The Experts below are selected from a list of 61482 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Ahmed A. K. Salama - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Readability of visual and Electronic leg tags versus rumen boluses and Electronic ear tags for the permanent Identification of dairy goats
    Journal of dairy science, 2010
    Co-Authors: S. Carné, Gerardo Caja, M. A. Rojas-olivares, Ahmed A. K. Salama
    Abstract:

    Murciano-Granadina dairy goats (n=220) were used to assess the performance of visual and Electronic Identification devices: 1) leg tags (LT) on the shank of the right hind leg (metatarsus) consisting of plastic bands (181 × 39mm, 21g; n=220) printed with a 3-digit code and closed with 2 types of Electronic button tags (ET1, 3.9 g, 26 mm o.d., n=90; ET2, 5.5 g, 25 mm o.d., n=130); 2) Electronic rumen boluses (RB, 75 g, 68 × 21 mm, n=220) containing 32 × 3.8 mm transponders; 3) Electronic ear tags (EE, button-button, 4.8 g, 24 mm, n=47); and 4) visual plastic ear tags (VE, flag-button, 4.2 g, 40 × 38 mm, n=220). The shank circumference of 47 replacement kids (5 to 6 mo of age) and 103 adult goats was measured to evaluate the proper circumference for fastened LT. Goats were identified with RB and VE before the experiment. Time for leg tagging, reading, and data recording with a handheld transceiver was measured. Readability [(read/readable) × 100] was monitored for 1 yr with goats restrained in the milking parlor. Reading time and errors of RB and ET2 in the milking parlor using the handheld transceiver were recorded. Shank circumference of kids (70±1 mm) was 79.5% of that in adult goats (88±1 mm), thus LT (107±1 mm inner circumference) were only applied to adult goats as they were inadequate for 6-mo-old kids. Time for leg tagging and data recording was 53±3 s. At 1 yr, readability of RB was 96.5%. No LT losses occurred and all were visually readable, although 3 (1.5%) had to be removed due to limping, leading to a final LT retention of 98.5%. Moreover, 7 (3.6%) LT were found open and Electronically unreadable. Readability of button transponders, excluding removed LT, was 93.6% (3 lost and 2 unreadable) for ET1, and 98.3% (2 lost) for ET2. Readability was 95.7 and 97.0% in EE and VE ear tags, respectively. Only LT and ET1 readabilities differed. Reading time and reading errors (0.3 vs. 0%) in the milking parlor were greater for RB (61.2s) than for ET2 (45.9s). In conclusion, LT were not adequate for the Identification of goat kids under 6 mo of age. Only LT with ET2 transponders met International Committee for Animal Recording requirements for official Identification of adult goats (readability >98%) under the conditions of this experiment.

  • long term performance of visual and Electronic Identification devices in dairy goats
    Journal of Dairy Science, 2009
    Co-Authors: S. Carné, J J Ghirardi, Gerardo Caja, Ahmed A. K. Salama
    Abstract:

    Abstract Dairy goat kids born during a 3-yr period (n=97) and their mothers (n=29) were used for a long-term evaluation of the performance of 9 types of Identification (ID) devices. Kids wore multiple ID devices: visual ear tags (V1, tip-tag, n=47; V2, official, n=50), Electronic ear tags (E1, button-button, n=46; E2, flag-button, n=46), Electronic rumen boluses (B1, mini-bolus 14g, n=92; B2, mini-bolus 20g, n=28; B3, standard bolus 75g, n=34) and glass-encapsulated transponders injected in the forefeet (T1, 15mm, n=75; T2, 12mm, n=100). Visual ear tags were applied at birth and removed in yearlings, whereas Electronic ear tags were applied after bolusing with B1 (6.7kg BW and 30 d, on average); B2 were administered in the event of a B1 loss, and B3 in case of a B2 loss and in goat does. At d 60 of age, kids were allocated into 2 groups to evaluate the effects of rearing system on ID. Treatments were: weaned (n=46), and not weaned (n=46) where kids suckled a milk substitute until d 150. Readability of ID devices (read/readable×100) was monitored from 1 to 3 yr of age, depending on device and year of birth. Long-term readability was analyzed using a nonparametric survival analysis. A total of 3.3% infections and 6.5% tissue reactions were reported for Electronic ear tags, but ears were fully healed in yearlings. Weaning numerically reduced B1 losses at d 150 (weaned, 84.8% vs. not weaned, 73.3%). Readability of visual ear tags in yearlings (V1, 82.9%; V2, 94.0%) was lower than for Electronic ear tags (E1 and E2, 100%). Mini-bolus readability in yearlings did not differ by type (B1, 71.4%; B2, 84.6%) or with visual ear tags. No effect of inject type was reported (T1, 92.0%; T2, 96.0%). Survival analysis after yr 3 gave the greatest readability value for E1 (100%), which did not differ from B3 (96.8%). The lowest readability was estimated for B1 (66.3%), followed by E2 (79.8%), B2 (81.4%), and T1 (90.4%). In conclusion, button-button Electronic ear tags and standard boluses were the more efficient devices under our conditions, their readability values being greater than injects, Electronic mini-boluses, and visual and flag-button Electronic ear tags. Transponders injected in the forefeet and mini-boluses used here are not recommended in practice. Further research on E1 and B3 Electronic devices should be done in a higher number of goats to confirm the current results.

S. Carné - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Readability of visual and Electronic leg tags versus rumen boluses and Electronic ear tags for the permanent Identification of dairy goats
    Journal of dairy science, 2010
    Co-Authors: S. Carné, Gerardo Caja, M. A. Rojas-olivares, Ahmed A. K. Salama
    Abstract:

    Murciano-Granadina dairy goats (n=220) were used to assess the performance of visual and Electronic Identification devices: 1) leg tags (LT) on the shank of the right hind leg (metatarsus) consisting of plastic bands (181 × 39mm, 21g; n=220) printed with a 3-digit code and closed with 2 types of Electronic button tags (ET1, 3.9 g, 26 mm o.d., n=90; ET2, 5.5 g, 25 mm o.d., n=130); 2) Electronic rumen boluses (RB, 75 g, 68 × 21 mm, n=220) containing 32 × 3.8 mm transponders; 3) Electronic ear tags (EE, button-button, 4.8 g, 24 mm, n=47); and 4) visual plastic ear tags (VE, flag-button, 4.2 g, 40 × 38 mm, n=220). The shank circumference of 47 replacement kids (5 to 6 mo of age) and 103 adult goats was measured to evaluate the proper circumference for fastened LT. Goats were identified with RB and VE before the experiment. Time for leg tagging, reading, and data recording with a handheld transceiver was measured. Readability [(read/readable) × 100] was monitored for 1 yr with goats restrained in the milking parlor. Reading time and errors of RB and ET2 in the milking parlor using the handheld transceiver were recorded. Shank circumference of kids (70±1 mm) was 79.5% of that in adult goats (88±1 mm), thus LT (107±1 mm inner circumference) were only applied to adult goats as they were inadequate for 6-mo-old kids. Time for leg tagging and data recording was 53±3 s. At 1 yr, readability of RB was 96.5%. No LT losses occurred and all were visually readable, although 3 (1.5%) had to be removed due to limping, leading to a final LT retention of 98.5%. Moreover, 7 (3.6%) LT were found open and Electronically unreadable. Readability of button transponders, excluding removed LT, was 93.6% (3 lost and 2 unreadable) for ET1, and 98.3% (2 lost) for ET2. Readability was 95.7 and 97.0% in EE and VE ear tags, respectively. Only LT and ET1 readabilities differed. Reading time and reading errors (0.3 vs. 0%) in the milking parlor were greater for RB (61.2s) than for ET2 (45.9s). In conclusion, LT were not adequate for the Identification of goat kids under 6 mo of age. Only LT with ET2 transponders met International Committee for Animal Recording requirements for official Identification of adult goats (readability >98%) under the conditions of this experiment.

  • long term performance of visual and Electronic Identification devices in dairy goats
    Journal of Dairy Science, 2009
    Co-Authors: S. Carné, J J Ghirardi, Gerardo Caja, Ahmed A. K. Salama
    Abstract:

    Abstract Dairy goat kids born during a 3-yr period (n=97) and their mothers (n=29) were used for a long-term evaluation of the performance of 9 types of Identification (ID) devices. Kids wore multiple ID devices: visual ear tags (V1, tip-tag, n=47; V2, official, n=50), Electronic ear tags (E1, button-button, n=46; E2, flag-button, n=46), Electronic rumen boluses (B1, mini-bolus 14g, n=92; B2, mini-bolus 20g, n=28; B3, standard bolus 75g, n=34) and glass-encapsulated transponders injected in the forefeet (T1, 15mm, n=75; T2, 12mm, n=100). Visual ear tags were applied at birth and removed in yearlings, whereas Electronic ear tags were applied after bolusing with B1 (6.7kg BW and 30 d, on average); B2 were administered in the event of a B1 loss, and B3 in case of a B2 loss and in goat does. At d 60 of age, kids were allocated into 2 groups to evaluate the effects of rearing system on ID. Treatments were: weaned (n=46), and not weaned (n=46) where kids suckled a milk substitute until d 150. Readability of ID devices (read/readable×100) was monitored from 1 to 3 yr of age, depending on device and year of birth. Long-term readability was analyzed using a nonparametric survival analysis. A total of 3.3% infections and 6.5% tissue reactions were reported for Electronic ear tags, but ears were fully healed in yearlings. Weaning numerically reduced B1 losses at d 150 (weaned, 84.8% vs. not weaned, 73.3%). Readability of visual ear tags in yearlings (V1, 82.9%; V2, 94.0%) was lower than for Electronic ear tags (E1 and E2, 100%). Mini-bolus readability in yearlings did not differ by type (B1, 71.4%; B2, 84.6%) or with visual ear tags. No effect of inject type was reported (T1, 92.0%; T2, 96.0%). Survival analysis after yr 3 gave the greatest readability value for E1 (100%), which did not differ from B3 (96.8%). The lowest readability was estimated for B1 (66.3%), followed by E2 (79.8%), B2 (81.4%), and T1 (90.4%). In conclusion, button-button Electronic ear tags and standard boluses were the more efficient devices under our conditions, their readability values being greater than injects, Electronic mini-boluses, and visual and flag-button Electronic ear tags. Transponders injected in the forefeet and mini-boluses used here are not recommended in practice. Further research on E1 and B3 Electronic devices should be done in a higher number of goats to confirm the current results.

Gerardo Caja - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Readability of visual and Electronic leg tags versus rumen boluses and Electronic ear tags for the permanent Identification of dairy goats
    Journal of dairy science, 2010
    Co-Authors: S. Carné, Gerardo Caja, M. A. Rojas-olivares, Ahmed A. K. Salama
    Abstract:

    Murciano-Granadina dairy goats (n=220) were used to assess the performance of visual and Electronic Identification devices: 1) leg tags (LT) on the shank of the right hind leg (metatarsus) consisting of plastic bands (181 × 39mm, 21g; n=220) printed with a 3-digit code and closed with 2 types of Electronic button tags (ET1, 3.9 g, 26 mm o.d., n=90; ET2, 5.5 g, 25 mm o.d., n=130); 2) Electronic rumen boluses (RB, 75 g, 68 × 21 mm, n=220) containing 32 × 3.8 mm transponders; 3) Electronic ear tags (EE, button-button, 4.8 g, 24 mm, n=47); and 4) visual plastic ear tags (VE, flag-button, 4.2 g, 40 × 38 mm, n=220). The shank circumference of 47 replacement kids (5 to 6 mo of age) and 103 adult goats was measured to evaluate the proper circumference for fastened LT. Goats were identified with RB and VE before the experiment. Time for leg tagging, reading, and data recording with a handheld transceiver was measured. Readability [(read/readable) × 100] was monitored for 1 yr with goats restrained in the milking parlor. Reading time and errors of RB and ET2 in the milking parlor using the handheld transceiver were recorded. Shank circumference of kids (70±1 mm) was 79.5% of that in adult goats (88±1 mm), thus LT (107±1 mm inner circumference) were only applied to adult goats as they were inadequate for 6-mo-old kids. Time for leg tagging and data recording was 53±3 s. At 1 yr, readability of RB was 96.5%. No LT losses occurred and all were visually readable, although 3 (1.5%) had to be removed due to limping, leading to a final LT retention of 98.5%. Moreover, 7 (3.6%) LT were found open and Electronically unreadable. Readability of button transponders, excluding removed LT, was 93.6% (3 lost and 2 unreadable) for ET1, and 98.3% (2 lost) for ET2. Readability was 95.7 and 97.0% in EE and VE ear tags, respectively. Only LT and ET1 readabilities differed. Reading time and reading errors (0.3 vs. 0%) in the milking parlor were greater for RB (61.2s) than for ET2 (45.9s). In conclusion, LT were not adequate for the Identification of goat kids under 6 mo of age. Only LT with ET2 transponders met International Committee for Animal Recording requirements for official Identification of adult goats (readability >98%) under the conditions of this experiment.

  • long term performance of visual and Electronic Identification devices in dairy goats
    Journal of Dairy Science, 2009
    Co-Authors: S. Carné, J J Ghirardi, Gerardo Caja, Ahmed A. K. Salama
    Abstract:

    Abstract Dairy goat kids born during a 3-yr period (n=97) and their mothers (n=29) were used for a long-term evaluation of the performance of 9 types of Identification (ID) devices. Kids wore multiple ID devices: visual ear tags (V1, tip-tag, n=47; V2, official, n=50), Electronic ear tags (E1, button-button, n=46; E2, flag-button, n=46), Electronic rumen boluses (B1, mini-bolus 14g, n=92; B2, mini-bolus 20g, n=28; B3, standard bolus 75g, n=34) and glass-encapsulated transponders injected in the forefeet (T1, 15mm, n=75; T2, 12mm, n=100). Visual ear tags were applied at birth and removed in yearlings, whereas Electronic ear tags were applied after bolusing with B1 (6.7kg BW and 30 d, on average); B2 were administered in the event of a B1 loss, and B3 in case of a B2 loss and in goat does. At d 60 of age, kids were allocated into 2 groups to evaluate the effects of rearing system on ID. Treatments were: weaned (n=46), and not weaned (n=46) where kids suckled a milk substitute until d 150. Readability of ID devices (read/readable×100) was monitored from 1 to 3 yr of age, depending on device and year of birth. Long-term readability was analyzed using a nonparametric survival analysis. A total of 3.3% infections and 6.5% tissue reactions were reported for Electronic ear tags, but ears were fully healed in yearlings. Weaning numerically reduced B1 losses at d 150 (weaned, 84.8% vs. not weaned, 73.3%). Readability of visual ear tags in yearlings (V1, 82.9%; V2, 94.0%) was lower than for Electronic ear tags (E1 and E2, 100%). Mini-bolus readability in yearlings did not differ by type (B1, 71.4%; B2, 84.6%) or with visual ear tags. No effect of inject type was reported (T1, 92.0%; T2, 96.0%). Survival analysis after yr 3 gave the greatest readability value for E1 (100%), which did not differ from B3 (96.8%). The lowest readability was estimated for B1 (66.3%), followed by E2 (79.8%), B2 (81.4%), and T1 (90.4%). In conclusion, button-button Electronic ear tags and standard boluses were the more efficient devices under our conditions, their readability values being greater than injects, Electronic mini-boluses, and visual and flag-button Electronic ear tags. Transponders injected in the forefeet and mini-boluses used here are not recommended in practice. Further research on E1 and B3 Electronic devices should be done in a higher number of goats to confirm the current results.

  • the use of passive injectable transponders in fattening lambs from birth to slaughter effects of injection position age and breed
    Journal of Animal Science, 2002
    Co-Authors: Carlos Conill, Gerardo Caja, R Nehring, O Ribo
    Abstract:

    A total of 1,159 Tiris half-duplex passive injectable transponders (PIT) of 32-mm length were used to study the Electronic Identification of 618 fattening lambs of two breeds used for different production purposes (Ripollesa, meat breed, n = 271, and Manchega, dairy breed, n = 347). The lambs were s.c. injected in the armpit and the retro-auricular positions at 2, 15, and 30 d of age. All lambs were also tagged with a small plastic ear tag after birth. A group of 76 lambs were injected only in the right armpit and were kept for breeding. The PIT losses, breakages, and Electronic failures were evaluated at weekly weight recordings throughout the fattening period using two types of hand-held transceivers. Fattened lambs were harvested in a commercial abattoir between 3 and 4 mo of age when they reached market weight (11 to 12 kg hot carcass weight). The total number of PIT that fell or broke in the slaughtering line, the location method, and the recovery time were recorded. On the farm PIT losses were not affected (P > 0.05) by age at injection, injection position, or breed. Mean losses of PIT and ear tags during the same period were 5% and 6.3%, respectively (P > 0.05). No PIT breakages or failures were observed during the fattening period. Mean recovery of PIT in the abattoir (85.6%) was affected (P 0.05) by breed, injection position, or age, thus allowing a harvesting speed of 200 lambs/h on average. In conclusion, the injection of 32-mm PIT into the armpit or the retro-auricular region is not recommended as a practice for the Electronic Identification of fattening lambs, even though they perform similarly to small plastic ear tags. This is partly a consequence of the PIT losses observed on the farm but mainly because of the difficulties with recovering the PIT in the abattoir. More research will determine whether the use of smaller transponders or injection in other positions could improve their performance in fattening lambs.

Caro, Ivan W. - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Points of microchips implants in pigs for eletronic Identification: placing and validation by image analysis
    Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola, 2005
    Co-Authors: Pandorfi Héliton, Silva, Iran J. O., Sevegnani, Kelly B., Caro, Ivan W.
    Abstract:

    Nas últimas décadas, a produção de suínos, pressionada por uma crescente demanda por alimentos, tem-se caracterizado pela maior concentração de animais em grandes unidades de produção, dificultando o registro dos dados individuais. Os sistemas automáticos de identificação eletrônica podem auxiliar a detecção de doenças, a avaliação de respostas fisiológicas, o controle de ingestão de alimentos, a atividade física e ainda o impacto ambiental causado pelo sistema de produção, promovendo melhor controle da propriedade. Transponders injetáveis, brincos eletrônicos e o monitoramento por meio da análise de imagem estão sendo utilizados no processo de identificação. O objetivo desta pesquisa foi avaliar os diferentes locais de implante subcutâneo de microchips em leitões, verificando-se possíveis infecções e/ou rejeições, migrações dos microchips em relação ao local de implante e sua validação em relação à análise de imagem.In the last decades the increase of the swine production, because of the increasing in food consumption, has been characterized by an increase of animal concentration in great production units, making difficult to record individual data. The automatic Electronic Identification systems can help in illness detection and in the evaluation of physiological data, food ingestion, physical activity and impact in the environment by the production system. Electronic injectable transponders, earing tags and the image analysis are been used for Electronic Identification purposes. The objective of the present work was to evaluate the best body site to inject passive transponders in piglets and possible resulting infections and/or rejections and its validation by using image analysis

  • Locais de implante de microchips de identificação eletrônica de leitões: seleção e validação por análise de imagem
    Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola (SBEA), 2005
    Co-Authors: Pandorfi Héliton, Silva, Iran J. O., Sevegnani, Kelly B., Caro, Ivan W.
    Abstract:

    Nas últimas décadas, a produção de suínos, pressionada por uma crescente demanda por alimentos, tem-se caracterizado pela maior concentração de animais em grandes unidades de produção, dificultando o registro dos dados individuais. Os sistemas automáticos de identificação eletrônica podem auxiliar a detecção de doenças, a avaliação de respostas fisiológicas, o controle de ingestão de alimentos, a atividade física e ainda o impacto ambiental causado pelo sistema de produção, promovendo melhor controle da propriedade. Transponders injetáveis, brincos eletrônicos e o monitoramento por meio da análise de imagem estão sendo utilizados no processo de identificação. O objetivo desta pesquisa foi avaliar os diferentes locais de implante subcutâneo de microchips em leitões, verificando-se possíveis infecções e/ou rejeições, migrações dos microchips em relação ao local de implante e sua validação em relação à análise de imagem.In the last decades the increase of the swine production, because of the increasing in food consumption, has been characterized by an increase of animal concentration in great production units, making difficult to record individual data. The automatic Electronic Identification systems can help in illness detection and in the evaluation of physiological data, food ingestion, physical activity and impact in the environment by the production system. Electronic injectable transponders, earing tags and the image analysis are been used for Electronic Identification purposes. The objective of the present work was to evaluate the best body site to inject passive transponders in piglets and possible resulting infections and/or rejections and its validation by using image analysis

Monica Taljaard - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Electronic search strategies to identify reports of cluster randomized trials in medline low precision will improve with adherence to reporting standards
    BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2010
    Co-Authors: Jessie Mcgowan, Jeremy M Grimshaw, Monica Taljaard, Jamie C Brehaut, Andrew D Mcrae, Martin P Eccles
    Abstract:

    Background Cluster randomized trials (CRTs) present unique methodological and ethical challenges. Researchers conducting systematic reviews of CRTs (e.g., addressing methodological or ethical issues) require efficient Electronic search strategies (filters or hedges) to identify trials in Electronic databases such as MEDLINE. According to the CONSORT statement extension to CRTs, the clustered design should be clearly identified in titles or abstracts; however, variability in terminology may make Electronic Identification challenging. Our objectives were to (a) evaluate sensitivity ("recall") and precision of a well-known Electronic search strategy ("randomized controlled trial" as publication type) with respect to identifying CRTs, (b) evaluate the feasibility of new search strategies targeted specifically at CRTs, and (c) determine whether CRTs are appropriately identified in titles or abstracts of reports and whether there has been improvement over time.