Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32770242›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2020

Comparison of data analytics strategies in computer vision systems to predict pig body composition traits from 3D images.

Arthur F A Fernandes, João R R Dórea, Bruno Dourado Valente, Robert Fitzgerald, William Herring, Guilherme J M Rosa

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Estimation of Sow Backfat Thickness Based on Machine Vision.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Arthur F A FernandesDepartment of Animal and Dairy Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.
João R R DóreaDepartment of Animal and Dairy Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.
Bruno Dourado ValenteGenus PLC, Hendersonville, TN.
Robert FitzgeraldGenus PLC, Hendersonville, TN.
William HerringGenus PLC, Hendersonville, TN.
Guilherme J M RosaDepartment of Animal and Dairy Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computer vision systems (CVS) have been shown to be a powerful tool for the measurement of live pig body weight (BW) with no animal stress. With advances in precision farming, it is now possible to evaluate the growth performance of individual pigs more accurately. However, important traits such as muscle and fat deposition can still be evaluated only via ultrasound, computed tomography, or dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Therefore, the objectives of this study were: 1) to develop a CVS for prediction of live BW, muscle depth (MD), and back fat (BF) from top view 3D images of finishing pigs and 2) to compare the predictive ability of different approaches, such as traditional multiple linear regression, partial least squares, and machine learning techniques, including elastic networks, artificial neural networks, and deep learning (DL). A dataset containing over 12,000 images from 557 finishing pigs (average BW of 120 ± 12 kg) was split into training and testing sets using a 5-fold cross-validation (CV) technique so that 80% and 20% of the dataset were used for training and testing in each fold. Several image features, such as volume, area, length, widths, heights, polar image descriptors, and polar Fourier transforms, were extracted from the images and used as predictor variables in the different approaches evaluated. In addition, DL image encoders that take raw 3D images as input were also tested. This latter method achieved the best overall performance, with the lowest mean absolute scaled error (MASE) and root mean square error for all traits, and the highest predictive squared correlation (R2). The median predicted MASE achieved by this method was 2.69, 5.02, and 13.56, and R2 of 0.86, 0.50, and 0.45, for BW, MD, and BF, respectively. In conclusion, it was demonstrated that it is possible to successfully predict BW, MD, and BF via CVS on a fully automated setting using 3D images collected in farm conditions. Moreover, DL algorithms simplified and optimized the data analytics workflow, with raw 3D images used as direct inputs, without requiring prior image processing.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerAlgorithmsAnimalsBody CompositionBody WeightData ScienceHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLinear ModelsMachine LearningMusclesPhenotypeSwineTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonographybody compositionimage analysismachine learningprecision livestock farmingultrasound

Identifiers

PMID32770242
PMCPMC7447136

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.