Automated monitoring of resting in dogs

Abstract Dogs may be deprived of adequate rest in certain environments such as noisy shelters or kennels. Accelerometers have been used to assess gross activity in dogs, but do not appear to distinguish simple inactivity from the prone, head-down recumbency that typifies sustained rest in the species. We tested the use of collar-mounted data loggers that record changes in tilt in 3 dimensions for monitoring head-down recumbency. Twelve dogs were studied using both video-recording and data loggers for a total of 36 h, with behaviour recorded every 10 s. From the video-recordings, dogs were coded as “resting” during a given minute if they were in head-down recumbency on all six observations in the minute, or “active” otherwise. With the criterion that rest was indicated when mean tilt change in a minute was ≤10°, the data loggers correctly identified active and resting minutes in 87 ± 2 per cent (mean ± SE) of minutes recorded. Thresholds of 8 and 12° were nearly as accurate whereas the other thresholds tested (2, 4, 6 and 14°) were less accurate. For two dogs the accuracy was lower (70 and 79%) because their unusual restless movements while recumbent often exceeded the 10° threshold. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis also showed the best performance (Sensitivity 0.88, Specificity 0.81) at a 10° threshold. We conclude that the tilt feature of the collar-mounted data loggers provides a reasonably accurate and efficient means of identifying head-down recumbency in domestic dogs but accuracy is reduced in dogs that are unusually restless while recumbent.

[1]  David G. Thomas,et al.  Quantification of activity in domestic cats (Felis catus) by accelerometry , 2015 .

[2]  Stewart Trost,et al.  Accelerometer validity and placement for detection of changes in physical activity in dogs under controlled conditions on a treadmill. , 2012, Research in veterinary science.

[3]  M. Hennessy,et al.  Plasma Cortisol Levels of Dogs at a County Animal Shelter , 1997, Physiology & Behavior.

[4]  Katherine A. Houpt,et al.  Domestic Animal Behavior for Veterinarians and Animal Scientists , 1991 .

[5]  Andreas Buerkert,et al.  Use of a tri-axial accelerometer for automated recording and classification of goats' grazing behaviour , 2009 .

[6]  S. Martin,et al.  Veterinary Epidemiologic Research , 2009 .

[7]  Paul D. McGreevy,et al.  A comparison of uniaxial and triaxial accelerometers for the assessment of physical activity in dogs , 2014 .

[8]  Catrine Tudor-Locke,et al.  Use of pedometers to measure physical activity in dogs. , 2005, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.

[9]  Kathryn E Michel,et al.  Determination and application of cut points for accelerometer-based activity counts of activities with differing intensity in pet dogs. , 2011, American journal of veterinary research.

[10]  Tom Fawcett,et al.  An introduction to ROC analysis , 2006, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[11]  T. Vicsek,et al.  Identification of Behaviour in Freely Moving Dogs (Canis familiaris) Using Inertial Sensors , 2013, PloS one.

[12]  B. Keene,et al.  Evaluation of an accelerometer for at-home monitoring of spontaneous activity in dogs. , 2007, American journal of veterinary research.

[13]  J. Reilly,et al.  Validity, practical utility and reliability of Actigraph accelerometry for the measurement of habitual physical activity in dogs. , 2011, The Journal of small animal practice.

[14]  D M Weary,et al.  Lying behavior: assessing within- and between-herd variation in free-stall-housed dairy cows. , 2009, Journal of dairy science.