Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42215579›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Machine learning based detection of subacute ruminal acidosis in early lactation dairy cows using multi-sensor behavioral, physiological, and milk production data.

Samanta Grigė, Akvilė Girdauskaitė, Ovidijus Grigas, Sigitas Japertas, Dovilė Malašauskienė, Mindaugas Televičius, Mingaudas Urbutis, Karina Džermeikaitė, Justina Krištolaitytė, Ramūnas Antanaitis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Samanta GrigėAnimal Clinic, Veterinary Academy, Lithuania University of Health Sciences, Tilžės Str. 18, 47181, Kaunas, Lithuania. Samanta.grige1@lsmu.lt.
Akvilė GirdauskaitėAnimal Clinic, Veterinary Academy, Lithuania University of Health Sciences, Tilžės Str. 18, 47181, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Ovidijus GrigasFaculty of Informatics, Kaunas University of Technology, 50254, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Sigitas JapertasPractical Training and Research Center, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Topolių g. 6, 54310, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Dovilė MalašauskienėAnimal Clinic, Veterinary Academy, Lithuania University of Health Sciences, Tilžės Str. 18, 47181, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Mindaugas TelevičiusAnimal Clinic, Veterinary Academy, Lithuania University of Health Sciences, Tilžės Str. 18, 47181, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Mingaudas UrbutisAnimal Clinic, Veterinary Academy, Lithuania University of Health Sciences, Tilžės Str. 18, 47181, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Karina DžermeikaitėAnimal Clinic, Veterinary Academy, Lithuania University of Health Sciences, Tilžės Str. 18, 47181, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Justina KrištolaitytėAnimal Clinic, Veterinary Academy, Lithuania University of Health Sciences, Tilžės Str. 18, 47181, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Ramūnas AntanaitisAnimal Clinic, Veterinary Academy, Lithuania University of Health Sciences, Tilžės Str. 18, 47181, Kaunas, Lithuania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Subacute ruminal acidosis (SARA) is a common metabolic disorder in early lactation dairy cows that negatively affects rumen function, milk production, and animal welfare. Early identification remains challenging because clinical signs are often subtle and transient. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether multi sensor behavioral, physiological, and milk-production data could be used to identify cows experiencing SARA using machine-learning approaches. The study included early-lactation Holstein cows during the first 100 days in milk. The final dataset comprised 636 cow-day observations, including 134 SARA cases and 502 clinically healthy controls. Cow identification numbers were additionally used as grouping variables during cross-validation to ensure complete separation of individual animals between training and validation subsets. SARA was defined based on continuous ruminal pH measurements, where cows were classified as SARA when ruminal pH remained between 5.2 and 5.8 for at least 180 min per day. Sensor derived variables included rumination time, activity, water intake, reticulorumen temperature, milk yield, and milk composition obtained from intraruminal boluses and an in-line milk analyzer. Six supervised machine learning classifiers were developed to classify SARA status based on combined sensor data. Among the evaluated models, SVM demonstrated the highest discriminatory performance, which achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.97, accuracy of 0.95, sensitivity of 0.86, and specificity of 0.98 under repeated cow-level grouped cross-validation. Random forest showed similar performance (AUC = 0.97; accuracy = 0.93 and 0.98, respectively). Across all models, specificity was consistently higher than sensitivity, indicating that healthy cows were classified more accurately than SARA cases. These results demonstrate that integrated behavioral, physiological, and milk production data obtained from automated sensor systems can support classification of cows experiencing SARA under commercial farm conditions. The findings support the potential of multi sensor monitoring systems combined with machine learning classifiers as a tool for automated detection of rumen health disturbances in precision dairy farming.

Indexed as

AcidosisCattle DiseasesLactationMachine LearningMilkRumenStomach DiseasesAnimalsCattleClassification AlgorithmsFemaleHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationPredictive Learning ModelsBiosensorsDairy cattleInnovationsMachine learning

Identifiers

PMID42215579
PMCPMC13454269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.