CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 72Animal Behavior and Welfare StudiesSmart Agriculture and AIVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia

Remote Noninvasive Assessment of Pain and Health Status in Cattle

Open access
Theurer, Miles E., Amrine, David E., White, Brad J.·2013·Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice
DOI 10.1016/j.cvfa.2012.11.011
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Cattle behavior is frequently monitored to determine the health of the animal. This article describes potential benefits and challenges of remotely monitoring cattle behavior with available methodologies. The behavior of interest, labor required, and monitoring expenses must be considered before deciding which remote behavioral monitoring device is appropriate. Monitoring the feeding behavior of an animal over time allows establishment of a baseline against which deviations can be evaluated. Interpretation of multiple behavioral responses as an aggregate indicator of animal wellness status instead of as individual outcomes may be a more accurate measure of true state of pain or wellness.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cvfa.2012.11.011

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 78

  1. Gonyou HW. Why the study of animal behavior is associated with the animal welfare issue. J Anim Sci. 1994;72(8):2171-2177.
  2. Levitis D, Lidlicker WZ, Freund G. Behavioural biologists do not agree on what constitutes behaviour. Anim Behav. 2009;78(1):103-110.
  3. Hanzlicek GA, White BJ, Mosier DA, et al. Serial evaluation of physiologic, pathological, and behavioral changes related to disease progression of experimentally induced Mannheimia haemolytica pneumonia in postweaned calves. Am J Vet Res. 2010;71(3):359-369.
  4. Theurer ME, White BJ, Anderson DE, et al. Effect of transportation during periods of high ambient temperature on physiology and behavior of beef heifers. Am J Vet Res. Accepted, In Press.
  5. Pauly C, White BJ, Coetzee JF, et al. Evaluation of analgesic protocol effect on calf behavior after concurrent castration and dehorning. Int J Appl Res Vet M. 2012;10(1):54- 61.
  6. Robert B, White BJ, Renter DG, et al. Evaluation of three-dimensional accelerometers to monitor and classify behavior patterns in cattle. Comput Electron Agr. 2009;67(1-2):80- 84.
  7. Theurer ME, Anderson DE, White BJ, et al. Effect of Mannheimia haemolytica pneumonia on behavior and physiologic responses of calves experiencing hyperthermal environmental conditions Paper presented at: XXVII World Buiatrics Conference 2012; June 3-8, 2012, 2012; Lisbon, Portugal.
  8. Theurer ME, White BJ, Coetzee JF, et al. Assessment of behavioral changes associated with oral meloxicam administration at time of dehorning in calves using a remote triangulation device and accelerometers. BMC Vet Res. 2012;8(1):48.
  9. Dockweiler J, Bergamasco L, Coetzee J, et al. Effect of age and castration method on physiological stress indicators in calves. Paper presented at: Phi Zeta Sigma Chapter, 2012; Manhattan, Kansas.
  10. White BJ, Anderson DE, Renter DG, et al. Clinical, behavioral, and pulmonary changes following Mycoplasma bovis challenge in calves. Am J Vet Res. 2012;73(4):490.
  11. Hayes G, Mathews K, Kruth S, et al. Illness severity scores in veterinary medicine: what can we learn? J Vet Intern Med. 2010;24(3):457.
  12. Perino LJ, Apley M. Clinical trial design in feedlots. Vet Clin N Am-Food A. 1998;14(3):243-266.
  13. Coetzee JF, Edwards LN, Mosher RA, et al. Effect of oral meloxicam on health and performance of beef steers relative to bulls castrated on arrival at the feedlot. J Anim Sci. 2012;90(3):1026.
  14. Sanderson MW. Designing and running clinical trials on farms. Vet Clin N Am-Food A. Mar 2006;22(1):103-123.
  15. Wenz JR, Garry FB, Barrington GM. Comparison of disease severity scoring systems for dairy cattle with acute coliform mastitis. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2006;229(2):259.
  16. Amrine DE, White BJ, Larson RL, et al. Determining precision and accuracy of clinical illness scores compared to pulmonary consolidation scores in Holstein calves with induced Mycoplasma bovis pneumonia. Am J Vet Res. Accepted, in press.
  17. Kristensen E, Dueholm L, Vink D, et al. Within-and across-person uniformity of body condition scoring in Danish Holstein cattle. J Dairy Sci. 2006;89(9):3721-3728.
  18. Wittum TE, Woollen NE, Perino LJ, et al. Relationships among treatment for respiratory tract disease, pulmonary lesions evident at slaughter, and rate of weight gain in feedlot cattle. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1996;209(4):814-818.
  19. Schneider MJ, Tait RGJ, Busby WD. An evaluation of bovine respiratory disease complex in feedlot cattle: Impact on performance and carcass traits using treatment records and lung lesion scores. J Anim Sci. 2009;87(5):1821-1827.
  20. Thompson PN, Stone A, Schultheiss WA. Use of treatment records and lung lesion scoring to estimate the effect of respiratory disease on growth during early and late finishing periods in South African feedlot cattle. J Anim Sci. 2006;84(2):488-498.
  21. White BJ, Renter DG. Bayesian estimation of the performance of using clinical observations and harvest lung lesions for diagnosing bovine respiratory disease in post- weaned beef calves. J Vet Diagn Invest. 2009;21(4):446-453.
  22. Robertson IS, Kent JE, Molony V. Effect of different methods of castration on behaviour and plasma cortisol in calves of three ages. Res Vet Sci. 1994;56(1):8-17.
  23. Mellor DJ. Effects of castration on behaviour and plasma cortisol concentrations in young lambs, kids and calves. Res Vet Sci. 1991;51(2):149.
  24. Gonzalez LA, Schwartzkopf-Genswein KS, Caulkett NA, et al. Pain mitigation following band castration of beef calves and its effects on performance, behavior, E. coli, and salivary cortisol. J Anim Sci. 2009;88:802 -810.
  25. Morisse JP, Cotte JP, Huonnic D. Effect of dehorning on behaviour and plasma cortisol responses in young calves. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 1995;43(4):239-247.
  26. McMeekan C, Stafford K, Mellor D, et al. Effects of a local anaesthetic and a non- steroidal anti-inflammatory analgesic on the behavioural responses of calves to dehorning. New Zeal Vet J. 1999;47(3):92-96.
  27. Graf B. Behavioural and physiological responses of calves to dehorning by heat cauterization with or without local anaesthesia. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 1999;62(2-3):153.
  28. Stilwell G, Carvalho RC, Carolino N, et al. Effect of hot-iron disbudding on behaviour and plasma cortisol of calves sedated with xylazine. Res Vet Sci. 2010;88(1):188-193.
  29. Vickers KJ, Niel L, Kiehlbauch LM, et al. Calf Response to Caustic Paste and Hot-Iron Dehorning Using Sedation With and Without Local Anesthetic. J Dairy Sci. 2005;88(4):1454-1459.
  30. Grandin T. Assessment of stress during handling and transport. J. Anim Sci. 1997;75(1):249-257.
  31. Mormede P, Soissons J, Bluthe RM, et al. Effect of transportation on blood serum composition, disease incidence, and production traits in young calves. Influence of the journey duration. Ann Rech Vet. 1982;13(4):369-384.
  32. Hillerton JE, Bramley AJ. Variability between Muscidae populations of dairy heifers on two different types of pasture in southern England. Brit Vet J. 1986;142(2):155-162.
  33. Harris JA, Hillerton JE, Morant SV. Effect on milk production of controlling muscid flies, and reducing fly-avoidance behaviour, by the use of fenvalerate ear tags during the dry period. J Dairy Res. 1987;54(2):165-171.
  34. Altmann J. Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behaviour. 1974;49(3):227.
  35. Ishiwata T, Kilgour RJ, Uetake K, et al. Choice of attractive conditions by beef cattle in a Y-maze just after release from restraint. J Anim Sci. 2006;85(4):1080.
  36. Grignard L. The social environment influences the behavioural responses of beef cattle to handling. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2000;68(1):1.
  37. Robért BD, White BJ, Renter DG, et al. Determination of normal beef cattle activity patterns utilizing wireless accelerometers: circadian rhythms, variation among days, and differences between individual calves. Am J Vet Res. 2011;72(4):467.
  38. Phillips CJC, Schofield SA. The effect of supplementary light on the production and behaviour of dairy cows. Anim Prod. 1989;48(2):293-303.
  39. Hänninen L. CowLog: Open-source software for coding behaviors from digital video. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41(2):472.
  40. Morrow-Tesch JL, Dailey JW, Jiang H. A video data base system for studying animal behavior. J Anim Sci. 1998;76(10):2605.
  41. Mitlohner FM, Morrow-Tesch JL, Wilson SC, et al. Behavioral sampling techniques for feedlot cattle. J Anim Sci. 2001;79(5):1189.
  42. Colgan PW. Quantitative ethology: Wiley; 1978.
  43. Mitlohner FM, Morrow-Tesch JL, Wilson SC, et al. Behavioral sampling techniques for feedlot cattle. J. Anim Sci. May 1, 2001 2001;79(5):1189-1193.
  44. Arnold-Meeks C, McGlone JJ. Validating techniques to sample behavior of confined, young pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 1986;16(2):149.
  45. Duff GC, Galyean ML. Board-invited review: recent advances in management of highly stressed, newly received feedlot cattle. J Anim Sci. 2007;85(3):823-840.
  46. Weary DM, Huzzey, J.M., von Keyserlingk, M.A.G. Board-Invited Review: Using behavior to predict and identify ill health in animals. J. Anim Sci. 2009;87:770-777.
  47. White BJ, Coetzee JF, Renter DG, et al. Evaluation of two-dimensional accelerometers to monitor behavior of beef calves after castration. Am J Vet Res. 2008;69(8):1005-1012.
  48. Coetzee J, Nutsch A, Barbur L, et al. A survey of castration methods and associated livestock management practices performed by bovine veterinarians in the United States. BMC Vet Res. 2010;6(1):12.
  49. Schulz KL, Anderson DE, Coetzee JF, et al. Effect of flunixin meglumine on the amelioration of lameness in dairy steers with amphotericin B-induced transient synovitis- arthritis. Am J Vet Res. 2011;72(11):1431.
  50. Fuquay JW. Heat stress as it affects animal production. J Anim Sci. 1981;52(1):164.
  51. Currah JM, Hendrick SH, Stookey JM. The behavioral assessment and alleviation of pain associated with castration in beef calves treated with flunixin meglumine and caudal lidocaine epidural anesthesia with epinephrine. Can Vet J. 2009;50(4):375-382.
  52. Haley DB, Bailey DW, Stookey JM. The effects of weaning beef calves in two stages on their behavior and growth rate. J. Anim Sci. 2005;83(9):2205-2214.
  53. Mazrier H, Tal S, Aizinbud E, et al. A field investigation of the use of the pedometer for the early detection of lameness in cattle. Can Vet J. 2006;47(9):883-886.
  54. O'Callaghan KA, Cripps PJ, Downham DY, et al. Subjective and objective assessment of pain and discomfort due to lameness in dairy cattle. Anim Welfare. 2003;12(4):605.
  55. Redden KD, Kennedy AD, Ingalls JR, et al. Detection of estrus by radiotelemetric monitoring of vaginal and ear skin temperature and pedometer measurements of activity J Dairy Sci. 1992;76:713-721.
  56. Roelofs JB, van Eerdenburg FJ, Soede NM, et al. Pedometer readings for estrous detection and as predictor for time of ovulation in dairy cattle. Theriogenology. Nov 2005;64(8):1690-1703.
  57. Sowell BF, Branine ME, Bowman JG, et al. Feeding and watering behavior of healthy and morbid steers in a commercial feedlot. J Anim Sci. 1999;77(5):1105-1112.
  58. Nkrumah JD, Basarab JA, Price MA, et al. Different measures of energetic efficiency and their phenotypic relationships with growth, feed intake, and ultrasound and carcass merit in hybrid cattle. J Anim Sci. 2004;82(8):2451.
  59. Kelly AK, McGee M, Crews DHJ, et al. Effect of divergence in residual feed intake on feeding behavior, blood metabolic variables, and body composition traits in growing beef heifers. J Anim Sci. 2010;88(1):109.
  60. Bingham GM, Friend TH, Lancaster PA, et al. Relationship between feeding behavior and residual feed intake in growing Brangus heifers. J Anim Sci. Aug 2009;87(8):2685- 2689.
  61. Gonzalez LA, Tolkamp BJ, Coffey MP, et al. Changes in feeding behavior as possible indicators for the automatic monitoring of health disorders in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. Mar 2008;91(3):1017-1028.
  62. Moen R, Pastor J, Cohen Y. Effects of animal activity on GPS telemetry location attempts. Alces. 2001;37(1):207-216.
  63. Davis JD, Darr MJ, Xin H, et al. Development of a GPS herd activity and well-being kit (GPS HAWK) to monitor cattle behavior and the effect of sample interval on travel distance. Appl Eng Agric. 2011;27(1):143-150.
  64. Tomkiewicz SM, Fuller MR, Kie JG, et al. Global positioning system and associated technologies in animal behaviour and ecological research. Philos T Roy Soc B. 2010;365(1550):2163.
  65. Schleppe JB, Lachapelle G, Booker CW, et al. Challenges in the design of a GNSS ear tag for feedlot cattle. Comput Electron Agr. 2010;70(1):84-95.
  66. Trotter MG, Lamb DW, Hinch GN, et al. Global navigation satellite system livestock tracking: system development and data interpretation. Anim Prod Sci. 2010;50(6):616.
  67. Schleppe JB, Lachapelle G, Booker CW, et al. Challenges in the design of a GNSS ear tag for feedlot cattle. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 2010;70(1):84-95.
  68. Stewart M, Webster JR, Schaefer AL, et al. Infrared thermography as a non-invasive tool to study animal welfare. Anim Welfare. 2005;14:319-325.
  69. Willatt DJ. Continuous infrared thermometry of the nasal mucosa. Rhinology. 1993;31(2):63-67.
  70. Stewart M, Stookey JM, Stafford KJ, et al. Effects of local anesthetic and a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug on pain responses of dairy calves to hot-iron dehorning. J Dairy Sci. 2009;92(4):1512-1519.
  71. Stewart M. Eye temperature and heart rate variability of calves disbudded with or without local anaesthetic. Physiol Behav. 2008;93(4-5):789.
  72. Rainwater Lovett K. Detection of foot-and-mouth disease virus infected cattle using infrared thermography. Vet J. 2009;180(3):317.
  73. Small JA. Core body temperature monitoring with passive transponder boluses in beef heifers. Can Vet J. 2008;88(2):225.
  74. Rose Dye TK. Rumen temperature change monitored with remote rumen temperature boluses after challenges with bovine viral diarrhea virus and Mannheimia haemolytica. J Anim Sci. 2010;89(4):1193.
  75. Davis MS, Mader TL, Holt SM, et al. Strategies to reduce feedlot cattle heat stress: effects on tympanic temperature. J Anim Sci. Mar 2003;81(3):649-661.
  76. Mader TL, Holt SM, Hahn GL, et al. Feeding strategies for managing heat load in feedlot cattle. J Anim Sci. 2002;80(9):2373-2382.
  77. Mader T, Davis M, Kreikemeier W. Case study: Tympanic temperature and behavior associated with moving feedlot cattle. Prof Anim Sci. 2005;21:339-344.
  78. Rorie RW, Bilby TR, Lester TD. Application of electronic estrus detection technologies to reproductive management of cattle. Theriogenology. Jan 1 2002;57(1):137-148.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Theurer, M. E., Amrine, D. E., & White, B. J.
Affiliations
Kansas State University (US)
Corresponding author
White, Brad J.
ORCID
Venue
Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-03
Volume
29
Issue
1
Pages
59-74
ISSN
0749-0720 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cvfa.2012.11.011
OpenAlex
W2091614880
Cited by
72
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3
FWCI
0.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Veterinary Clinics of North America Food Animal Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • K-State Research Exchange (Kansas State University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Smart Agriculture and AI
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Veterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Keywords
cattle, remote monitoring, non-invasive assessment, animal pain, animal health, feeding behavior, baseline behavior, animal welfare indicators, herd health
MeSH terms
Animals, Behavior, Animal, Cattle, Cattle Diseases, Feeding Behavior, Health Status, Monitoring, Physiologic, Pain, Pain Measurement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review