Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T05:01:08.930Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of two methods of assessing dairy cow body condition score

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2009

Jeffrey M Bewley ,
Robert E Boyce ,
David J Roberts ,
Michael P Coffey  and
Michael M Schutz
Jeffrey M Bewley*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, 125 South Russell Street, West Lafayette, IN47907
Robert E Boyce
Affiliation:
IceRobotics Ltd., Logan Building, Roslin BioCentre, Roslin, MidlothianEH25 9TT, Scotland, UK
David J Roberts
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems Group, Scottish Agricultural College, Crichton Royal Farm, Dairy Services Unit, Midpark House, Bankend Road, Dumfries, DG1 4SZ, Scotland, UK
Michael P Coffey
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems Group, Scottish Agricultural College, Sir Steven Watson Building, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian, EH26 0PH, Scotland, UK
Michael M Schutz
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Purdue University, 125 South Russell Street, West Lafayette, IN47907
*
†For correspondence; e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two body condition scoring systems were compared for assessing body condition of cows at the Scottish Agricultural College's Crichton Royal Farm. The weekly body condition scores (BCS) were collected for a period of 12 weeks (5 September–21 November). Scores were obtained using the primary systems utilized within the UK and USA. The USBCS were obtained by the same evaluator each week, while the UKBCS were obtained by two different evaluators alternating between weeks. Paired scores (n=2088) between the two systems within week were moderately correlated (r=0·75, P<0·0001). Regression equations to convert scores between the two systems were created using the GLM procedure of SAS (SAS Institute Inc., Cary NC, USA). The simple GLM models to convert from UK to US scores and US to UK scores were USBCS=1·182+0·816 * UKBCS (R2=0·56) and UKBCS=0·131+0·681 (R2=0·56), respectively. These equations may be used to interpret scores within the literature obtained using these two BCS systems, although they must be used with caution.

Keywords

Body condition scoringinternational comparison
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 77 , Issue 1 , February 2010 , pp. 95 - 98
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bewley, JM, Peacock, AM, Lewis, O, Boyce, RE, Roberts, DJ, Coffey, MP, Kenyon, SJ & Schutz, MM 2008 Potential for estimation of body condition scores in dairy cattle using digital images. Journal of Dairy Science 91 3439–3453CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edmonson, AJ, Lean, IJ, Weaver, LD, Farver, T & Webster, G 1989 A body condition scoring chart for Holstein dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 72 68–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, JO, Galligan, DT & Thomsen, N 1994 Principal descriptors of body condition score in Holstein cows. Journal of Dairy Science 77 2695–2703CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lowman, BG, Scott, NA & Somerville, SH 1976 Condition scoring of cattle. In: East of Scotland College of Agriculture, Edinburgh, Scotland.Google Scholar
Mulvany, P 1977 Dairy cow condition scoring. In: National Institute for Research in Dairying Paper No 4468, Shinfield, Reading, UK.Google Scholar
Roche, JR, Dillon, PG, Stockdale, CR, Baumgard, LH & VanBaale, MJ 2004 Relationships among international body condition scoring systems. Journal of Dairy Science 87 3076–3079CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed