Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36621101›Full record

ArticlePoultry science2023

Passive radio frequency identification and video tracking for the determination of location and movement of broilers.

J E Doornweerd, G Kootstra, R F Veerkamp, B de Klerk, I Fodor, M van der Sluis, A C Bouwman, E D Ellen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Poultry science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Deep Learning Methods for Tracking the Locomotion of Individual Chickens.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
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

8 authors.

J E DoornweerdAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands. Electronic address: janerik.doornweerd@wur.nl.
G KootstraFarm Technology, Wageningen University & Research, 6700 AA Wageningen, the Netherlands.
R F VeerkampAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands.
B de KlerkResearch & Development, Cobb Europe BV, 5831 GH Boxmeer, the Netherlands.
I FodorAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands.
M van der SluisAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands.
A C BouwmanAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands.
E D EllenAnimal Breeding and Genomics, Wageningen University & Research, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phenotypes on individual animals are required for breeding programs to be able to select for traits. However, phenotyping individual animals can be difficult and time-consuming, especially for traits related to health, welfare, and performance. Individual broiler behavior could serve as a proxy for these traits when recorded automatically and reliably on many animals. Sensors could record individual broiler behavior, yet different sensors can differ in their assessment. In this study a comparison was made between a passive radio frequency identification (RFID) system (grid of antennas underneath the pen) and video tracking for the determination of location and movement of 3 color-marked broilers at d 18. Furthermore, a systems comparison of derived behavioral metrics such as space usage, locomotion activity and apparent feeding and drinking behavior was made. Color-marked broilers simplified the computer vision task for YOLOv5 to detect, track, and identify the animals. Animal locations derived from the RFID-system and based on video were largely in agreement. Most location differences (77.5%) were within the mean radius of the antennas' enclosing circle (≤128 px, 28.15 cm), and 95.3% of the differences were within a one antenna difference (≤256 px, 56.30 cm). Animal movement was not always registered by the RFID-system whereas video was sensitive to detection noise and the animal's behavior (e.g., pecking). The method used to determine location and the systems' sensitivities to movement led to differences in behavioral metrics. Behavioral metrics derived from video are likely more accurate than RFID-system derived behavioral metrics. However, at present, only the RFID-system can provide individual identification for non-color marked broilers. A combination of verifiable and detailed video with the unique identification of RFID could make it possible to identify, describe, and quantify a wide range of individual broiler behaviors.

Indexed as

Radio Frequency Identification DeviceAnimalsChickensDrinking BehaviorLocomotionactivitybroilerdeep learningsensorstracking

Identifiers

PMID36621101
PMCPMC9841275

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.