An Imperative Role of Digitalization in Monitoring Cattle Health for Sustainability
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- We discussed the different diseases that affect the cattle animal on the dairy farm.
- The fundamental notion of digital technologies, as well as the significance of these technologies for cattle health, are presented in detail.
- A detailed discussion on hardware devices and prototypes that are implemented in the previous studies for monitoring cattle health.
- Finally, the article presents a detailed discussion and suggested significant recommendations that can be applied in the future.
2. Overview of Diseases in Cattle
3. Overview of Digital Technologies
- (a)
- Internet of Things (IoT)
- (b)
- Artificial Intelligence
- (c)
- Machine learning
- (d)
- Cloud Computing
- (e)
- Edge Computing
- (f)
- Fog Computing
- (g)
- Robotics
- (h)
- Drones
- (i)
- Bigdata
- (j)
- Blockchain
- (k)
- Robotic Process Automation
4. Devices and Prototype for Cattle Health Monitoring
5. Discussion& Recommendations
- The health monitoring platform based on the IoT and AI techniques is implemented in previous studies. For real-time monitoring of physiological parameters such as heart rate, body temperature, and rumination with surrounding temperature [62]. Various sensors mounted on the bodies of animals provide information about their health status, which users can easily access via the internet. This will aid in analyzing the cattle movement and determining whether the cattle are infected or not based on their average daily motion.
- The researchers must emphasize building a hybrid model capable of detecting multiple diseases based on real-time data because for every type of disease, the trained dataset, and input attributes are different. In addition to this, the real-time data from the IoT sensors need to be carried out for building the real-time dataset. This indeed assists to increase the accuracy of the model for applying the AI model to real-time data.
- The widespread adoption of sensors and IoT communication protocols is required to accelerate the implementation of digital networks in cattle for real-time monitoring and visualization [63]. Furthermore, prediction and intelligent analytics are only attainable when there is a sufficient volume of real-time data available via IoT.
- Using AI techniques in animal health enables researchers to solve extremely complicated topics such as forecast and statistical epidemiological, animal/human personalized treatment, and host-parasite interaction [64]. AI could help (i) To disease detection and diagnosis, (ii) more realistically represent complex biological systems, and (iii) To accelerating decisions and improving risk analysis accuracy.
- Figure 5 shows the proposed architecture for the wearable gadget with an edge gateway. The proposed architecture can be implemented in the scalable network. Here the wearable gadget comprises multiple biological sensors that can be used to sense various biological parameters of animals [65]. A biosensor is a sensing device composed of a particular biological constituent and a transducer. The term “biosensor” denotes that the device is made up of two parts: bio-element and sensor-element. Electric current, electric potential, the intensity and phase of electromagnetic radiations, mass, conductance, impedance, temperature, viscosity, and so on are examples of sensor elements. Specific “bio” element recognizes a specific analyte, and the “sensor” element converts the biomolecule’s change into an electrical signal [66]. All these wearable gadgets are interconnected to the edge gateway through long-range communication. For long-range communication usethe LoRa module. Lora is a wide area network technology, and Lora WAN is a LoRa-based low power, wide area networking (LPWAN) protocol. Long Range Wide Area Network is intended primarily for long-range, battery-powered wireless IoT devices. It is well-known for its ability to communicate over long distances with minimal power consumption and detect signals at low-to-high signal levels. It is specially designed to support low-cost mobile secure communication in IoT while also accommodating millions of devices [54]. A pre-trained DL model will be loaded in the computing unit of the edge gateway, so that based on received sensor data, the edge gateway predicts health variations in the animal and generates warnings on the cloud server via internet communication with the Wi-Fi module. Edge gateway also comprises of LoRa and Wi-Fi modules for the establishment of the connection with wearable gadgets and cloud servers.
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Agriculture Overview. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/agriculture/overview (accessed on 22 April 2021).
- Kumar, A.; Hancke, G.P. A zigbee-based animal health monitoring system. IEEE Sens. J. 2014, 15, 610–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schepers, J. Precision agriculture for sustainability. Precis. Agric. 2019, 20, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wietrzyk, B.; Radenkovic, M. Enabling large scale ad hoc animal welfare monitoring. In Proceedings of the 2009 Fifth International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Communications, IEEE, Cannes/La Bocca, France, 23–29 August 2009; pp. 401–409. [Google Scholar]
- Strutzke, S.; Fiske, D.; Hoffmann, G.; Ammon, C.; Heuwieser, W.; Amon, T. Technical note: Development of a noninvasive respiration rate sensor for cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 2019, 102, 690–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stygar, A.H.; Gómez, Y.; Berteselli, G.V.; Dalla Costa, E.; Canali, E.; Niemi, J.K.; Llonch, P.; Pastell, M. A Systematic Review on Commercially Available and Validated Sensor Technologies for Welfare Assessment of Dairy Cattle. Front. Vet. Sci. 2021, 8, 634338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shabani, I.; Biba, T.; Çiço, B. Design of a Cattle-Health-Monitoring System Using Microservices and IoT Devices. Computers 2022, 11, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rasmussen, S.L.; Hallig, J.; van Wijk, R.E.; Petersen, H.H. An investigation of endoparasites and the determinants of parasite infection in European hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) from Denmark. Int. J. Parasitol. Parasites Wildl. 2021, 16, 217–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feldmeier, H. Ectoparasites and Arthropod Vectors: Ectoparasite Infestations. Int. Encycl. Public Health 2008, 282–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamphuis, C.; Mollenhorst, H.; Heesterbeek, J.A.P.; Hogeveen, H. Detection of clinical mastitis with sensor data from automatic milking systems is improved by using decision-tree induction. J. Dairy Sci. 2010, 93, 3616–3627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venkatesakumar, E.; Vijayakumar, G.; Subramanian, M.; Balasubramaniam, G.A.; Rajeswar, J.J. Demographic study of pneumonia in cattle in and around Namakkal, Tamilnadu. Indian Vet. J. 2016, 93, 37–40. [Google Scholar]
- Sultana, M.; Ahad, A.; Biswas, P.K.; Rahman, M.A.; Barua, H. Black quarter (BQ) disease in cattle and diagnosis of BQ septicaemia based on gross lesions and microscopic examination. Bangladesh J. Microbiol. 2008, 25, 13–16. [Google Scholar]
- Nandi, S.; Negi, B.S. Bovine ephemeral fever: A review. Comp. Immunol. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 1999, 22, 81–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Molla, B.; Ayelet, G.; Asfaw, Y.; Jibril, Y.; Ganga, G.; Gelaye, E. Epidemiological study on foot-and-mouth disease in cattle: Seroprevalence and risk factor assessment in South Omo zone, south-western Ethiopia. Transbound. Emerg. Dis. 2010, 57, 340–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jibat, T.; Mourits, M.C.M.; Hogeveen, H. Incidence and economic impact of rabies in the cattle population of Ethiopia. Prev. Vet. Med. 2016, 130, 67–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Francesconi, F.; Lupi, O. Myiasis. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2012, 25, 79–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gomez, D.E.; Weese, J.S. Viral enteritis in calves. Can. Vet. J. 2017, 58, 1267. [Google Scholar]
- Owens, F.N.; Secrist, D.S.; Hill, W.J.; Gill, D.R. Acidosis in cattle: A review. J. Anim. Sci. 1998, 76, 275–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mwaanga, E.S.; Janowski, T. Anoestrus in dairy cows: Causes, prevalence and clinical forms. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2000, 35, 193–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhat, P.; Hegde, G.; Hegde, G.R. Ethnomedicinal practices in different communities of Uttara Kannada district of Karnataka for treatment of wounds. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2012, 143, 501–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cilev, G.; Gacovski, Z.; Petrovska, B.; Crnec, I. Lumpy skin disease (brc)-occurrence, causes, economic losses of cattles in pelagonia region of r. Macedonia. Int. Sci. Online J. Sci. 2018, 8, 41–47. [Google Scholar]
- Herlin, A.; Brunberg, E.; Hultgren, J.; Högberg, N.; Rydberg, A.; Skarin, A. Animal welfare implications of digital tools for monitoring and management of cattle and sheep on pasture. Animals 2021, 11, 829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mhatre, V.; Vispute, V.; Mishra, N.; Khandagle, K. IoT based health monitoring system for dairy cows. In Proceedings of the 2020 Third International Conference on Smart Systems and Inventive Technology (ICSSIT), IEEE, Tirunelveli, India, 20–22 August 2020; pp. 820–825. [Google Scholar]
- Germani, L.; Mecarelli, V.; Baruffa, G.; Rugini, L.; Frescura, F. An IoT architecture for continuous livestock monitoring using LoRa LPWAN. Electronics 2019, 8, 1435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rajapakse, K.A.T.D.; Maduranga, M.W.P. Feasibility Study on Using NB-IoT For Animal Health Monitoring. 2021. Available online: http://ir.kdu.ac.lk/handle/345/5562 (accessed on 20 July 2022).
- Saloni, S.; Achyut, H. WiFi-aware as a connectivity solution for IoT pairing IoT with WiFi aware technology: Enabling new proximity-based services. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Internet of Things and Applications (IOTA), IEEE, Pune, India, 22–24 January 2016; pp. 137–142. [Google Scholar]
- Unwala, I.; Taqvi, Z.; Lu, J. Thread: An iot protocol. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Green Technologies Conference (GreenTech), IEEE, Austin, TX, USA, 4–6 April 2018; pp. 161–167. [Google Scholar]
- Lavric, A.; Petrariu, A.I.; Popa, V. Long range SigFox communication protocol scalability analysis under large-scale, high-density conditions. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 35816–35825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, S.-Y.; Chang, J.-E.; Fan, H.; Sun, Y.-H. Comparing the performance of NB-IoT, LTE Cat-M1, SigFox, and LoRa for IoT end devices moving at high speeds in the air. J. Signal Processing Syst. 2022, 94, 81–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taleb, H.; Nasser, A.; Andrieux, G.; Charara, N.; Motta Cruz, E. Wireless technologies, medical applications and future challenges in WBAN: A survey. Wirel. Netw. 2021, 27, 5271–5295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dasdag, S.; Akdag, M.Z. The link between radiofrequencies emitted from wireless technologies and oxidative stress. J. Chem. Neuroanat. 2016, 75, 85–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Katemboh, E.M.; Abdulla, R.; Jayapal, V.; Selvaperumal, S.K.; Ratnadurai, D. Integrated animal health care using iot. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Technol. 2020, 29, 42–56. [Google Scholar]
- Oczak, M.; Bayer, F.; Vetter, S.; Maschat, K.; Baumgartner, J. Comparison of the automated monitoring of the sow activity in farrowing pens using video and accelerometer data. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2022, 192, 106517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jung, D.-H.; Kim, N.Y.; Moon, S.H.; Jhin, C.; Kim, H.-J.; Yang, J.-S.; Kim, H.S.; Lee, T.S.; Lee, J.Y.; Park, S.H. Deep learning-based cattle vocal classification model and real-time livestock monitoring system with noise filtering. Animals 2021, 11, 357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wietrzyk, B.; Radenkovic, M. Energy efficiency in the mobile ad hoc networking approach to monitoring farm animals. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Networking (ICN’07), IEEE, Martinique, France, 22–28 April 2007; p. 1. [Google Scholar]
- Alouffi, B.; Hasnain, M.; Alharbi, A.; Alosaimi, W.; Alyami, H.; Ayaz, M. A Systematic Literature Review on Cloud Computing Security: Threats and Mitigation Strategies. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 57792–57807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mansouri, Y.; Babar, M.A. A review of edge computing: Features and resource virtualization. J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 2021, 150, 155–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sittón-Candanedo, I.; Alonso, R.S.; Corchado, J.M.; Rodríguez-González, S.; Casado-Vara, R. A review of edge computing reference architectures and a new global edge proposal. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 2019, 99, 278–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cebollada, S.; Payá, L.; Flores, M.; Peidró, A.; Reinoso, O. A State-of-the-Art Review on Mobile Robotics Tasks Using Artificial Intelligence and Visual Data; Elsevier Ltd.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021; Volume 167, ISBN 0000000245654. [Google Scholar]
- Hassanalian, M.; Abdelkefi, A. Classifications, applications, and design challenges of drones: A review. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2017, 91, 99–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sagiroglu, S.; Sinanc, D. Big data: A review. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems (CTS), San Diego, CA, USA, 20–24 May 2013; pp. 42–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malik, P.; Singh, R.; Gehlot, A.; Akram, S.V.; Das, P.K. Village 4.0: Digitalization of Village with Smart Internet of Things Technologies. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2022, 165, 107938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, M.; Chen, X.; Kou, G. A systematic review of blockchain. Financ. Innov. 2019, 5, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huang, C.-H.; Shen, P.-Y.; Huang, Y.-C. IoT-based physiological and environmental monitoring system in animal shelter. In Proceedings of the 2015 Seventh International Conference on Ubiquitous and Future Networks, IEEE, Sapporo, Japan, 7–10 July 2015; pp. 317–322. [Google Scholar]
- Nadimi, E.S.; Jørgensen, R.N.; Blanes-Vidal, V.; Christensen, S. Monitoring and classifying animal behavior using ZigBee-based mobile ad hoc wireless sensor networks and artificial neural networks. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2012, 82, 44–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nadimi, E.S.; Søgaard, H.T. Observer Kalman filter identification and multiple-model adaptive estimation technique for classifying animal behaviour using wireless sensor networks. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2009, 68, 9–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nadimi, E.S.; Søgaard, H.T.; Bak, T.; Oudshoorn, F.W. ZigBee-based wireless sensor networks for monitoring animal presence and pasture time in a strip of new grass. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2008, 61, 79–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lopes, H.F.; Carvalho, N.B. Livestock low power monitoring system. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Topical Conference on Wireless Sensors and Sensor Networks (WiSNet), IEEE, Austin, TX, USA, 24–27 January 2016; pp. 15–17. [Google Scholar]
- Ting, J.S.L.; Kwok, S.K.; Lee, W.B.; Tsang, A.H.C.; Cheung, B.C.F. A dynamic RFID-based mobile monitoring system in animal care management over a wireless network. In Proceedings of the 2007 International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, IEEE, Shanghai, China, 21–25 September 2007; pp. 2085–2088. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, J.-D.; Hsieh, H.-C. Design of gateway for monitoring system in IoT networks. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Conference on Green Computing and Communications and IEEE Internet of Things and IEEE Cyber, Physical and Social Computing, IEEE, Beijing, China, 20–23 August 2013; pp. 1876–1880. [Google Scholar]
- Huircán, J.I.; Muñoz, C.; Young, H.; Von Dossow, L.; Bustos, J.; Vivallo, G.; Toneatti, M. ZigBee-based wireless sensor network localization for cattle monitoring in grazing fields. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2010, 74, 258–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rainwater-Lovett, K.; Pacheco, J.M.; Packer, C.; Rodriguez, L.L. Detection of foot-and-mouth disease virus infected cattle using infrared thermography. Vet. J. 2009, 180, 317–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alsaaod, M.; Römer, C.; Kleinmanns, J.; Hendriksen, K.; Rose-Meierhöfer, S.; Plümer, L.; Büscher, W. Electronic detection of lameness in dairy cows through measuring pedometric activity and lying behavior. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2012, 142, 134–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Janzekovic, M.; Vindis, P.; Stajnko, D.; Brus, M.; Fuerstner, I. Polar sport tester for cattle heart rate measurements. Adv. Knowl. Appl. Pract. 2010, 157–172. [Google Scholar]
- Ariff, M.H.; Ismail, I. Livestock information system using Android Smartphone. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Conference on Systems, Process & Control (ICSPC), IEEE, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 13–15 December 2013; pp. 154–158. [Google Scholar]
- Ariff, M.H.; Ismarani, I.; Shamsuddin, N. RFID based systematic livestock health management system. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Conference on Systems, Process and Control (ICSPC 2014), IEEE, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 12–14 December 2014; pp. 111–116. [Google Scholar]
- Sharma, B.; Deepika, K. Cattle health monitoring system using wireless sensor network: A survey from innovation perspective. IET Wirel. Sens. Syst. 2018, 8, 143–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahmud, M.S.; Zahid, A.; Das, A.K.; Muzammil, M.; Khan, M.U. A systematic literature review on deep learning applications for precision cattle farming. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2021, 187, 106313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qiao, Y.; Kong, H.; Clark, C.; Lomax, S.; Su, D.; Eiffert, S.; Sukkarieh, S. Intelligent perception for cattle monitoring: A review for cattle identification, body condition score evaluation, and weight estimation. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2021, 185, 106143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qiao, Y.; Kong, H.; Clark, C.; Lomax, S.; Su, D.; Eiffert, S.; Sukkarieh, S. Intelligent perception-based cattle lameness detection and behaviour recognition: A review. Animals 2021, 11, 3033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Crociati, M.; Sylla, L.; De Vincenzi, A.; Stradaioli, G.; Monaci, M. How to Predict Parturition in Cattle? A Literature Review of Automatic Devices and Technologies for Remote Monitoring and Calving Prediction. Animals 2022, 12, 405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mukhopadhyay, S.C.; Tyagi, S.K.S.; Suryadevara, N.K.; Piuri, V.; Scotti, F.; Zeadally, S. Artificial Intelligence-Based Sensors for Next Generation IoT Applications: A Review. IEEE Sens. J. 2021, 21, 24920–24932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Čolaković, A.; Hadžialić, M. Internet of Things (IoT): A review of enabling technologies, challenges, and open research issues. Comput. Networks 2018, 144, 17–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ezanno, P.; Picault, S.; Beaunée, G.; Bailly, X.; Muñoz, F.; Duboz, R.; Monod, H.; Guégan, J.-F. Research perspectives on animal health in the era of artificial intelligence. Vet. Res. 2021, 52, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khoshmanesh, F.; Thurgood, P.; Pirogova, E.; Nahavandi, S.; Baratchi, S. Wearable sensors: At the frontier of personalised health monitoring, smart prosthetics and assistive technologies. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2021, 176, 112946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neethirajan, S. Recent advances in wearable sensors for animal health management. Sens. Bio-Sens. Res. 2017, 12, 15–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
S. No | Disease and Disorder | Cattle No. of Cases | Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
1 | FMD | 8 | 8.89% |
2 | Dermatitis | 3 | 3.33% |
3 | Rabies | 2 | 2.22% |
4 | Pneumonia | 2 | 2.22% |
5 | Infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis | 1 | 1.11% |
6 | Mastitis | 4 | 4.44% |
7 | Black quarter | 1 | 1.11% |
8 | Endoparasitic infestation | 14 | 15.56% |
9 | Bovine ephemeral fever | 7 | 7.78% |
10 | Myiasis | 3 | 3.33% |
11 | Babesiosis | 1 | 1.11% |
12 | Ectoparasitic infestation | 5 | 5.56% |
13 | Indigestion | 4 | 4.44% |
14 | Bloat | 6 | 6.67 % |
15 | Acidosis | 4 | 4.44% |
16 | Retention of placenta | 2 | 2.22% |
17 | Milk fever | 1 | 1.11% |
18 | Diarrhea/Enteritis | 7 | 7.78% |
19 | Wound | 2 | 2.22% |
20 | Anestrous | 4 | 4.44% |
21 | Alopecia | 3 | 3.33% |
22 | Pyometra | 1 | 1.11% |
23 | Papillomatosis | 1 | 1.11% |
24 | Dermatophytosis | 2 | 2.22% |
25 | Poisoning | 2 | 2.22% |
Total | 90 | 100% |
Attribute | Wi-Fi | ZigBee | Thread | NB-IoT | SigFox | LoRaWAN | LTE-Cat M1 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Frequency Bands | 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz | 2.4 GHz ISM Band | 2.4 GHz ISM Band | 800–900 Mhz | 962–928 MHz | 865–867 MHz | 1.08 MHz |
Range | 15–100 m | 10–100 m | 20–30 m | 1–10 km | 10–50 km | 2–20 km | 1–10 km |
Data Rate | 600 Mbps | 250 KbPS | 250 Kbps | 230 Kbps | 100 Bps | 10 kbps–0 Kbps | Up to 1 Mbps |
Power Consumption | Medium | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Topology | Star | Star, Tree, Mesh | Mesh | Star | Mesh | Mesh | Mesh |
Advantages | Large-scale data transfers, with voice calls and video streaming, enabled via high-speed wireless connectivity | The node support for Zigbee technology is high. One network can accommodate thousands of nodes | Multiple tasks from an application can be run simultaneously and reduce a large application’s complexity | Under licensed frequency ranges, it achieves excellent coexistence performance with GSM and LTE | With SigFox, you may have long-distance communications that are inexpensive, simple to connect to, use little power, and emit little electromagnetic radiation | Due to its simple architecture, a single LoRa Gateway device is intended to manage thousands of end devices or nodes | Provide better coverage even in challenging environments such aa basements, and because it is a P2P technology, it works well in rural areas with lower meter densities. |
Disadvantages | There could be significant co-channel interference. | Zigbee has a low bit rate, which also affects how quickly data is transmitted using this technology. | The developers have to spend more time on thread synchronization, which increases the risk of data inconsistency or thread sync problems. | Due to NB-limited IoT’s downlink capacity, reliability is a problem because only half of the messages are acknowledged, which is inconvenient. | Due to the low receiving power used, the SigFox network can be jammed by any nearby device, which poses a reliability concern. | For real-time applications demanding lower latency and bounded jitter constraints, it is not the best choice. | LTE Cat-M1 is still an emerging technology with limited global coverage. |
Ref | Objective | Findings |
---|---|---|
[57] | Automatic health monitoring systems for dairy cattle based on wireless sensor networks (WSNs) | WSN is a low-cost technique that is used to detect infections in dairy cattle. |
[58] | Deep learning applications in precision cow farming, particularly health and identity. | ResNet is the most commonly used of the 19 training networks identified. |
[59] | Precision cattle farming, with a focus on live weight calculation, and body condition score assessment. | intelligent perception for precision Cattle farming will evolve through non-contact, high precision methods. |
[60] | Techniques for identifying cattle lameness and recognizing automatic animal behavior. | Precision livestock farming (PLF) would develop in an autonomous, and real-time manner. |
[61] | Remote monitoring and calving prediction using automatic devices and technologies | Non-optimal local tolerability and cow welfare issues have been noted. |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Singh, D.; Singh, R.; Gehlot, A.; Akram, S.V.; Priyadarshi, N.; Twala, B. An Imperative Role of Digitalization in Monitoring Cattle Health for Sustainability. Electronics 2022, 11, 2702. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11172702
Singh D, Singh R, Gehlot A, Akram SV, Priyadarshi N, Twala B. An Imperative Role of Digitalization in Monitoring Cattle Health for Sustainability. Electronics. 2022; 11(17):2702. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11172702
Chicago/Turabian StyleSingh, Devendra, Rajesh Singh, Anita Gehlot, Shaik Vaseem Akram, Neeraj Priyadarshi, and Bhekisipho Twala. 2022. "An Imperative Role of Digitalization in Monitoring Cattle Health for Sustainability" Electronics 11, no. 17: 2702. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11172702
APA StyleSingh, D., Singh, R., Gehlot, A., Akram, S. V., Priyadarshi, N., & Twala, B. (2022). An Imperative Role of Digitalization in Monitoring Cattle Health for Sustainability. Electronics, 11(17), 2702. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11172702