Monitoring ammonia as part of flock management in poultry husbandry systems

In der Diskussion um umwelt- und tiergerechte Haltungsverfahren steht insbesondere die Nutzgeflügelhaltung im Fokus. Mit der zunehmenden Entwicklung von sensorgestützten Technologien sind mit dem DOL 53 sowie dem Extox-Stable zwei elektrochemische Ammoniaksensoren auf den Markt gekommen, welche eine kontinuierliche Messung der NH3-Konzentration in der Stallluft ermöglichen. Dadurch kann nicht nur frühzeitig im Management zur Sicherstellung tiergerechter Haltungssysteme agiert werden, sollten die Sensoren Schwellenwerte aufzeigen, sondern auch durch eine kontinuierliche Anwendung NH3-reduzierender Maßnahmen die Ammoniakemissionen in der Nutzgeflügelhaltung vermindert werden. Voraussetzung ist jedoch die richtige Anwendung und regelmäßige Überprüfung der Sensoren mittels Prüfstandard.Poultry farming is required to meet the increasing demands regarding animal welfare, environmental protection and sustainability. Digital and smart techniques are increasingly used in poultry husbandry to fulfil these requirements. As an example to monitor and evaluate barn climate continuously, data of two sensors (DOL 53 and Extox-Stable) were evaluated on-farm during a broiler fattening cycle. The study showed that both sensors may be able to successively and validly detect ammonia emissions over the course of fattening cycle and thus may be implemented in proactive flock management strategies and tools

Foot Pad Health as Part of On-Farm-Monitoring in Turkey Flocks

Currently, there is no consistent approach to on-farm and post-mortem foot pad (FP) assessment in turkey husbandry in sampling of both feet, sample sizes of birds and scoring schemes during the production period. Therefore, in a field study, 11,400 turkeys, i.e., 22,800 feet, were macroscopically scored at 4-week intervals, 60 birds per flock per date, in accordance with the scale system of Hocking et al. (1). Spearman's rho was calculated between the foot pad dermatitis (FPD) score of both feet of an individual turkey. Sample size for FPD monitoring was calculated for several flock sizes, considering expected FPD prevalence and the error and confidence level (α = 0.01, 0.05, 0.1). To compare macroscopic to histological findings, ten excised FPs were histopathologically investigated by hematoxylin & eosin staining. To align manual macroscopic FPD evaluations with a technical system, 20 photographic images of FPD were measured using the ImageJ program. The scores of both feet of an individual turkey correlated between r = 0.252 and r = 1.000. Thus, both feet of a bird should be monitored, while the worse foot should be evaluated. As an exemplary sample size for on-farm FPD assessment, 77 turkey poults were calculated in a flock of 4,000 birds with an expected FPD prevalence of 40% and α = 0.1. The sample size of monitored birds within a flock should differ and depend on flock size and expected FPD prevalence. Histopathological findings showed normal and non-affected structures of a macroscopic Score 0 and a moderate ulcer of the macroscopic Score 1 and Score 2. The applied assessment scheme should distinguish first alterations and scar tissue as separate scores to differentiate the need for management intervention vs. the success of management measures that were already implemented. FPD affected areas were given lower Scores and assessed to be healthier when evaluated by an image system, compared to a manual assessment. Furthermore, with regard to an increase in camera-based assessments, the boundary of the metatarsal pad needs to be clarified. In conclusion, a new scoring system is required, as the size of the FP cannot be clearly defined and different tissue textures, as well as valid sample sizes are not currently sufficiently considered

Can Livestock Farming Benefit from Industry 4.0 Technology? Evidence from Recent Study

The term ”Agriculture 4.0” emerged from the term “Industry 4.0” like amany other “4.0” terms. However, are Industry 4.0 technologies and concepts really applicable to agriculture? Are the benefits that Industry 4.0 brings to industrial use cases transferable to livestock farming? This paper tries to answer this question for the three dominant sectors of livestock farming in Central Europe and Germany: Poultry, pig fattening, and dairy farming. These sectors are analyzed along with the eight most relevant Industry 4.0 benefits. The results show that only part of the Industry 4.0 benefits are relevant for livestock farming in a similar manner as in industrial production. Due to basic differences between industrial and livestock farming use cases, some of the benefits must be adapted. The presence of individual living animals and the strong environmental impact of livestock farming affect the role of digital individualization and demand orientation. The position of livestock farming within the value chain minimizes the need for flexibilization. The introduction and adoption of Industry 4.0 concepts and technologies may contribute significantly to transforming agriculture into something that may be called Agriculture 4.0. Technologies are indispensable for this development step, but vocational education and open-mindedness of farmers towards Industry 4.0 is essential as well

One, two, three: portable sample size in agricultural research

Determination of sample size (the number of replications) is a key step in the design of an observational study or randomized experiment. Statistical procedures for this purpose are readily available. Their treatment in textbooks is often somewhat marginal, however, and frequently the focus is on just one particular method of inference (significance test, confidence interval). Here, we provide a unified review of approaches and explain their close interrelationships, emphasizing that all approaches rely on the standard error of the quantity of interest, most often a pairwise difference of two means. The focus is on methods that are easy to compute, even without a computer. Our main recommendation based on standard errors is summarized as what we call the 1-2-3 rule for a difference of two treatment means

Can Livestock Farming Benefit from Industry 4.0 Technology? Evidence from Recent Study

The term ”Agriculture 4.0” emerged from the term “Industry 4.0” like amany other “4.0” terms. However, are Industry 4.0 technologies and concepts really applicable to agriculture? Are the benefits that Industry 4.0 brings to industrial use cases transferable to livestock farming? This paper tries to answer this question for the three dominant sectors of livestock farming in Central Europe and Germany: Poultry, pig fattening, and dairy farming. These sectors are analyzed along with the eight most relevant Industry 4.0 benefits. The results show that only part of the Industry 4.0 benefits are relevant for livestock farming in a similar manner as in industrial production. Due to basic differences between industrial and livestock farming use cases, some of the benefits must be adapted. The presence of individual living animals and the strong environmental impact of livestock farming affect the role of digital individualization and demand orientation. The position of livestock farming within the value chain minimizes the need for flexibilization. The introduction and adoption of Industry 4.0 concepts and technologies may contribute significantly to transforming agriculture into something that may be called Agriculture 4.0. Technologies are indispensable for this development step, but vocational education and open-mindedness of farmers towards Industry 4.0 is essential as well