Staff Publications

Staff Publications

  • external user (warningwarning)
  • Log in as
  • language uk
  • About

    'Staff publications' is the digital repository of Wageningen University & Research

    'Staff publications' contains references to publications authored by Wageningen University staff from 1976 onward.

    Publications authored by the staff of the Research Institutes are available from 1995 onwards.

    Full text documents are added when available. The database is updated daily and currently holds about 240,000 items, of which 72,000 in open access.

    We have a manual that explains all the features 

Record number 529282
Title Traditional mixed linear modelling versus modern machine learning to estimate cow individual feed intake
Author(s) Kamphuis, C.; Riel, J.W. van; Veerkamp, R.F.; Mol, R.M. de
Source In: Precision Livestock Farming '17. - - p. 366 - 376.
Event 8th European Conference on Precision Livestock Farming, Nantes, 2017-09-12/2017-09-14
Department(s) LR - Animal Breeding & Genomics
LR - Animal Behaviour & Welfare
Publication type Contribution in proceedings
Publication year 2017
Keyword(s) precision feeding - dairy cows - Big Data - prediction - machine learning
Abstract Three modelling approaches were used to estimate cow individual feed intake
(FI) using feeding trial data from a research farm, including weekly recordings
of milk production and composition, live-weight, parity, and total FI.
Additionally, weather data (temperature, humidity) were retrieved from the
Dutch National Weather Service (KNMI). The 2014 data (245 cows; 277
parities) were used for model development. The first model (M1) applied an
existing formula to estimate energy requirement using parity, fat and protein
corrected milk, and live-weight, and assumed this requirement to be equal to
energy intake and thus FI. The second model used ‘traditional’ Mixed Linear
Regression, first using the same variables as in M1 as fixed effects (MLR1), and
then by adding weather data (MLR2). The third model applied Boosted
Regression Tree, a ‘modern’ machine learning technique, again once with the
same variables as M1 (BRT1), and once with weather information added
(BRT2). All models were validated on 2015 data (155 cows; 165 parities) using
correlation between estimated and actual FI to evaluate performance. Both
MLRs had very high correlations (0.91) between actual and estimated FI on 2014
data, much higher than 0.46 for M1, and 0.73 for both BRTs. When validated on
2015 data, correlations dropped to 0.71 for MLR1 and 0.72 for MLR2, and
increased to 0.71 for M1 and 0.76 for both BRTs. FI estimated by BRT1 was, on
average, 0.35kg less (range: -7.61 – 13.32kg) than actual FI compared to 0.52kg
less (range: -11.67 – 19.87kg) for M1. Adding weather data did not improve FI
There are no comments yet. You can post the first one!
Post a comment
Please log in to use this service. Login as Wageningen University & Research user or guest user in upper right hand corner of this page.