ArticleScientific reports2022
Modern livestock farming under tropical conditions using sensors in grazing systems.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sensor-Based Precision Feeding Systems in Animal Production: Technologies and Applications.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Insights into thermal stress effects on performance and behavior of grazing cattle via multimodal sensor monitoring.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate a commercial sensor-a three-axis accelerometer-to predict animal behavior with a variety of conditions in tropical grazing systems. The sensor was positioned on the underjaw of young bulls to detect the animals' movements. A total of 22 animals were monitored in a grazing system, during both seasons (wet and dry), with different quality and quantity forage allowance. The machine learning (ML) methods used were random forest (RF), convolutional neural net and linear discriminant analysis; the metrics used to determine the best method were accuracy, Kappa coefficient, and a confusion matrix. After predicting animal behavior using the best ML method, a forecast for animal performance was developed using a mechanistic model: multiple linear regression to correlate intermediate average daily gain (iADG) observed versus iADG predicted. The best ML method yielded accuracy of 0.821 and Kappa coefficient of 0.704, was RF. From the forecast for animal performance, the Pearson correlation was 0.795 and the mean square error was 0.062. Hence, the commercial Ovi-bovi sensor, which is a three-axis accelerometer, can act as a powerful tool for predicting animal behavior in beef cattle production developed under a variety tropical grazing condition.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.