Automatically Detected Pecking Activity in Group-Housed Turkeys
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Equipment for Data Recording
2.2. Data Processing
2.3. Farm 1
2.3.1. Animal and Housing
2.3.2. Validation
2.3.3. Data Recording
2.4. Farm 2
2.4.1. Animal and Housing
2.4.2. Validation
2.4.3. Data Recording
2.5. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Validation of Detection System
3.2. Pecking Activity over the Rearing Period
3.3. Variation in Pecking Activity over the Day
3.4. Pecking Activity and Cannibalistic Events
4. Discussion
4.1. Validation of Detection System
4.2. Pecking Activity over the Rearing Period
4.3. Variation in Pecking Activity over the Day
4.4. Pecking Activity and Cannibalistic Events
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- FAO. Gateway to Poultry Production and Products. Available online: http://www.fao.org/poultry-production-products/production/en/ (accessed on 15 February 2020).
- Windhorst, H.W. The Contrasting World of Chicken Meat Production. 2020. Available online: https://wing.tiho-hannover.de/meldungen/contrasting-world-chicken-meat-production.html (accessed on 17 October 2020).
- Scientific Advisory Board on Agricultural Policy. Pathways to a Socially Accepted Livestock Husbandry in Germany; Executive Summary and Synthesis Report; Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture: Berlin, Germany, 2015; Available online: https://www.bmel.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/EN/_Ministry/ScientificAdvisoryBoard-Pathways-Summary.pdf;jsessionid=EB7B115CCB8D34D1125D5D2C056D92CB.internet2852?__blob=publicationFile&v=2 (accessed on 21 September 2020).
- Hafez, H.M. Übersicht über Probleme der haltungs- und zuchtbedingten Erkrankungen bei Mastputen. Arch. Geflügelk. 1996, 60, 249–256. [Google Scholar]
- Krautwald-Junghanns, M.-E.; Ellerich, R.; Mitterer-Istyagin, H.; Ludewig, M.; Fehlhaber, K.; Schuster, E.; Berk, J.; Dressel, A.; Petermann, S.; Kruse, W.; et al. Untersuchungen zur Prävalenz von Hautverletzungen bei schnabelkupierten Mastputen. Berl. Münch. Tierärztl. Wochenschr. 2011, 124, 8–16. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Savory, C.J. Feather pecking and cannibalism. Worlds Poult. Sci. J. 1995, 51, 215–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Institut für Tierschutz und Tierhaltung Celle. Available online: https://docplayer.org/59989865-Institut-fuer-tierschutz-und-tierhaltung-celle.html (accessed on 3 November 2020).
- Duggan, G.; Widowski, T.; Quinton, M.; Torrey, S. The development of injurious pecking in a commercial turkey facility. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 2014, 23, 280–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frackenpohl, U.; Meyer, H. Feather Pecking and Cannibalism: Practical Experiences to keep Turkeys busy. In Proceedings of the International Meeting Turkey Production: Balance Act between Protection, Animal Welfare and Economic Aspects, Berlin, Germany, 28 February–1 March 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Kulke, K.; Habig, C.; Kemper, N.; Spindler, B. Untersuchungen zum Vorkommen von Kannibalismus bei nicht schnabelgekürzten Putenhähnen bei unterschiedlichen Besatzdichten; Report; Institut für Tierhygiene, Tierschutz und Nutztierethologie, Stiftung Tierärztliche Hochschule Hannover: 2014. Available online: https://www.ml.niedersachsen.de/startseite/themen/tiergesundheit_tierschutz/tierschutzplan_niedersachsen_2011_2018/puten/puten-110863.html (accessed on 17 October 2020).
- Kulke, K.; Spindler, B.; Kemper, N. Verzicht auf das Schnabelkürzen-wo stehen wir in Deutschland? Züchtungskunde 2016, 88, 456–474. [Google Scholar]
- Fiedler, H.-H. Schnabelkürzen bei Puten. Deutsche Tierärztl. Wochenschr. 2003, 113, 110–112. [Google Scholar]
- Anonymous. Tierschutzplan Niedersachsen. 2011. Available online: https://www.ml.niedersachsen.de/startseite/themen/tiergesundheit_tierschutz/tierschutzplan_niedersachsen_2011_2018/ (accessed on 23 September 2020).
- Anonymous. Vereinbarung zur Verbesserung des Tierwohls, insbesondere zum Verzicht auf das Schnabelkürzen in der Haltung von Legehennen und Mastputen. 2015. Available online: https://www.bmel.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Broschueren/EineFragederHaltungTierwohl.html#:text=Legehennen%20und%20Mastputen-,Vereinbarung%20zur%20Verbesserung%20des%20Tierwohls%2C%20insbesondere%20zum%20Verzicht%20auf%20das,Haltung%20von%20Legehennen%20und%20Mastputen&text=In%20der%20Vereinbarung%20verpflichtet%20sich,von%20Legehennen%20und%20Mastputen%20abzuschaffen (accessed on 23 September 2020).
- Berk, J.; Stehle, E.; Bartels, T. Beschäftigungsmaterial-eine Möglichkeit zur Reduktion von “Beschädigungspicken” bei Mastputen mit unkupierten Schnäbeln? Berl. Münch. Tierärztl. Wochenschr. 2017, 130, 230–240. [Google Scholar]
- Statham, P.; Green, L.; Bichard, M.; Mendl, M. Predicting tail-biting from behaviour of pigs prior to outbreaks. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2009, 121, 157–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zonderland, J.J.; Schepers, F.; Bracke, M.B.M.; den Hartog, L.A.; Kemp, B.; Spoolder, H.A.M. Characteristics of biter and victim piglets apparent before a tail-biting outbreak. Animal 2011, 5, 767–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hughes, B.O.; Grigor, P.N. Behavioural time-budgets and beak related behavior in floor-housed turkeys. Anim. Welf. 1996, 5, 189–198. [Google Scholar]
- Kjaer, J.B.; Bessei, W. The interrelationships of nutrition and feather pecking in the domestic fowl. Archiv Geflügelkun. 2013, 77, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
- Cloutier, S.; Newberry, R.C.; Forster, C.T.; Girsberger, K.M. Does pecking at inanimate stimuli predict cannibalistic behaviour in domestic fowl? Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2000, 66, 119–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Busayi, R.M.; Channing, C.E.; Hocking, P.M. Comparisons of damaging feather pecking and time budges in male and female turkeys of a traditional breed and a genetically selected male line. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2006, 96, 281–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodenburg, T.B.; Koene, P. Comparison of individual and social feather pecking tests in two lines of laying hens at ten different ages. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2003, 81, 133–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bircher, L.; Schlup, P. Ethologische Indikatoren zur Beurteilung der Tiergerechtheit von Trutenmastsystemen; Report; Universität Bern, Zoologisches Institut Abt. Sozial-und Nutztierethologie: Bern, Switzerland, 1991; p. 113. [Google Scholar]
- Bircher, L.; Schlup, P. Das Verhalten von Truten eines Bauernschlages unter Naturnahen Haltungsbedingungen; Report; Universität Bern, Zoologisches Institut Abt. Sozial-und Nutztierethologie: Bern, Switzerland, 1991; p. 107. [Google Scholar]
- Sherwin, C.M.; Kelland, A. Time-budgets, comfort behaviours and injurious pecking of turkeys housed in pairs. Br. Poult. Sci. 1998, 39, 325–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aydin, A.; Bahr, C.; Viazzi, S.; Exadaktylos, V.; Buyse, J.; Berckmans, D. A novel method to automatically measure the feed intake of broiler chickens by sound technology. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2014, 101, 17–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banakar, A.; Sadeghi, M.; Shushtari, A. An intelligent device for diagnosing avian diseases: Newcastle, infectious bronchitis, avian influenza. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2016, 127, 744–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Huang, J.; Wang, W.; Zhang, T. Method for detecting avian influenza disease of chickens based on sound analysis. Biosyst. Eng. 2019, 180, 16–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Moura, D.J.; de Alencar Nääs, I.; Cangussu de Souza Alves, E.; Morandi Ridolfi de Carvalho, T.; Martinez do Vale, M.; de Lima, K.A.O. Noise Analysis to Evaluate Chick Thermal Comfort. Sci. Agric. 2008, 50, 438–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Du, X.; Lao, F.; Teng, G. A Sound Source Localisation Analytical Method for Monitoring the Abnormal Night Vocalisations of Poultry. Sensors 2018, 18, 2906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bright, A. Vocalisation and acoustic parameters of flock noise from feather pecking and non-feather pecking laying flocks. Br. Poult. Sci. 2008, 49, 241–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nasirahmadi, A.; Gonzalez, J.; Sturm, B.; Hensel, O.; Knierim, U. Pecking activity detection in group-housed turkeys using acoustic data and a deep learning technique. Biosyst. Eng. 2020, 194, 40–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anonymous. Bundeseinheitliche Eckwerte für eine Freiwillige Vereinbarung zur Haltung von Mastputen. Available online: https://www.bmel.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/_Tiere/Tierschutz/ZDG-Eckwerte-Haltung-Mastputen.html (accessed on 23 September 2020).
- Martin, P.; Bateson, P. One-Zero-Sampling. In Measuring Behaviour: An Introductory Guide, 3rd ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2003; pp. 54–55. [Google Scholar]
- Jeon, S.; Shin, J.W.; Lee, Y.J.; Kim, W.H.; Kwon, Y.; Yang, H.Y. Empirical study of drone sound detection in real-life environment with deep neural networks. In Proceedings of the 25th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO), Kos, Greece, 28 August–2 September 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Spindler, B.; Schulze Hillert, M.; Sürie, C.; Kamphues, J.; Hartung, J. Abschlussbericht: Untersuchungen zum Verzicht auf Schnabelkürzen bei Mastputenhennen: Kann der Einsatz von Tierischem Eiweiß im Alleinfutter Federpicken und Kannibalismus bei Putenhennen Reduzieren? Report; Institut für Tierhygiene Tierschutz und Nutztierethologie, Stiftung Tierärztliche Hochschule Hannover: 2012. Available online: https://www.ml.niedersachsen.de/startseite/themen/tiergesundheit_tierschutz/tierschutzplan_niedersachsen_2011_2018/puten/puten-110863.html (accessed on 17 October 2020).
- Hughes, B.O. Feather Pecking and Cannibalism in Domestic Fowls. In Disturbed Behaviour in Farm Animals; Bessei, W., Ed.; Verlag Eugen Ulmer: Stuttgart, Germany, 1982; pp. 138–146. [Google Scholar]
- Blokhuis, H.J.; Arkes, J.G. Some observations on the development of feather pecking in poultry. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1984, 12, 145–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dalton, H.A.; Wood, B.J.; Torrey, S. Injurious pecking in domestic turkeys. Development, causes, and potential solutions. Worlds Poult. Sci. J. 2013, 69, 865–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Term | Equation/Definition |
---|---|
Sensitivity/Recall | |
Specificity | |
Accuracy | |
Precision | |
F1-score | |
True Positive (TP) | observed pecking = recorded pecking |
True Negative (TN) | observed non-pecking = recorded non-pecking |
False Positive (FP) | observed non-pecking ≠ recorded pecking |
False Negative (FN) | observed pecking ≠ recorded non-pecking |
Week | TP | TN | FP | FN | Sensitivity/Recall (%) | Specificity (%) | Accuracy (%) | Precision (%) | F1-Score (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Farm 1 | |||||||||
2 | 45 | 240 | 11 | 4 | 91.8 | 95.6 | 95.0 | 80.4 | 85.7 |
3 | 51 | 242 | 5 | 2 | 96.2 | 98.0 | 97.7 | 91.0 | 93.6 |
4 | 166 | 117 | 13 | 4 | 97.6 | 90.0 | 94.3 | 92.7 | 95.1 |
5 | 141 | 152 | 1 | 0 | 100.0 | 99.3 | 99.7 | 99.3 | 99.7 |
6 | 89 | 184 | 9 | 18 | 83.2 | 95.3 | 91.0 | 90.8 | 86.8 |
7 | 13 | 283 | 2 | 2 | 86.7 | 99.3 | 98.7 | 86.7 | 86.7 |
8 | 4 | 288 | 5 | 3 | 57.1 | 98.3 | 97.3 | 44.4 | 50.0 |
9 | 25 | 269 | 0 | 6 | 80.6 | 100.0 | 98.0 | 100.0 | 89.3 |
10 | 3 | 295 | 1 | 1 | 75.0 | 99.7 | 99.3 | 75.0 | 75.0 |
11 | 8 | 284 | 6 | 2 | 80.0 | 97.9 | 97.3 | 57.1 | 66.7 |
12 | 24 | 259 | 15 | 2 | 92.3 | 94.5 | 94.3 | 61.5 | 73.9 |
13 | 20 | 277 | 0 | 3 | 87.0 | 100.0 | 99.0 | 100.0 | 93.0 |
14 | 34 | 255 | 4 | 7 | 82.9 | 98.5 | 96.3 | 89.5 | 86.1 |
Total | 623 | 3145 | 72 | 54 | 92.0 | 97.8 | 96.8 | 89.6 | 90.8 |
Farm 2 | |||||||||
4 | 23 | 86 | 1 | 10 | 74.2 | 98.9 | 90.8 | 95.8 | 83.6 |
5 | 42 | 69 | 5 | 4 | 91.3 | 93.2 | 92.5 | 89.4 | 90.3 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Gonzalez, J.J.; Nasirahmadi, A.; Knierim, U. Automatically Detected Pecking Activity in Group-Housed Turkeys. Animals 2020, 10, 2034. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112034
Gonzalez JJ, Nasirahmadi A, Knierim U. Automatically Detected Pecking Activity in Group-Housed Turkeys. Animals. 2020; 10(11):2034. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112034
Chicago/Turabian StyleGonzalez, Jennifer J., Abozar Nasirahmadi, and Ute Knierim. 2020. "Automatically Detected Pecking Activity in Group-Housed Turkeys" Animals 10, no. 11: 2034. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112034
APA StyleGonzalez, J. J., Nasirahmadi, A., & Knierim, U. (2020). Automatically Detected Pecking Activity in Group-Housed Turkeys. Animals, 10(11), 2034. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112034