W534
ADAPTMap and Points Methods for Livestock Digital Phenotyping and Weight Prediction

Date: Monday, January 16, 2017
Time: 6:40 PM
Room: Sunrise - Meeting House
M.J. Woodward-Greene , USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD
Clet Wandui Masiga , Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA), Entebbe Uganda, current affiliation: Tropical Institute of Development Innovations (TRIDI), Kampala, Uganda
Jason M. Kinser , George Mason University, Manassas, VA
Johann Soelkner , University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria
Tad S. Sonstegard , Acceligen Inc. Animal Ag. Subsidary of Recombinetics, St. Paul, MN
Iosif Vaisman , George Mason University, Manassas, VA
Curtis P. VanTassell , Animal Genomics and Improvement Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD
The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization affirmed accurate, consistent phenotypic data is integral to understand and conserve indigenous animal genetic resources. Body weight is a critical phenotype for animal health, production, breeding, and marketing. Platform (walk-on) scales provide accurate weights, however, they are expensive and inconvenient. Alternatively, manual methods such as, caprine weigh tape (tape), measures chest girth and provides a corresponding body weight; while ‘BM’ predicts body weight as body weight in pounds = ((chest girth inches2 x body length inches)/300). ADAPTMap novel image collection protocol, calibration signs, and two digital phenotype enumeration software methods (ADAPTMap, Points) were developed for body measurement and weight prediction, with electronic phenotype recording. Digital body measures were highly correlated to manual measures (0.72 to 0.82 Pearson Correlation Coefficients (PCC)). ADAPTMap digital-only measures included total body area, and trunk area (body excluding head and legs). Digital body weight prediction models fit linearly (r2 = 0.90 and 0.83 for ADAPTMap, Points). Validation (n=77) and field (n=817) studies compared digital and manual weight predictions to scale weights, and showed PCCs of 0.86 and 0.91 (tape, BM) and 0.91 and 0.86 (ADAPTMap, Points). The range of percent body weight difference between the scale and predicted weights were similar for BM, Points, and ADAPTMap ([0% - 72%], [0% - 72%], [0% - 60%]), and larger for tape ([0% - 181%]). ADAPTMap and Points digital phenotype measures improve manual methods by adding digital-only phenotypes, seamlessly providing digital records, and predicting body weight similarly, and are likely to improve.