Review Reports
- Antía Acción1,
- Jacobo Álvarez1 and
- Raquel Holgado1
- et al.
Reviewer 1: Silviu-Ionuț Borş Reviewer 2: Svetlana Nedic
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIndependent review
Article type: research article.
Title: Days in milk, parity, and milk production influence on the hind hoof skin surface temperature in dairy cattle
The study examines the variation in hoof temperature, as measured by infrared thermography, in 156 healthy dairy cows across different parity levels, milk production, and days in milk. According to the results, the mean temperatures in the cranial and caudal hooves are higher in primiparous cows compared to multiparous cows. Additionally, hoof mean temperature is greater in cows with high milk production and in those with fewer than 200 days in milk.
My concerns are:
The results section should focus exclusively on the findings derived directly from the study, ensuring that all statements are relevant to the research questions posed. In discussing the results, it is essential to draw comparisons with existing literature to contextualize the findings within the broader scope of similar research. The conclusions are too large, and most of them are recommendations. Furthermore, I recommend that the paper include a dedicated recommendations section. This section should offer actionable insights based on findings, aimed at dairy farmers and veterinary professionals. Suggestions could encompass management strategies to optimize hoof health during different stages of lactation, highlighting the importance of monitoring hoof temperature variations in relation to DIM and parity. These recommendations could serve to improve animal welfare, enhance productivity, and ultimately lead to better herd management practices.
Line 26: Please define in your study early lactation. Early lactation usually refers to the first 100 days of lactation.
Line 69: Early lactation? Please define.
Line 388: early lactation? Please define.
Line 55: Leach et al., [12]...
Lines 72-84: Please move this part to the discussion section.
Lines 314-315: I find this sentence quite confusing. The mean temperatures for cows are recorded at 202 days in milk (DIM), which is well into the lactation period, not during early lactation. Subsequently, you discuss physiological modifications that occur during early lactation; however, this seems inconsistent with the findings of your study. Could you clarify how these two points align or address the apparent discrepancy?
Line 320: Cows with higher MY and fewer DIM often experience a Negative Energy Balance, which induces metabolic stress.
It seems that you are discussing the experience with fewer DIMs, yet the study evaluates the first 202 DIMs. This discrepancy is a bit confusing to me.
Line 392: What reproductive status was considered in the study? The research did not assess the reproductive status of the dairy cows within the study group, which raises questions about the potential impact of reproductive factors on the findings. Without this critical evaluation, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions, and the statement appears speculative in nature.
Line 395: You discuss the physiological variation of hoof temperatures that may precede clinical lameness, but you evaluate only clinically healthy cows. Please explain why this variation, according to days in milk (DIM), milk production, and parity, is not normal.
It is important to clarify why this variation, particularly when classified by days in milk (DIM), levels of milk production, and parity, does not align with typical physiological values. For instance, significant deviations in hoof temperature throughout different stages of lactation—such as early, mid, or late DIM—can reflect underlying metabolic or environmental stressors. Similarly, higher milk production may correlate with increased stress sensitivity, suggesting that cows with greater yield may experience changes in hoof temperature as a response to added stress. Furthermore, parity plays a crucial role, as multiparous cows may experience different physiological thresholds compared to primiparous cows. These factors collectively underscore why hoof temperature variations can be deemed normal in the absence of clinical lameness.
Lines 400-427: The following sentences serve as recommendations rather than conclusions of the study.
Reference 41 is not cited in the text. Please correct this oversight.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
We would like to thank all the reviewers for taking their time to revise our manuscript and made the necessary comments and suggestions to improve its quality. In this document, we address all issues rose and give some explanations that hopefully are enough to answer all pending concerns about the manuscript.
The results section should focus exclusively on the findings derived directly from the study, ensuring that all statements are relevant to the research questions posed. In discussing the results, it is essential to draw comparisons with existing literature to contextualize the findings within the broader scope of similar research. The conclusions are too large, and most of them are recommendations. Furthermore, I recommend that the paper include a dedicated recommendations section. This section should offer actionable insights based on findings, aimed at dairy farmers and veterinary professionals. Suggestions could encompass management strategies to optimize hoof health during different stages of lactation, highlighting the importance of monitoring hoof temperature variations in relation to DIM and parity. These recommendations could serve to improve animal welfare, enhance productivity, and ultimately lead to better herd management practices.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 26: Please define in your study early lactation. Early lactation usually refers to the first 100 days of lactation.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 69: Early lactation? Please define.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 388: early lactation? Please define.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 55: Leach et al., [12]..
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Lines 72-84: Please move this part to the discussion section.
We appreciate the reviewer’s insightful suggestion. However, we respectfully consider that the proposed section is more appropriately placed within the Introduction. This is because the explanation of IRT functioning, together with its applications in other species, provides essential background information that frames the rationale of the study, whereas its inclusion in the Discussion would not align as well with the purpose of that section. We sincerely thank the reviewer for the comment and hope that this clarification is satisfactory.
Lines 314-315: I find this sentence quite confusing. The mean temperatures for cows are recorded at 202 days in milk (DIM), which is well into the lactation period, not during early lactation. Subsequently, you discuss physiological modifications that occur during early lactation; however, this seems inconsistent with the findings of your study. Could you clarify how these two points align or address the apparent discrepancy?
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 320: Cows with higher MY and fewer DIM often experience a Negative Energy Balance, which induces metabolic stress.
It seems that you are discussing the experience with fewer DIMs, yet the study evaluates the first 202 DIMs. This discrepancy is a bit confusing to me.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 392: What reproductive status was considered in the study? The research did not assess the reproductive status of the dairy cows within the study group, which raises questions about the potential impact of reproductive factors on the findings. Without this critical evaluation, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions, and the statement appears speculative in nature.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 395: You discuss the physiological variation of hoof temperatures that may precede clinical lameness, but you evaluate only clinically healthy cows. Please explain why this variation, according to days in milk (DIM), milk production, and parity, is not normal.
It is important to clarify why this variation, particularly when classified by days in milk (DIM), levels of milk production, and parity, does not align with typical physiological values. For instance, significant deviations in hoof temperature throughout different stages of lactation—such as early, mid, or late DIM—can reflect underlying metabolic or environmental stressors. Similarly, higher milk production may correlate with increased stress sensitivity, suggesting that cows with greater yield may experience changes in hoof temperature as a response to added stress. Furthermore, parity plays a crucial role, as multiparous cows may experience different physiological thresholds compared to primiparous cows. These factors collectively underscore why hoof temperature variations can be deemed normal in the absence of clinical lameness.
We thank the reviewer for this thoughtful comment. We believe there may have been a misunderstanding regarding the intention of the paragraph. Our aim was to clarify that, in order to employ IRT as a tool for automated lameness prevention, it is essential to recognize that certain physiological changes in hoof temperature can occur in healthy cows and do not necessarily indicate lameness. We appreciate the reviewer’s observation and hope that this explanation resolves the confusion.
Lines 400-427: The following sentences serve as recommendations rather than conclusions of the study.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Reference 41 is not cited in the text. Please correct this oversight.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe study "Days in milk, parity and milk production influence on the hind hoof skin surface temperature in dairy cattle" presents relevant and informative findings regarding the use of thermal imaging and mean T in relation to invastigated parameters. This topic is of practical importance, particulary considering the potential benefits for farmers and veterinary practice. Early detection of lameness in dairy cows can significatly reduce economic losses, and studies addressing this issue are highly valuable.
However, althought the research is promising, the manuscript requires several substantial revisions before it can be considered for publication. The necessary changes and clarifications have been outlined in detail in the comments above.
Please remove the unintended line break (exta space) between "dairy" abd "cattle" in the title to ensure proper formating.
Line 18: Please specify, out of the total 156 cows, how many were primiparous and how many were multiparous
Line 22: Could you please clarify which cows belong to Group 1 and which belong to Group 2?
Line 22: Please avoid beginning the sentence with the abbreviation (DIM) and use the full term instead.
Line 27: In future invastigations, it would be of interest to determine the proportion of cows with elevated MT of the hind hooves that later developed lameness.
Line 35: Please add a space between 1 and 2, also between 3 and 9 (Line 50)
Line 44: There is extra parenthesis, 5 i 6 should be placedwithin a single parenthesis.
Line 55: Please replace the period with a comma between 11 and 12.
Line 59: It would be clearer if a period were placed after 14, starting a new sentence afterwards.
Line 79: Please insert a semicolon following 30 and 31.
Line 111: For clarity, it should be noted that the authors applied IRT for detection hoof lesions, in contrast to your study, which was conducted on healthy cows.
Line 79: Please include the full name in the subtitle 2.2
Line 210-212: For clarity, it would be helpful to indicate how many cows belonged to each group.
Table 1. For clarity, Table 1 should include the number of multiparous and primiparous cows
Table 1 requires technical formatting. I recommend reducing the font size in the first row to ensure proper spacing between the four hooves.
In my opinion, it would be simpler and clearer for reading and interpreting the results if separate tables were created for the effect of MY on hoof T (3.2) and the effect of DIM on hoof T (3.3.).
It would also be important to indicate the number of cows in each group for MY and DIM.
Line 272-275: I suggest relocating this sentence to the Discussion section for better contextual placement.
If possible, it would be valuable to perform correlation of MT with the DIM, MY and parity.
In my opinion, the Concluson is too long and should be shortened to more clearly convey the study results and their relevance for farmers and veterinary practice. The section on future research should be shorter and more concise.
Please remove the redundant reference number 68 from the reference list.
Author Response
We would like to thank all the reviewers for taking their time to revise our manuscript and made the necessary comments and suggestions to improve its quality. In this document, we address all issues rose and give some explanations that hopefully are enough to answer all pending concerns about the manuscript.
Please remove the unintended line break (exta space) between "dairy" abd "cattle" in the title to ensure proper formating.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 18: Please specify, out of the total 156 cows, how many were primiparous and how many were multiparous Line 22: Could you please clarify which cows belong to Group 1 and which belong to Group 2?
We thank the reviewer for the helpful suggestion. However, due to the word limit required for the abstract, it is not feasible to include the number of animals in that specific paragraph. Nevertheless, we have ensured that this information is clearly provided in the Materials and Methods section, as also suggested by the reviewer. We appreciate the comment and hope this clarification is satisfactory.
Line 22: Please avoid beginning the sentence with the abbreviation (DIM) and use the full term instead.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 27: In future invastigations, it would be of interest to determine the proportion of cows with elevated MT of the hind hooves that later developed lameness.
We appreciate the reviewer’s interesting and valuable suggestion. We fully agree with this point, and we are currently working on incorporating this aspect into our future research efforts. We thank the reviewer for the thoughtful comment.
Line 35: Please add a space between 1 and 2, also between 3 and 9 (Line 50)
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 44: There is extra parenthesis, 5 i 6 should be placedwithin a single parenthesis.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 55: Please replace the period with a comma between 11 and 12.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 59: It would be clearer if a period were placed after 14, starting a new sentence afterwards.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 79: Please insert a semicolon following 30 and 31.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 111: For clarity, it should be noted that the authors applied IRT for detection hoof lesions, in contrast to your study, which was conducted on healthy cows.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 79: Please include the full name in the subtitle 2.2
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 210-212: For clarity, it would be helpful to indicate how many cows belonged to each group.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Table 1. For clarity, Table 1 should include the number of multiparous and primiparous cows
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Table 1 requires technical formatting. I recommend reducing the font size in the first row to ensure proper spacing between the four hooves.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
In my opinion, it would be simpler and clearer for reading and interpreting the results if separate tables were created for the effect of MY on hoof T (3.2) and the effect of DIM on hoof T (3.3.).
It would also be important to indicate the number of cows in each group for MY and DIM.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Line 272-275: I suggest relocating this sentence to the Discussion section for better contextual placement.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
In my opinion, the Concluson is too long and should be shortened to more clearly convey the study results and their relevance for farmers and veterinary practice. The section on future research should be shorter and more concise.
The manuscript was modified according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
Please remove the redundant reference number 68 from the reference list.
We appreciate the reviewer’s observation. However, there appears to have been a misunderstanding, as reference number 68 does not exist in the manuscript. We kindly thank the reviewer for the careful reading of our work.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
Thank you for considering my suggestion to improve your article. Congratulations on your thoughtful work; it presents valuable insights into the application of IRT techniques in dairy cows. I encourage you to continue exploring this important subject, as it plays a critical role in improving cow health. Your efforts contribute significantly to advancing knowledge and practices within the field. Keep up the excellent work!
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI thank the authors for addresing all of my suggestions, and in my opinion the manuscript is now suitable for publication in the journal.