Álvaro García
Dairy farming continually seeks ways to improve efficiency and productivity, while enhancing animal well-being. The adoption of imaging technology in recent times has emerged as a viable solution to address these challenges. In this article, we examine the practical applications and advantages for dairy farms analyzing a cow from a commercial farm that uses a 3D camera system. When these cameras are strategically placed (e.g., at the entrance or exit of the parlor), they detect body condition, weight, height, and lameness of each cow that walks by it. Furthermore, farmers can customize the camera to provide alerts when such animal’s parameters deviate from normal. The use of these alerts within the system proves to be an invaluable feature, providing real-time notifications and insights tailored to the farm owner’s preferences.
The alert system
The first thing the operator sees when accessing the 3D software in the computer is a summary of the herd like in figure 1. It specifies the number of cows milked on the farm, the average production, and the total milk produced.
In the opening page the operator also has a graphic summary of the herd which shows an analysis of the body condition and milk production of all cows. Both graphs show the herd is in excellent body condition, and milk production on average surpasses expectations.
Once the alert system has been set according to the farm specifications and when opening the application, the number of specific alerts are displayed at the top like in Figure 1. They showcase the number of cows fitting the “alerts” criteria (e.g. deviation from expected production or BCS or other), in this case 213, and how many of them are considered severe (50). Upon clicking the red exclamation mark to the top left, the list of cows that have entered the alert list shows up on the screen. The ones that require immediate attention will be displayed in red, while the rest, which are less urgent but still within the alert parameters set by the user, will be highlighted in yellow.
Moving down the list let us examine for example cow number 961 of the group of early lactation that is highlighted in red, her BCS is consistently at 2.8 (green arrow pointing to the right), and she is showing sudden daily milk losses amounting to – $17.45. To review her lactation performance one can click on her farm number in the alert list (first column to the left in Figure 2) or access her report directly by searching her farm number. To be able to do that one has to go to the cow icon (red circle) in figure 2 and when prompted type her number.
The graph shows she reached peak milk yield at 40 days in milk with 140 pounds, followed by a decline to 128 pounds shortly thereafter. Except for a couple of days of higher production around 75 days in milk, she consistently maintained an excellent production of around 120 pounds of milk per day thereafter, until day 137 in milk when she dropped dramatically.
With regards to her Body Condition Score (BCS), she started the lactation at around 3.7, decreasing by one point to 2.7 within approximately three weeks of lactation (Figure 5).
This sudden decline in body condition in such a short period (3 weeks) was remarkable even for a high-producing dairy cow. It led to negative energy balance (NEB), which prompted the mobilization of body fat resulting in the loss of BCS. By around 32 days in milk, she reached the highest fat mobilization, maintaining a BCS in the high 2’s until approximately 83 days in milk. Subsequently, she began to regain condition, which resulted in her first visible signs of heat and insemination on day 91, followed by another heat cycle and insemination at 114 days in milk. The drastic drop in BCS at the beginning of her lactation is characteristic of genetically superior dairy cows and indicates challenges to keep up with nutrient demands for production. Metabolic challenges such as subclinical ketosis that oftentimes result from the NEB and subsequent fat mobilization likely delayed the onset of estrus. Despite these challenges, she maintained milk production close to 20 pounds above predicted (Figure 4).
The culprit
In the cow report, typically, there’s a single row containing various parameters extending horizontally. To simplify presentation in this article, this row was divided into three sections and consolidated into one image (Figure 6). Cow 961, a mature fourth lactation cow, currently holds a BCS of 2.85. Notably, between days 80 and 110 of lactation, she experienced a 0.5-point increase in BCS, from 2.86 to 3.37, prompting her first apparent heat and insemination on day 91 and a subsequent insemination on day 114, resulting in confirmed pregnancy later. Within this section, operators can view the dorsal image captured by the 3D camera and the corresponding “cloud image,” allowing for a comprehensive assessment of BCS estimation from various angles (Figure 7). One parameter however stands out in this section: a notable change by one point (-1.0) in her locomotion score, which can be observed in the gray box at the top right of Figure 6. Locomotion scoring is used in dairies to evaluate the gait of cows; a score of 1 indicates a normal gait with no signs of lameness, while a score of 5 represents severe lameness or an inability to walk. Scores in between reflect degrees of lameness, from mild discomfort to significant impairment. This system helps farmers identify lameness issues early, implement appropriate management practices, and ensure the overall health and well-being of the herd.
Changes in locomotion score, like that observed in cow 961, significantly affect well-being and milk production. It is possible that a strong enough trauma induced her lameness without any predisposing condition, and her delayed onset of estrus was only the result of the NEB. Another possibility is that she initially scored 2 or higher in lameness and it went unnoticed until a sudden trauma worsened it by 1 point, as detected by the 3D camera. Her initial reproduction difficulties suggest issues that could have likely been worsened by her loss in BCS. Subclinical ketosis can result from fat mobilization predisposing to lameness by weakening immunity, impairing hoof health, and causing muscle weakness. Additionally, it disrupts hoof horn formation, elevating susceptibility to hoof problems. Whichever the reason, with or without predisposing conditions, the result was that a sudden trauma resulted in lameness and loss of milk production. Body condition score was also affected by the sudden onset of lameness; however, the changes were, at least initially, not as dramatic as the milk production losses. Nevertheless, they remained significant over time, dropping from 3.1 to 2.85 in approximately 10 days (Figure 5). One can access this graph by clicking on the little graph shown in BCS section shown in Figure 2.
Implications
Even minor trauma in a predisposed hoof can rapidly worsen existing slight lameness significantly, aggravating inflammation and disrupting blood flow and tissue integrity, thus exacerbating the condition. Overall, a sudden increase in lameness by 1 point within such a short timeframe indicates a serious issue that demands prompt veterinary intervention and comprehensive management to alleviate pain, promote healing, and prevent further deterioration of the cow’s condition.
The case of cow 961 underscores the critical need for individualized monitoring and management in dairy farming. By leveraging advanced imaging technology and comprehensive management practices, farmers can effectively address the diverse factors influencing cow health and productivity. This proactive approach not only optimizes the performance of individual cows like 961 but also ensures the overall well-being and productivity of an entire herd. Continued investment in innovative monitoring tools and strategic management strategies will be essential for sustaining the success and resilience of dairy operations worldwide.
© 2025 Dellait Knowledge Center. All Rights Reserved.
