Classification of Daily Body Weight Gains in Beef Calves Using Decision Trees, Artificial Neural Networks, and Logistic Regression

Simple Summary In the management of beef cattle, it can be useful to divide individuals based on a specific trait value (below and above average). This in turn allows for focusing on a larger group of animals with the aim of improving, e.g., their growth rate or obtaining a more uniform group in terms of a given trait. Classifying calves into less (below average) and more (above average) efficient growth creates an opportunity for producers to direct their efforts towards the “worse” animals and improve their performance through adjustments in nutrition, animal grouping, or reorganization of work. In this study, models were developed based on data from a beef farm. They were used to classify beef calves into poorer and better growth groups. In order to obtain more input data, predictions were made for the third calf. Among the analyzed models, random forest was the most effective. The most significant factors influencing daily body weight gains were also identified and discussed in the present study. The results demonstrate that machine learning models can be useful for classifying calves based on their growth rates. However, it is necessary to maintain proper breeding documentation from which the predictors can be obtained. Abstract The aim of the present study was to compare the predictive performance of decision trees, artificial neural networks, and logistic regression used for the classification of daily body weight gains in beef calves. A total of 680 pure-breed Simmental and 373 Limousin cows from the largest farm in the West Pomeranian Province, whose calves were fattened between 2014 and 2016, were included in the study. Pre-weaning daily body weight gains were divided into two categories: A—equal to or lower than the weighted mean for each breed and sex and B—higher than the mean. Models were developed separately for each breed. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve on a test set for the best model (random forest) were 0.83, 0.67, 0.76, and 0.82 and 0.68, 0.86, 0.78, and 0.81 for the Limousin and Simmental breeds, respectively. The most important predictors were daily weight gains of the dam when she was a calf, daily weight gains of the first calf, sex of the third calf, milk yield at first lactation, birth weight of the third calf, dam birth weight, dam hip height, and second calving season. The selected machine learning models can be used quite effectively for the classification of calves based on their daily weight gains.

[1]  L. Vandaele,et al.  Diagnostic milk biomarkers for predicting the metabolic health status of dairy cattle during early lactation. , 2022, Journal of dairy science.

[2]  V. Kober,et al.  Comparative analysis of machine learning algorithms for predicting live weight of Hereford cows , 2022, Comput. Electron. Agric..

[3]  R. Chaisricharoen,et al.  The IoT-based weighing system for growth monitoring and evaluation of fattening process in beef cattle farm , 2022, 2022 Joint International Conference on Digital Arts, Media and Technology with ECTI Northern Section Conference on Electrical, Electronics, Computer and Telecommunications Engineering (ECTI DAMT & NCON).

[4]  J. Archer,et al.  Genetic Parameters for Maternal Performance Traits in Commercially Farmed New Zealand Beef Cattle , 2021, Animals : an open access journal from MDPI.

[5]  M. Haskell,et al.  Early prediction of respiratory disease in preweaning dairy calves using feeding and activity behaviors. , 2021, Journal of dairy science.

[6]  D. Tulpan,et al.  ASAS-NANP SYMPOSIUM: Applications of machine learning for livestock body weight prediction from digital images , 2021, Journal of animal science.

[7]  M. Chizzotti,et al.  Development of equations to predict carcass weight, empty body gain, and retained energy of Zebu beef cattle. , 2020, Animal : an international journal of animal bioscience.

[8]  L. Han,et al.  Relationship of body weight at first calving with milk yield and herd life. , 2020, Journal of dairy science.

[9]  M. Marufuzzaman,et al.  Predicting dairy cattle heat stress using machine learning techniques. , 2020, Journal of dairy science.

[10]  Suresh Neethirajan The role of sensors, big data and machine learning in modern animal farming , 2020 .

[11]  Hemerson Pistori,et al.  Deep Learning Techniques for Beef Cattle Body Weight Prediction , 2020, 2020 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN).

[12]  Marinka Zitnik,et al.  Interpretability of machine learning‐based prediction models in healthcare , 2020, WIREs Data Mining Knowl. Discov..

[13]  G. Rosa,et al.  Automated computer vision system to predict body weight and average daily gain in beef cattle during growing and finishing phases , 2020 .

[14]  D. Chicco,et al.  The advantages of the Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC) over F1 score and accuracy in binary classification evaluation , 2020, BMC Genomics.

[15]  Amalia Luque,et al.  The impact of class imbalance in classification performance metrics based on the binary confusion matrix , 2019, Pattern Recognit..

[16]  Hyeon Tae Kim,et al.  Prediction of average daily gain of swine based on machine learning , 2019, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst..

[17]  E. Eyduran,et al.  Comparing Predictive Performances of MARS and CHAID Algorithms for Defining Factors Affecting Final Fattening Live Weight in Cultural Beef Cattle Enterprises , 2018, Pakistan Journal of Zoology.

[18]  Patrizia Busato,et al.  Machine Learning in Agriculture: A Review , 2018, Sensors.

[19]  B J White,et al.  BIG DATA ANALYTICS AND PRECISION ANIMAL AGRICULTURE SYMPOSIUM: Data to decisions. , 2018, Journal of animal science.

[20]  R. Pilarczyk,et al.  Comparison of calf rearing results and nursing cow performance in various beef breeds managed under the same conditions in north-western Poland , 2018 .

[21]  T. Yin,et al.  Genetic parameters for body weight from birth to calving and associations between weights with test-day, health, and female fertility traits. , 2017, Journal of dairy science.

[22]  Yufei Xia,et al.  A boosted decision tree approach using Bayesian hyper-parameter optimization for credit scoring , 2017, Expert Syst. Appl..

[23]  Sabri Boughorbel,et al.  Optimal classifier for imbalanced data using Matthews Correlation Coefficient metric , 2017, PloS one.

[24]  Sergio José Ibáñez,et al.  THE USE OF CLASSIFICATION AND REGRESSION TREE WHEN CLASSIFYING WINNING AND LOSING BASKETBALL TEAMS , 2017 .

[25]  B. Pradhan,et al.  A comparative study of logistic model tree, random forest, and classification and regression tree models for spatial prediction of landslide susceptibility , 2017 .

[26]  Senol Celik,et al.  Comparison of the predictive capabilities of several data mining algorithms and multiple linear regression in the prediction of body weight by means of body measurements in the indigenous Beetal goat of Pakistan. , 2017 .

[27]  E. Mahjoubi,et al.  Effects of dam parity and pre-weaning average daily gain of Holstein calves on future milk production. , 2016, The Journal of dairy research.

[28]  A. Sadeghi-Sefidmazgi,et al.  Effect of calf birth weight on milk production of Holstein dairy cattle in desert climate , 2016 .

[29]  Wei-Yin Loh,et al.  Classification and regression trees , 2011, WIREs Data Mining Knowl. Discov..

[30]  G. Mendoza,et al.  A simulation model to predict body weight gain in lambs fed high-grain diets , 2015 .

[31]  David Page,et al.  Prediction of insemination outcomes in Holstein dairy cattle using alternative machine learning algorithms. , 2014, Journal of dairy science.

[32]  D. Piwczyński,et al.  Statistical modeling of calving ease and stillbirths in dairy cattle using the classification tree technique , 2013 .

[33]  Anna K. Johnson,et al.  Using Classification Trees to Detect Lameness in Sows , 2013 .

[34]  Ralph B D'Agostino,et al.  Misuse of DeLong test to compare AUCs for nested models , 2012, Statistics in medicine.

[35]  J. K. Bertrand,et al.  Genotype by region and season interactions on weaning weight in United States Angus cattle. , 2012, Journal of animal science.

[36]  R. Everett,et al.  Preweaning milk replacer intake and effects on long-term productivity of dairy calves. , 2012, Journal of dairy science.

[37]  J. Aerts,et al.  Dynamic algorithms of biomarkers for monitoring infection/inflammation processes in pigs , 2011 .

[38]  H Hogeveen,et al.  Detection of clinical mastitis with sensor data from automatic milking systems is improved by using decision-tree induction. , 2010, Journal of dairy science.

[39]  Evgeny A. Antipov,et al.  Applying CHAID for logistic regression diagnostics and classification accuracy improvement , 2009 .

[40]  Joachim Krieter,et al.  Mastitis and lameness detection in dairy cows by application of fuzzy logic , 2009 .

[41]  D. Pfeiffer,et al.  Use of data mining techniques to investigate disease risk classification as a proxy for compromised biosecurity of cattle herds in Wales , 2008, BMC veterinary research.

[42]  Q. Meng,et al.  Evaluation of dry matter intake and daily weight gain predictions of the Cornell Net Carbohydrate and Protein System with local breeds of beef cattle in China , 2008 .

[43]  Joydeep Ghosh,et al.  A framework for simultaneous co-clustering and learning from complex data , 2007, KDD '07.

[44]  M Kujala,et al.  A probabilistic neural network model for lameness detection. , 2007, Journal of dairy science.

[45]  S. Arjona,et al.  A simulation model to predict body weight gain in growing steers grazing tropical pastures , 2006 .

[46]  Wagner A. Kamakura,et al.  Defection Detection: Measuring and Understanding the Predictive Accuracy of Customer Churn Models , 2006 .

[47]  N. A. Janovick,et al.  Productivity and hay requirements of beef cattle in a Midwestern year-round grazing system. , 2004, Journal of animal science.

[48]  Bruce Ratner,et al.  Statistical Modeling and Analysis for Database Marketing , 2004 .

[49]  Bruce Ratner,et al.  Statistical Modeling and Analysis for Database Marketing: Effective Techniques for Mining Big Data , 2003 .

[50]  S. Prasher,et al.  Classification of hyperspectral data by decision trees and artificial neural networks to identify weed stress and nitrogen status of corn , 2003 .

[51]  D. Villalba,et al.  Factors affecting animal performance during the grazing season in a mountain cattle production system. , 2002, Journal of animal science.

[52]  R. Lacroix,et al.  Investigation into the production and conformation traits associated with clinical mastitis using artificial neural networks. , 2000 .

[53]  Nissan Levin,et al.  Continuous Predictive Modeling—A Comparative Analysis , 1998 .

[54]  J. Basarab,et al.  The efficacy of predicting dystocia in yearling beef heifers: II. Using discriminant analysis. , 1993, Journal of animal science.

[55]  D. Notter,et al.  Techniques for estimation of milk yield in beef cows and relationships of milk yield to calf weight gain and postpartum reproduction. , 1990, Journal of animal science.

[56]  S. Martin,et al.  A comparison of discriminant analysis and logistic regression for the prediction of coliform mastitis in dairy cows. , 1987, Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire.

[57]  J. Magidson Some Common Pitfalls in Causal Analysis of Categorical Data , 1982 .

[58]  M. Kissi,et al.  Classification of Body Weight in Beef Cattle via Machine Learning Methods: A Review , 2021, EUSPN/ICTH.

[59]  Masoud Monjezi,et al.  Classification and regression tree technique in estimating peak particle velocity caused by blasting , 2016, Engineering with Computers.

[60]  H. Küçükönder,et al.  Application of Classification Tree Method to Determine Factors Affecting Fertility in Japanese quail Eggs , 2014 .

[61]  Daniel Zaborski,et al.  Classification of Daily Body Weight Gains in Beef Cattle via Neural Networks and Decision Trees , 2014 .

[62]  R. Lacroix,et al.  Induction and evaluation of decision trees for lactation curve analysis , 2003 .