar Pop-Trajkov 5-7, Skopje 1000, Macedonia
V. Ilieski
Affiliation:
Animal Welfare Centre, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ss Cyril and Methodius University, Lazar Pop-Trajkov 5-7, Skopje 1000, Macedonia
*
†E-mail: miro@fvm.ukim.edu.mk
Get access

Abstract

Temporo-spatial observation of the leg could provide important information about the general condition of an animal, especially for those such as sheep and other free-ranging farm animals that can be difficult to access. Tri-axial accelerometers are capable of collecting vast amounts of data for locomotion and posture observations; however, interpretation and optimization of these data records remain a challenge. The aim of the present study was to introduce an optimized method for gait (walking, trotting and galloping) and posture (standing and lying) discrimination, using the acceleration values recorded by a tri-axial accelerometer mounted on the hind leg of sheep. The acceleration values recorded on the vertical and horizontal axes, as well as the total acceleration values were categorized. The relative frequencies of the acceleration categories (RFACs) were calculated in 3-s epochs. Reliable RFACs for gait and posture discrimination were identified with discriminant function and canonical analyses. Post hoc predictions for the two axes and total acceleration were conducted, using classification functions and classification scores for each epoch. Mahalanobis distances were used to determine the level of accuracy of the method. The highest discriminatory power for gait discrimination yielded four RFACs on the vertical axis, and five RFACs each on the horizontal axis and total acceleration vector. Classification functions showed the highest accuracy for walking and galloping. The highest total accuracy on the vertical and horizontal axes were 90% and 91%, respectively. Regarding posture discrimination, the vertical axis exhibited the highest discriminatory power, with values of RFAC (0, 1]=99.95% for standing; and RFAC (−1, 0]=99.50% for lying. The horizontal axis showed strong discrimination for the lying side of the animal, as values were in the acceleration category of (0, 1] for lying on the left side and (−1, 0] on the right side. The algorithm developed by the method employed in the present study facilitates differentiation of the various types of gait and posture in animals from fewer data records, and produces the most reliable acceleration values from only one axis within a short time frame. The present study introduces an optimized method by which the tri-axial accelerometer can be used in gait and posture discrimination in sheep as an animal model.

Keywords

gaitpostureaccelerationaccelerometersheep
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 11 , Issue 7 , July 2017 , pp. 1249 - 1257
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2016 

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

Alexander, RM 1989. Optimization and gaits in the locomotion of vertebrates. Physiological Reviews 69, 1199–1227.Google Scholar
Blomberg, K 2011. Automatic registration of dairy cows grazing behaviour on pasture, Examensarbete 332, Instutitionen för husdjurens utfodring och vård, Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
Bojkovski, D, Stuhec, I, Kompan, D and Zupan, M 2014. The behavior of sheep and goats co-grazing on pasture with different types of vegetation in the karst region. Journal of Animal Science 92, 2752–2758.Google Scholar
Chapinal, N, de Passille, AM, Pastell, M, Hanninen, L, Munksgaard, L and Rushen, J 2011. Measurement of acceleration while walking as an automated method for gait assessment in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 94, 2895–2901.Google Scholar
Conte, S, Bergeron, R, Gonyou, H, Brown, J, Rioja-Lang, FC, Connor, L and Devillers, N 2014. Measure and characterization of lameness in gestating sows using force plate, kinematic, and accelerometer methods. Journal of Animal Science 92, 5693–5703.Google Scholar
de Passille, AM, Jensen, MB, Chapinal, N and Rushen, J 2010. Technical note: use of accelerometers to describe gait patterns in dairy calves. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 3287–3293.Google Scholar
DuBois, C, Zakrajsek, E, Haley, DB and Merkies, K 2015. Validation of triaxial accelerometers to measure the lying behaviour of adult domestic horses. Animal 9, 110–114.Google Scholar
Ito, K, Weary, DM and von Keyserlingk, MA 2009. Lying behavior: assessing within- and between-herd variation in free-stall-housed dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 4412–4420.Google Scholar
Klecka, WR 1980. Discriminant analysis. Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences Series, No. 19. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lachica, M and Aguilera, JF 2005. Energy expenditure of walk in grassland for small ruminants. Small Ruminant Research 59, 105–121.Google Scholar
Ledgerwood, DN, Winckler, C and Tucker, CB 2010. Evaluation of data loggers, sampling intervals, and editing techniques for measuring the lying behavior of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 5129–5139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McLennan, KM, Skillings, EA, Rebelo, CJB, Corke, MJ, Pires Moreira, MA, Morton, AJ and Constantino-Casas, F 2015. Technical note: validation of an automatic recording system to assess behavioural activity level in sheep (Ovis aries). Small Ruminant Research 127, 92–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreau, M, Siebert, S, Buerkert, A and Schlecht, E 2009. Use of a tri-axial accelerometer for automated recording and classification of goats’ grazing behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 119, 158–170.Google Scholar
Nielsen, LR, Pedersen, AR, Herskin, MS and Munksgaard, L 2010. Quantifying walking and standing behaviour of dairy cows using a moving average based on output from an accelerometer. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 127, 12–19.Google Scholar
Nielsen, PP 2013. Automatic registration of grazing behaviour in dairy cows using 3D activity loggers. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 148, 179–184.Google Scholar
Nyquist, H 1928. Certain topics in telegraph transmission theory. Transactions of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers 47, 617–644.Google Scholar
Pastell, M, Tiusanen, J, Hakojärvi, M and Hänninen, L 2009. A wireless accelerometer system with wavelet analysis for assessing lameness in cattle. Biosystems Engineering 104, 545–551.Google Scholar
Robert, B, White, BJ, Renter, DG and Larson, RL 2009. Evaluation of three-dimensional accelerometers to monitor and classify behavior patterns in cattle. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 67, 80–84.Google Scholar
Scheibe, K and Gromann, C 2006. Application testing of a new three-dimensional acceleration measuring system with wireless data transfer (WAS) for behavior analysis. Behavior Research Methods 38, 427–433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shannon, CE 1949. Communication in the presence of noise. Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers 37, 10–21.Google Scholar
StatSoft, Inc 2007. Electronic statistics textbook. Retrieved on 27 April 2016 from http://www.statsoft.com/textbook/stathome.html.Google Scholar
Trenel, P, Jensen, MB, Decker, EL and Skjoth, F 2009. Technical note: quantifying and characterizing behavior in dairy calves using the IceTag automatic recording device. Journal of Dairy Science 92, 3397–3401.Google Scholar
Watanabe, S, Izawa, M, Kato, A, Ropert-Coudert, Y and Naito, Y 2005. A new technique for monitoring the detailed behaviour of terrestrial animals: a case study with the domestic cat. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 94, 117–131.Google Scholar
Weary, DM, Huzzey, JM and von Keyserlingk, MA 2009. Board-invited review: using behavior to predict and identify ill health in animals. Journal of Animal Science 87, 770–777.Google Scholar
Wickler, SJ, Hoyt, DF, Biewener, AA, Cogger, EA and De La Paz, KL 2005. In vivo muscle function vs speed. II. Muscle function trotting up an incline. Journal of Experimental Biology 208, 1191–1200.Google Scholar
Wilson, RP, Shepard, ELC and Liebsch, N 2008. Prying into the intimate details of animal lives: use of a daily diary on animals. Endangered Species Research 4, 123–137.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Radeski and Ilieski supplementary material

Tables S1-S2 and Figures S1-S2

Download Radeski and Ilieski supplementary material(File)
File 295.9 KB