FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Equine Vet J / Validation of inertial measurement units to detect and predi...
Equine veterinary journal2022; doi: 10.1111/evj.13909

Validation of inertial measurement units to detect and predict horse behaviour while stabled.

Abstract: Musculoskeletal injuries are observed in Thoroughbred racehorses and may become catastrophic. Currently, there are limited methods for early detection of such injuries. Most injuries develop gradually due to accumulated damage, providing the opportunity for early detection. Horses experiencing pain or lameness may exhibit changes in behaviour so the development of an objective, real-time system monitoring horse behaviour may enable detection of bone injuries before catastrophic failure. Objective: To determine whether intensive observational methods of assessing horse behaviour can be replaced by use of inertial measurement units (IMUs). Methods: Validation study assessing IMU use against video observation. Methods: Six hospitalised Thoroughbreds (algorithm training data) and 19 Thoroughbred racehorses in-training (algorithm testing data) were equipped with an IMU placed on the lateral side of both forelimbs (left fore, LF; right fore, RF) and monitored in a stable for 4 h. An algorithm was developed to classify behaviour and then validated against video recordings. Results: Standing was the most prevalent behaviour (LF 88.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 88.7-89.0; RF 88.5%, 95% CI 88.4-88.7). IMU classification of recumbent and standing activities showed excellent agreement (sensitivity) with video observation (>98%). This was followed by stepping (LF 89.4%, RF 85.5%) then weight-shifting (LF 54.3%, RF 61.5%). Predictions from the algorithm showed misclassification of 2.5% (LF 5500/225 352, RF 5218/210 170). Excluding standing, misclassification was 6.8% (1705/25 158) and 7.5% (1812/24 077) for the left and right forelimbs, respectively, with pawing and weight-shifting most frequently misclassified. Conclusions: Increasing the number of horses and types of behaviours observed may improve predictions. Conclusions: IMUs displayed a high sensitivity to movement on a small number of horses, and with further validation they have the potential to effectively monitor behaviour of racehorses in training. However, more sensitive methods may be needed to validate the classification of weight-shifting behaviour. Future studies should evaluate the association between each behaviour and musculoskeletal injury. Unassigned: Muskuloskeletale Verletzungen werden bei Vollblutrennpferden beobachtet und können katastrophale Folgen haben. Derzeit gibt es nur wenige Methoden zur Früherkennung solcher Verletzungen. Die meisten Verletzungen entwickeln sich allmählich aufgrund von kumulierten Schäden, was die Möglichkeit einer frühzeitigen Erkennung bietet. Pferde, die unter Schmerzen oder Lahmheit leiden, zeigen oft Verhaltensänderungen, so dass die Entwicklung eines objektiven Echtzeitsystems zur Überwachung des Pferdeverhaltens die Erkennung von Knochenverletzungen vor einem katastrophalen Ausfall ermöglichen könnte. Unassigned: Es soll ermittelt werden, ob intensive Beobachtungsmethoden zur Beurteilung des Pferdeverhaltens durch den Einsatz von Inertialen Messeinheiten (IMUs) ersetzt werden können. Methods: Validierungsstudie zur Bewertung der IMU-Nutzung im Vergleich zur Videobeobachtung. Methods: Sechs stationär behandelte Vollblüter (Algorithmus-Trainingsdaten) und 19 Vollblut-Rennpferde im Training (Algorithmus-Testdaten) wurden mit einer IMU, die an der lateralen Seite beider Vordergliedmaßen (vorne links, VL; vorne rechts, VR) angebracht wurde, ausgestattet und vier Stunden lang in einem Stall überwacht. Es wurde ein Algorithmus zur Klassifizierung des Verhaltens entwickelt und anschließend anhand von Videoaufnahmen validiert. Unassigned: Das Stehen war das häufigste Verhalten (VL 88.8%, 95% CI 88.7, 89.0; VR 88.5%, 95% CI 88.4, 88.7). Die IMU-Klassifizierung von Aktivitäten im Liegen und Stehen zeigte eine ausgezeichnete Übereinstimmung (Sensitivität) mit der Videobeobachtung (>98%). Es folgte das Gehen (VL 89.4%, VR 85.5%) und dann die Gewichtsverlagerung (VL 54.3%, VR 61.5%). Die Vorhersagen des Algorithmus zeigten eine Fehlklassifizierung von 2.5% (VL 5500/225 352, VR 5218/210 170). Ohne das Stehen lag die Fehlklassifizierung bei 6.8% (1705/25 158) bzw. 7.5% (1812/24 077) für die linke bzw. rechte Vordergliedmaße, wobei Scharren und Gewichtsverlagerung am häufigsten falsch klassifiziert wurden. Unassigned: Eine Erhöhung der Anzahl der Pferde und der beobachteten Verhaltensweisen kann die Vorhersagen verbessern. Unassigned: Die IMUs zeigten bei einer kleinen Anzahl von Pferden eine hohe Sensibilität für die Bewegungen, und bei weiterer Validierung haben sie das Potenzial, das Verhalten von Rennpferden im Training effektiv zu überwachen. Es könnten jedoch empfindlichere Methoden erforderlich sein, um die Klassifizierung des Gewichtsverlagerungsverhaltens zu validieren. In künftigen Studien sollte der Zusammenhang zwischen den einzelnen Verhaltensweisen und Verletzungen des Bewegungsapparats untersucht werden.
© 2022 The Authors. Equine Veterinary Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of EVJ Ltd.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2022-12-20 PubMed ID: 36537838DOI: 10.1111/evj.13909Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research study is focused on examining the efficacy of inertial measurement units (IMUs) in predicting and detecting behaviour changes in horses which are indicative of musculoskeletal injuries. The findings suggest that while IMUs show promise in accurately classifying certain horse behaviours, further research and improvement in techniques may be necessary for better results.

Objective and Methods

  • The study was conducted to determine if extensive observational methods for assessing horse behaviour could be replaced with IMUs. These devices have been proposed as a non-invasive method to monitor horse behaviour in real-time, thus aiding in the early detection of musculoskeletal injuries.
  • The researchers used a validation study method, which evaluated the use of IMUs against standard video observation.
  • A total of 25 Thoroughbred racehorses participated in the study – six were hospitalised (used for algorithm training data), and 19 were in-training (used for algorithm testing data).
  • Each horse had an IMU attached to the lateral side of both forelimbs for a four-hour monitoring session in a stable.
  • An algorithm was developed to categorise horse behaviour, which was then validated against video recordings.

Results

  • Standing behaviour was the most prevalent, as recorded by the IMUs.
  • The IMUs were highly accurate (>98% sensitivity) in classifying standing and recumbent activities, as confirmed by video observation.
  • Other behaviours, such as stepping and weight-shifting, were less accurately categorised, with sensitivity rates of 89.4% and 54.3% for the left forelimb, and 85.5% and 61.5% for the right forelimb, respectively.
  • Predictions made by the algorithm showed a misclassification rate of 2.5%. However, if standing behaviour was excluded, the misclassification rate increased to 6.8% and 7.5% for the left and right forelimbs, respectively. The behaviours most frequently misclassified were pawing and weight-shifting.

Conclusions and Future Directions

  • Although the IMUs showed high sensitivity to horse movement, and thus potential for monitoring behaviour in training racehorses, the study identified room for improvement. More sensitive methods may be required to validate the classification of weight-shifting behaviour.
  • The researchers suggest an increase in the sample size and the variety of observed behaviours could potentially improve the prediction rates.
  • Future studies are needed to explore the relationship between different behaviours and musculoskeletal injuries for a more effective application of IMUs in detecting and predicting horse injuries.

Cite This Article

APA
Anderson K, Morrice-West AV, Walmsley EA, Fisher AD, Whitton RC, Hitchens PL. (2022). Validation of inertial measurement units to detect and predict horse behaviour while stabled. Equine Vet J. https://doi.org/10.1111/evj.13909

Publication

Equine veterinary journal
ISSN: 2042-3306
NlmUniqueID: 0173320
Country: United States
Language: English

Researcher Affiliations

Anderson, Katrina
  • Equine Lameness and Imaging Centre, Melbourne Veterinary School, University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.
Morrice-West, Ashleigh V
  • Equine Lameness and Imaging Centre, Melbourne Veterinary School, University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.
Walmsley, Elizabeth A
  • Equine Lameness and Imaging Centre, Melbourne Veterinary School, University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.
Fisher, Andrew D
  • Animal Welfare Science Centre, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Whitton, R Chris
  • Equine Lameness and Imaging Centre, Melbourne Veterinary School, University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.
Hitchens, Peta L
  • Equine Lameness and Imaging Centre, Melbourne Veterinary School, University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.

Grant Funding

  • Racing Victoria
  • University of Melbourne
  • Victorian Racing Industry Fund of the Victoria State Government

References

This article includes 63 references
  1. Bailey C, Rose R, Reid S, Hodgson D. Wastage in the Australian thoroughbred racing industry: a survey of Sydney trainers.. Aust Vet J 1997;75(1):64-6.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1751-0813.1997.tb13836.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  2. Dyson PK, Jackson BF, Pfeiffer DU, Price JS. Days lost from training by two- and three-year-old thoroughbred horses: a survey of seven UK training yards.. Equine Vet J 2008;40(7):650-7.
    doi: 10.2746/042516408x363242google scholar: lookup
  3. Holmes JM, Mirams M, Mackie EJ, Whitton RC. Thoroughbred horses in race training have lower levels of subchondral bone remodelling in highly loaded regions of the distal metacarpus compared to horses resting from training.. Vet J 2014;202(3):443-7.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2014.09.010google scholar: lookup
  4. Parkin TDH, Clegg PD, French NP, Proudman CJ, Riggs CM, Singer ER. Catastrophic fracture of the lateral condyle of the third metacarpus/metatarsus in UK racehorses - fracture descriptions and pre-existing pathology.. Vet J 2006;171(1):157-65.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2004.10.009google scholar: lookup
  5. Riggs CM, Whitehouse GH, Boyde A. Pathology of the distal condyles of the third metacarpal and third metatarsal bones of the horse.. Equine Vet J 1999;31(2):140-8.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1999.tb03807.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  6. Stover SM, Murray A. The California postmortem program: leading the way.. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2008;24(1):21-36.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cveq.2007.11.009google scholar: lookup
  7. Tranquille CA, Murray RC, Parkin TDH. Can we use subchondral bone thickness on high-field magnetic resonance images to identify thoroughbred racehorses at risk of catastrophic lateral condylar fracture?. Equine Vet J 2017;49(2):167-71.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12574google scholar: lookup
  8. Trope GD, Ghasem-Zadeh A, Anderson GA, Mackie EJ, Whitton RC. Can high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography imaging of subchondral and cortical bone predict condylar fracture in thoroughbred racehorses?. Equine Vet J 2015;47(4):428-32.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12312google scholar: lookup
  9. Kawcak CE, McIlwraith CW, Norrdin RW, Park RD, Steyn PS. Clinical effects of exercise on subchondral bone of carpal and metacarpophalangeal joints in horses.. Am J Vet Res 2000;61(10):1252-8.
  10. Crijns CP, Martens A, Bergman HJ, Veen H, Duchateau L, Bree HJJ. Intramodality and intermodality agreement in radiography and computed tomography of equine distal limb fractures.. Equine Vet J 2014;46(1):92-6.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12082google scholar: lookup
  11. Racing Australia. Australian Racing Fact Book 2007/2008.. .
  12. Racing Australia. Australian Racing Fact Book 2017/2018.. .
  13. Torcivia C, McDonnell S. In-person caretaker visits disrupt ongoing discomfort behavior in hospitalized equine orthopedic surgical patients.. Animals 2020;10(2):210.
    doi: 10.3390/ani10020210google scholar: lookup
  14. Rietmann TR, Staﾬher M, Bernasconi P, Auer JA, Weishaupt MA. The association between heart rate, heart rate variability, endocrine and behavioural pain measures in horses suffering from laminitis.. J Vet Med A Physiol Pathol Clin Med 2004;51(5):218-25.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0442.2004.00627.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  15. Bussières G, Jacques C, Lainay O, Beauchamp G, Leblond A, Cadoré JL. Development of a composite orthopaedic pain scale in horses.. Res Vet Sci 2008;85(2):294-306.
    doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2007.10.011google scholar: lookup
  16. Price J, Catriona S, Welsh EM, Waran NK. Preliminary evaluation of a behaviour based system for assessment of post operative pain in horses following arthroscopic surgery.. Vet Anaesth Analg 2003;30(3):124-37.
    doi: 10.1046/j.1467-2995.2003.00139.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  17. Pritchett LC, Ulibarri C, Roberts MC, Schneider RK, Sellon DC. Identification of potential physiological and behavioral indicators of postoperative pain in horses after exploratory celiotomy for colic.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2003;80(1):31-43.
    doi: 10.1016/s0168-1591(02)00205-8google scholar: lookup
  18. Dalla Costa E, Minero M, Lebelt D, Stucke D, Canali E, Leach MC. Development of the Horse Grimace Scale (HGS) as a pain assessment tool in horses undergoing routine castration.. PLoS One 2014;9(3):e92281.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092281google scholar: lookup
  19. Dyson S, Berger JM, Ellis AD, Mullard J. Can the presence of musculoskeletal pain be determined from the facial expressions of ridden horses (FEReq)?. J Vet Behav Clin Appl Res 2017;19:78-89.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2017.03.005google scholar: lookup
  20. Gleerup KB, Forkman B, Lindegaard C, Andersen PH. An equine pain face.. Vet Anaesth Analg 2015;42(1):103-14.
    doi: 10.1111/vaa.12212google scholar: lookup
  21. Hewetson M, Christley RM, Hunt ID, Voute LC. Investigations of the reliability of observational gait analysis for the assessment of lameness in horses.. Vet Rec 2006;158(25):852-8.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.158.25.852google scholar: lookup
  22. Lindegaard C, Thomsen MH, Larsen S, Andersen PH. Analgesic efficacy of intra-articular morphine in experimentally induced radiocarpal synovitis in horses.. Vet Anaesth Analg 2010;37(2):171-85.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1467-2995.2009.00521.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  23. van Loon JP, Van Dierendonck MC. Monitoring acute equine visceral pain with the equine Utrecht university scale for composite pain assessment (EQUUS-COMPASS) and the equine Utrecht university scale for facial assessment of pain (EQUUS-FAP): a scale-construction study.. Vet J 2015;206(3):356-64.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2015.08.023google scholar: lookup
  24. Rashid M, Silventoinen A, Gleerup KB, Andersen PH. Equine facial action coding system for determination of pain-related facial responses in videos of horses.. PLoS One 2020;15(11):e0231608.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231608google scholar: lookup
  25. van Loon J, Van Dierendonck M. Objective pain assessment in horses (2014-2018).. Vet J 2018;242:1-7.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2018.10.001google scholar: lookup
  26. Ask K, Rhodin M, Tamminen L-M, Hernlund E, Haubro AP. Identification of body behaviors and facial expressions associated with induced orthopedic pain in four equine pain scales.. Animals 2020;10(11):2155.
    doi: 10.3390/ani10112155google scholar: lookup
  27. Broomé S, Ask K, Rashid-Engström M, Haubro Andersen P, Kjellström H. Sharing pain: using pain domain transfer for video recognition of low grade orthopedic pain in horses.. PLoS One 2022;17(3):e0263854.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263854google scholar: lookup
  28. Lieber B, Taylor BES, Appelboom G, McKhann G, Connolly ES. Motion sensors to assess and monitor medical and surgical management of parkinson disease.. World Neurosurg 2015;84(2):561-6.
    doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2015.03.024google scholar: lookup
  29. Lugade V, Fortune E, Morrow M, Kaufman K. Validity of using tri-axial accelerometers to measure human movement - part I: posture and movement detection.. Med Eng Phys 2014;36(2):169-76.
    doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2013.06.005google scholar: lookup
  30. Mathie MJ, Coster ACF, Lovell NH, Celler BG. Detection of daily physical activities using a triaxial accelerometer.. Med Biol Eng Comput 2003;41(3):296-301.
    doi: 10.1007/bf02348434google scholar: lookup
  31. Mathie MJ, Celler BG, Lovell NH, Coster ACF. Classification of basic daily movements using a triaxial accelerometer.. Med Biol Eng Comput 2004;42(5):679-87.
    doi: 10.1007/bf02347551google scholar: lookup
  32. Aghanavesi S, Bergquist F, Nyholm D, Senek M, Memedi M. Motion sensor-based assessment of Parkinson's disease motor symptoms during leg agility tests: results from levodopa challenge.. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 2020;24(1):111-9.
    doi: 10.1109/jbhi.2019.2898332google scholar: lookup
  33. Elliott KH, Vaillant ML, Kato A, Speakman JR, Ropert-Coudert Y. Accelerometry predicts daily energy expenditure in a bird with high activity levels.. Biol Lett 2013;9(1):20120919.
    doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2012.0919google scholar: lookup
  34. Fehlmann G, O'Riain MJ, Hopkins PW, O'Sullivan J, Holton MD, Shepard ELC. Identification of behaviours from accelerometer data in a wild social primate.. Anim Biotelemetry 2017;5(1):6.
    doi: 10.1186/s40317-017-0121-3google scholar: lookup
  35. Graf PM, Wilson RP, Qasem L, Hackländer K, Rosell F. The use of acceleration to code for animal behaviours; a case study in free-ranging eurasian beavers castor fiber.. PLoS One 2015;10(8):e0136751.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136751google scholar: lookup
  36. Leos-Barajas V, Photopoulou T, Langrock R, Patterson TA, Watanabe YY, Murgatroyd M. Analysis of animal accelerometer data using hidden markov models.. Methods Ecol Evol 2017;8(2):161-73.
    doi: 10.1111/2041-210x.12657google scholar: lookup
  37. den Uijl I, Gómez Álvarez CB, Bartram D, Dror Y, Holland R, Cook A. External validation of a collar-mounted triaxial accelerometer for second-by-second monitoring of eight behavioural states in dogs.. PLoS One 2017;12(11):e0188481.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188481google scholar: lookup
  38. Barwick J, Lamb D, Dobos R, Schneider D, Welch M, Trotter M. Predicting lameness in sheep activity using tri-axial acceleration signals.. Animals 2018;8(1):12.
    doi: 10.3390/ani8010012google scholar: lookup
  39. Gibbons J, Medrano-Galarza C, Marie de Passillé A, Rushen J. Lying laterality and the effect of icetag data loggers on lying behaviour of dairy cows.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2012;136(2):104-7.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2011.12.005google scholar: lookup
  40. Bachmann M, Wensch-Dorendorf M, Hoffmann G, Steinhöfel I, Bothendorf S, Kemper N. Pedometers as supervision tools for mares in the prepartal period.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2014;151:51-60.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2013.11.014google scholar: lookup
  41. Steinke SL, Montgomery JB, Barden JM. Accelerometry-based step count validation for horse movement analysis during stall confinement.. Front Vet Sci 2021;8(680):681213.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.681213google scholar: lookup
  42. Egan S, Brama PAJ, Goulding C, McKeown D, Kearney CM, McGrath D. The feasibility of equine field-based postural sway analysis using a single inertial sensor.. Sensors 2021;21(4):1286.
    doi: 10.3390/s21041286google scholar: lookup
  43. Trénel P, Jensen MB, Decker EL, Skjøth F. Quantifying and characterizing behavior in dairy calves using the icetag automatic recording device.. J Dairy Sci 2009;92(7):3397-401.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2009-2040google scholar: lookup
  44. Robert B, White BJ, Renter DG, Larson RL. Evaluation of three-dimensional accelerometers to monitor and classify behavior patterns in cattle.. Comput Electron Agric 2009;67(1):80-4.
    doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2009.03.002google scholar: lookup
  45. White BJ, Coetzee JF, Renter DG, Babcock AH, Thomson DU, Andresen D. Evaluation of two-dimensional accelerometers to monitor behavior of beef calves after castration.. Am J Vet Res 2008;69(8):1005-12.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.69.8.1005google scholar: lookup
  46. Whiteside D, Cant O, Connolly M, Reid M. Monitoring hitting load in tennis using inertial sensors and machine learning.. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2017;12(9):1212-7.
    doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2016-0683google scholar: lookup
  47. Ungar ED, Nevo Y, Baram H, Arieli A. Evaluation of the icetag leg sensor and its derivative models to predict behaviour, using beef cattle on rangeland.. J Neurosci Methods 2018;300:127-37.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2017.06.001google scholar: lookup
  48. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 15.. 2017.
  49. Martiskainen P, Järvinen M, Skön J-P, Tiirikainen J, Kolehmainen M, Mononen J. Cow behaviour pattern recognition using a three-dimensional accelerometer and support vector machines.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2009;119(1):32-8.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2009.03.005google scholar: lookup
  50. Gabadinho A, Ritschard G, Müller NS, Studer M. Analyzing and visualizing state sequences in R with TraMineR.. J Stat Softw 2011;40(4):1-37.
    doi: 10.18637/jss.v040.i04google scholar: lookup
  51. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing.. .
  52. Chung ELT, Khairuddin NH, Azizan TRPT, Adamu L. Sleeping patterns of horses in selected local horse stables in Malaysia.. J Vet Behav 2018;26:1-4.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2018.03.014google scholar: lookup
  53. Ledgerwood DN, Winckler C, Tucker CB. Evaluation of data loggers, sampling intervals, and editing techniques for measuring the lying behavior of dairy cattle.. J Dairy Sci 2010;93(11):5129-39.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2009-2945google scholar: lookup
  54. DuBois C, Zakrajsek E, Haley DB, Merkies K. Validation of triaxial accelerometers to measure the lying behaviour of adult domestic horses.. Animal 2015;9(1):110-4.
    doi: 10.1017/s175173111400247xgoogle scholar: lookup
  55. Eerdekens A, Deruyck M, Fontaine J, Martens L, Poorter ED, Joseph W. Automatic equine activity detection by convolutional neural networks using accelerometer data.. Comput Electron Agric 2020;168:168105139.
    doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2019.105139google scholar: lookup
  56. Thompson CJ, Luck LM, Keshwani J, Pitla SK, Karr LK. Location on the body of a wearable accelerometer affects accuracy of data for identifying equine gaits.. J Equine Vet 2018;63:1-7.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2017.12.002google scholar: lookup
  57. González LA, Bishop-Hurley GJ, Handcock RN, Crossman C. Behavioral classification of data from collars containing motion sensors in grazing cattle.. Comput Electron Agric 2015;110:91-102.
    doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2014.10.018google scholar: lookup
  58. Hämäläinen WM, Martiskainen P, Järvinen M, Skön J-P, Tiirikainen J, Kolehmainen M. Computational challenges in deriving dairy cows' action patterns from accelerometer data.. 2010;18.
  59. Smith D, Rahman A, Bishop-Hurley GJ, Hills J, Shahriar S, Henry D. Behavior classification of cows fitted with motion collars: decomposing multi-class classification into a set of binary problems.. Comput Electron Agric 2016;131:40-50.
    doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2016.10.006google scholar: lookup
  60. Sweet AL. Temporal discrimination by the human eye.. Am J Psychol 1953;66:185-98.
    doi: 10.2307/1418725google scholar: lookup
  61. Ishihara A, Bertone AL, Rajala-Schultz PJ. Association between subjective lameness grade and kinetic gait parameters in horses with experimentally induced forelimb lameness.. Am J Vet Res 2005;66(10):1805-15.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.2005.66.1805google scholar: lookup
  62. McCracken MJ, Kramer J, Keegan KG, Lopes M, Wilson DA, Reed SK. Comparison of an inertial sensor system of lameness quantification with subjective lameness evaluation.. Equine Vet J 2012;44(6):652-6.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2012.00571.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  63. Clayton HM, Nauwelaerts S. Is a single force plate adequate for stabilographic analysis in horses?. Equine Vet J 2012;44(5):550-3.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2011.00458.xgoogle scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.