The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Evaluation of data loggers, sampling intervals, and editing techniques for measuring the lying behavior of dairy cattle
Open accessAbstract
Lying behavior in dairy cattle can provide insight into how cows interact with their environment. Although lying behavior is a useful indicator of cow comfort, it can be time consuming to measure. In response to these time constraints, using data loggers to automate behavioral recording has become increasingly common. We tested the accuracy of the Onset Pendant G data logger (Onset Computer Corporation, Bourne, MA) for measuring lying behavior in dairy cattle (n=24 cows; 12 in each of 2 experiments). Cows wore the logger on the lateral (experiment 1) or medial (experiment 2) side of the hind leg above the metatarsophalangeal joint. Loggers recorded behavior at 4 sampling intervals (6, 30, 60, and 300 s) for at least 1.5 d. Data were smoothed using 3 editing methods to examine the effects of short, potentially erroneous readings. For this purpose, Microsoft Excel macros (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA) converted readings (i.e., lying events bordered by standing or vice versa) occurring singly or in consecutive runs of ≤2 or ≤6. Behavior was simultaneously recorded with digital video equipment. The logger accurately measured lying and standing. For example, predictability, sensitivity, and specificity were >99% using 30-s sampling and the single-event filter compared with continuously scored video recordings. The 6- and 30-s sampling intervals were comparable for all aspects of lying behavior when short events were filtered from the data set. Estimates of lying time generated from the 300-s interval unfiltered regimen were positively related (R(2) ≥ 0.99) to estimates of lying time from video, but this sampling regimen overestimated the number of lying bouts. This is likely because short standing and lying bouts were missed (12 and 34% of lying and standing bouts were <300 s in experiment 1 and 2, respectively). In summary, the data logger accurately measured all aspects of lying behavior when the sampling interval was ≤30 s and when short readings of lying and standing were filtered from the data set.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Symposium Review: Precision Technologies for Dairy Calves and Management Applications
Costa, J. H. C., Cantor, M. C., & Neave, H. W. (2021) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.2019-17885 · Cited by 98
Toaff-Rosenstein, R. L., Gershwin, L. J., Zanella, A. J., & Tucker, C. B. (2016) · Applied Animal Behaviour Science · doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2016.05.016 · Cited by 32
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Ledgerwood, D. N., Winckler, C., & Tucker, C. B.
- Venue
- Journal of Dairy Science
- Publisher
- American Dairy Science Association
- Published
- 2010-11
- Volume
- 93
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 5129-5139
- ISSN
- 0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2070926505
- Cited by
- 297
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 25.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of data loggers, sampling intervals, and editing techniques for measuring the lying behavior of dairy cattle. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3168/jds.2009-2945
- The paper
- Ledgerwood, D. N., Winckler, C., & Tucker, C. B. (2010). Evaluation of data loggers, sampling intervals, and editing techniques for measuring the lying behavior of dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2945
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.