Cited by 20Smart Agriculture and AIPasture and Agricultural SystemsAgricultural Engineering and Mechanization

A review of precision technologies in pasture-based dairying systems

Open access
Shalloo, L., Byrne, T., Leso, L., Ruelle, E., Starsmore, K., Geoghegan, A., Werner, J., O’Leary, N.·2021·Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research

Abstract

The promised benefits of precision technologies (PTs) include improved efficiency, quality, animal health and welfare and reduced environmental impacts. To date, PTs (including sensors, algorithms, big data, decision-support tools, etc.) have had a relatively modest impact in pasture-based dairying systems in comparison with other agricultural sectors such as arable production. The areas animals roam and graze in pasture-based systems and the associated connectivity challenges may, in part at least, explain the comparatively reduced use of PTs in those systems. Thus, there are very few technologies designed specifically to increase pasture utilisation with the exception of global positioning systems (GPS) and Bluetooth-enabled Plate Meters. Terrestrial and satellite-based spectral analysis of pasture biomass and quality is still in the development phase. Therefore, one of the key drivers of efficiency in pasture-based systems has only been marginally impacted by PTs. In contrast, technological development in the area of fertility and heat detection has been important and offers significant potential value to dairy farmers. In general PTs can be described as good at measurement, data collection and storage but fall down around interpretation and providing useful outputs to end users. As a result, it is unclear if farm management is being sufficiently improved to justify widespread adoption of PTs. A needs-driven development of PTs and decision-support tools are required for the succesful integration within agriculture. Further cost/benefit analysis is also required to determine the efficiency of investing in PTs and what, if any, factors affect the variation in the returns.

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 · 10.15212/ijafr-2020-0119

Cites

88 of 88 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?

  • The general consensus in Irish studies is that adoption rates of practices in grassland management and reproductive performance are relatively low, notably due to information constraints.

    “To date, the general consensus in Irish studies is that adoption rates of practices in the areas of grassland management and reproductive performance are relatively low, notably due to information constraints (Hyland et al., 2018;Regan et al., 2021;Shalloo et al., 2021Shalloo et al., , 2018)).”

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

1 of the 89 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Finneran, E., Crosson, P., Wallace, M., O'Kiely, P., Forristal, P.D. and Shalloo, L. 2010 Simulation modelling of the cost of production and utilizing feeds for ruminants on Irish farms. Journal of Farm Management 14: 95-116.
  2. O'Leary, N., Tranter, R. and Bennett, R. 2017b. Farmer Personality and Farm Profitability. Proceedings of the International Farm Management Association Congress 21, Edinburgh, pages 1-17.
  3. Shalloo, L., O'Donnell, S. and Horan, B. 2007. Profitable dairying in an increased EU milk quota scenario. In: Exploiting the Freedom to Milk. Proceedings of the National Dairy Conference, Lyrath Hotel Kilkenny, Breaffy House Hotel Castlebar, 21-22-Nov-2007, pages 20-44. Available online: https://www.teagasc.ie/media/website/ publications/2007/53_NationalDairyConf2007.pdf.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shalloo, L., Byrne, T., Leso, L., Ruelle, E., Starsmore, K., Geoghegan, A., Werner, J., & O’Leary, N.
Affiliations
  • Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority (IE)
  • University of Hohenheim (DE)
Venue
Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research
Published
2021
Volume
59
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 0791-6833 (ISSN-L)
  • 2009-9029
OpenAlex
W3128066367
Cited by
20
References
89
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1
FWCI
2.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Nova Science Publishers (Nova Science Publishers, Inc.) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • T-Stór (Teagasc) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
Science Foundation Ireland (13/IA/1977, 16/RC/3835)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Smart Agriculture and AI
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Pasture and Agricultural Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Agricultural Engineering and Mechanization
Keywords
precision technology, dairy farming, pasture use, decision support system, estrus detection, GPS, spectral analysis, technology adoption, farm management, cost-benefit analysis

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