Dairy cows continuously-housed in tie-stalls failed to

manifest activity changes during estrus

C. A. Felton1, M. G. Colazo2, P. Ponce-Barajas1, C. J. Bench1, and D. J. Ambrose1,2,3
1
Department of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
T6G 2P5; and 2Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development, Livestock Research Branch, Edmonton, Alberta,
Canada T6H 5T6. Received 9 December 2011, accepted 10 February 2012.
Felton, C. A., Colazo, M. G., Ponce-Barajas, P., Bench, C. J. and Ambrose, D. J. 2012. Dairy cows continuously-housed in
tie-stalls failed to manifest activity changes during estrus. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 92: 189196. While pedometers are effective for
Can. J. Anim. Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 188.72.127.148 on 12/02/16

estrus detection in free-stall herds, their efficacy in tie-stalls is not established. The objectives were to determine if
pedometers equipped with a behavior tag for monitoring lying activity (AfiMilk Pedometer Plus Tag system) can
accurately record cow activity, and if they can facilitate estrus detection in dairy cows continuously housed in tie-stalls.
Nineteen lactating Holstein cows were subjected to estrus induction with prostaglandin F2a, and 18 pregnant cows served
as controls. Activity was monitored for 10 d using pedometers and 24-h video recording. Pedometer and video records
were compared for 6 d surrounding estrus; stepping (rc 0.85; PB0.01), lying time (rc 0.94; PB0.01), and lying bouts
(rc 0.89; PB0.01) were highly correlated. Progesterone concentrations confirmed that 17 of the 19 cows responded
to estrus induction; 16 of those 17 cows ovulated. Changes in mean daily activity did not differ (P0.05) between
estrus-induced cows and controls, or in the estrus-induced cows in the 48 to 72 h preceding the day of ovulation.
In conclusion, while the pedometers accurately recorded cow activity in lactating cows housed in tie-stalls, they could not
facilitate estrus detection because cow activity did not significantly change during estrus.

Key words: Dairy cow, estrus detection, tie-stall, pedometer

Felton, C. A., Colazo, M. G., Ponce-Barajas, P., Bench, C. J. et Ambrose, D. J. 2012. Les vaches laitières constamment
For personal use only.

gardées en stabulation entravée n’affichent pas de changement dans leurs activités durant l’œstrus. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 92:
189196. Si les podomètres permettent de détecter l’œstrus dans les troupeaux en stabulation libre, on n’en a pas établi
l’efficacité pour les animaux en stabulation entravée. L’étude devait préciser si les podomètres pourvus d’une étiquette
servant à surveiller si les animaux se couchent ou pas (système AfiMilk Pedometer Plus Tag) enregistrent avec précision
l’activité des vaches et facilitent ainsi la détection de l’œstrus chez les vaches laitières gardées en permanence en stabulation
entravée. Les auteurs ont provoqué l’œstrus chez dix-neuf vaches Holstein en lactation en leur administrant de la
prostaglandine F2a, 18 vaches gravides servant de témoins. L’activité des animaux a été surveillée pendant dix jours au
moyen d’un podomètre et d’une caméscope qui filmait les animaux 24 h par jour. Ensuite, les relevés du podomètre et les
enregistrements ont été comparés pour les six journées entourant l’oestrus. La marche (rc0,85; PB0,01), la durée du
repos (rc 0,94; PB0,01) et les périodes de repos (rc 0,89; PB0,01) sont étroitement corrélées. La concentration de
progestérone confirme que 17 des 19 vaches ont répondu à l’induction de l’œstrus; 16 sur ces 17 ont ovulé. La modification
du degré d’activité quotidien était la même (P0,05) pour les sujets chez qui l’œstrus a été provoqué et les témoins, tout
comme il était identique chez les vaches dont l’œstrus avait été induit durant les 48 à 72 h précédant le jour de l’ovulation.
En conclusion, s’ils enregistrent avec précision l’activité des vaches en lactation gardées en stabulation entravée, les
podomètres ne facilitent pas la détection de l’œstrus parce que le degré d’activité des animaux ne varie pas assez durant
cette période.

Mots clés: Vache laitière, détection de l’œstrus, stabulation entravée, podomètre

Accurate and efficient detection of estrus is a key
component to successful reproductive management.
Nevertheless, failure to detect estrus in dairy cattle
is one of the largest limiting factors in reproductive
performance (Nebel and Jobst 1998). When estrus goes
undetected or is falsely detected, it contributes to
increased days open, and revenue losses (Firk et al.
2002). Annual loss to the US dairy industry over failure
to detect or incorrectly detecting estrus is estimated to be
more than $300 million (Senger 1994).
The submission rates of dairy cows to artificial
insemination in Canadian herds are currently as low as
35% (LeBlanc 2005; Ambrose and Colazo 2007), which
suggests that a very high proportion of estrus events
go undetected. Several factors impact the expression of
estrus and subsequently behavioral estrus detection.
These include the type of housing (tie-stall vs. free-stall),

3
Corresponding author (e-mail: divakar.ambrose@gov. Abbreviations: DIM, days in milk; P4, progesterone; PGF,
ab.ca). prostaglandin F2a; rc, concordance correlation coefficient

Can. J. Anim. Sci. (2012) 92: 189196 doi:10.4141/CJAS2011-134 189

 190 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE
flooring surface (concrete vs. dirt), detection method
(live: visual; assisted: colour markers, heat-mount
detectors, pedometers or other electronic aids) and the
frequency, duration, and time of observations (Kiddy
1977; Britt et al. 1986; Xu et al. 1998; Roelofs et al.
2005).
Live visual observation, traditionally used for estrus
detection, is tedious and could incur high labor costs
(At-Taras and Spahr 2001), because cows must be
watched for estrous behavior two to three times daily.
Pedometers are activity monitors attached to the leg of a
cow, which can automatically monitor cow activity, and
Can. J. Anim. Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 188.72.127.148 on 12/02/16
assist producers in identifying cows in estrus (At-Taras
and Spahr 2001; Roelofs et al. 2005) and lower labor
costs. Cows housed in free-stalls, and those housed in
tie-stalls and given an out-of-stall exercise period, are
reported to have increases in activity of 4 and 2.75 times,
respectively, during estrus (Kiddy 1977). In free-stall
facilities pedometers have estrus detection rates between
79 and 87% (Roelofs et al. 2005, 2010). Little research
has been done to determine the efficiency of pedometers
in detecting estrus in lactating cows continuously housed
in tie-stalls. This is important, as 75% of Canadian
dairy herds are tie-stalls (Canadian Dairy Information
Centre 2011) and some tie-stall facilities do not provide
For personal use only.
consistent out-of-stall periods due to harsh weather,
staff shortages, and other reasons.
Estrus-related activities, such as increased walking,
mounting, or standing-to-be-mounted are restricted in
tie-stall housing because cows remain tethered for most
hours of the day. Although pedometers facilitate estrus
detection by recording increases in stepping or walking
activity in free-stall herds, relying on pedometers for
estrus detection based on increases in stepping and
walking in tie-stall herds could be risky. However,
because lying and standing activities also change
(increased frequency of lying bouts, decreased lying
time, and increased standing time) during estrus
(Pollock and Hurnick 1979; Walton and King 1986),
measuring these changes automatically for estrus
detection could be of value, particularly in cows housed
in tie-stalls. The AfiMilk Pedometer Plus TagTM system
(pedometer), used in this study, is unique in that it has a
sensor (Behavior tag† ) that records lying bouts (number
of lying events) and lying time (duration of a lying event)
in addition to the number of steps. The additional
sensor that records changes in lying activity could be
beneficial in a tie-stall barn to monitor changes in lying
and standing activities besides stepping.
Therefore, the objectives were to determine if
pedometers could: (1) accurately record cow stepping
and lying activity, and (2) facilitate estrus detection in
tie-stalls. We hypothesized that pedometers would: (1)
accurately record cow activity and (2) retrospectively
facilitate estrus detection, by recording changes in
estrus-related activity.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This study was conducted with lactating Holstein cows
at the Dairy Research and Technology Centre (DRTC),
a 146-cow tie-stall facility at the University of Alberta,
Edmonton, Alberta. All animals were cared for in
accordance with the guidelines of the Canadian Council
on Animal Care (2009). The University of Alberta’s
Animal Care and Use Committee approved the ex-
perimental protocols used in this study.
Activity Monitoring
Pedometer System
The AfiMilk Pedometer Plus TagTM system (S.A.E.
Afikim, Kibbutz Afikim, Israel) is an electronic moni-
toring device designed to facilitate estrus detection in
free-stall dairy cows by measuring changes in activity:
number of steps, number of lying bouts and duration of
lying time. A portable pedometer reader, hard-wired to
a computer through a data logger, was used to manually
scan each pedometer and capture the recorded activity
data. At each scan, the pedometer ID was captured
along with the activity records; this information was
downloaded into the AfiFarm herd management soft-
ware and then transferred into a Microsoft Excel
spreadsheet. The AfiFarm software was not used to
process activity changes or to determine which cows
were in estrus because activity thresholds for estrus in
tie-stall dairy cows are unknown. To monitor activity
changes, this study used activity measurements (number
of steps, frequency of lying bouts, and duration of lying
in 24 h) obtained from raw pedometer data after each
scan and calculating differences in activity between
periods.
Video Surveillance
Eight tie-stalls, equipped with 24-h video surveillance,
were used in this study. Two monochrome cameras
(Sony Super HAD ccd, SSC-M183 Sony Canada,
Toronto, ON) were installed such that each camera
monitored activity in four contiguous stalls. Cameras
captured a posterior end image in order to record rear
leg stepping and lying activity. Cameras were connected
into a four-channel digital quad (Robot MONO-
CHROME QUAD, MV47, Sensormatic Electronics
Corporation, Tyco International Ltd., Princeton, NJ).
The quad allowed viewing of up to four video images on
one screen. Video was recorded through a pinnacle
video transfer device (Pinnacle Systems, Mountain
View, CA) and stored on digital external hard drives
(Seagate Technology LLC, Scoots Valley, CA). The
Pinnacle device continuously recorded 24 h of video and
saved it into compressed video formats (mp4) in 4 h
recording loops.
Validation of Pedometers
To determine if pedometers could accurately monitor
cow lying activity in a tie-stall, 24-h video records were
 FELTON ET AL. * ESTRUS DETECTION IN TIE-STALL DAIRY COWS
analyzed for 17 estrus-induced cows for 6 d (total 2448 h
or 144 h per cow). Two observers watched the video
playback and recorded the frequency of lying bouts and
lying times (see Table 1 for definitions). The 2448 h of
video records were then compared with pedometer
records for the corresponding times.
In order to validate the pedometers for stepping
activity, we first determined what the pedometer
counted as a ‘‘step’’ (see Table 1 for definition) and
then 7 h of video recordings were compared against the
corresponding pedometer data.
Pearson correlations were used to determine the linear
Can. J. Anim. Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 188.72.127.148 on 12/02/16
relationship between pedometer records and video
records. Concordance correlation coefficients, used to
determine the agreement between paired readings and
to validate the reproducibility of an instrument (Lin
1989, 1992), were used to determine the reproducibility
between pedometers and video records. Pedometer
records were highly correlated (P0.01) to video
records for steps (r0.88), frequency of lying bouts
(r0.94), and lying time (r0.91). The concordance
correlation coefficients for steps, frequency of lying
bouts, and lying time were (rc0.85), (rc0.94), and
(rc0.89), respectively.
For personal use only.
Animals and Experimental Design
The experimental design and treatment schedule are
shown in Fig 1. Thirty-seven cows were used in this
study; 19 estrus-induced cows and 18 pregnant cows
were used as controls (for collecting baseline activity
data from cows that were not expected to come into
estrus). Parity of the estrus-induced cows ranged from
one to six with an average of 77911.0 DIM, parity of
the pregnant cows ranged from one to four with an
average of 242915.8 DIM. Cows were continuously
housed in tie-stalls, individually, with unrestricted access
to water, and were fed a total mixed ration, once daily
after morning milking. The total mixed ration was
formulated for lactating dairy cows according to
national research guidelines (National Research Council
2001). Main ingredients in the total mixed ration were
silage (barley and alfalfa), grain (barley or corn), and
hay (alfalfa or grass), and mineral supplements. Feed
intake was measured daily. Cows were milked in-stall
with a pipeline milking system (Westfalia-Surge Canada
Co, Mississauga, ON) twice daily between 0400 and
0600 and 1530 and 1730. Milk yield was recorded twice
daily until day of ovulation for the estrus-induced cows
Table 1. Cow activities monitored by pedometer then validated by video observation
Behavior
Step When the right rear foot lifted completely off the ground and was placed back to the ground in any location with or without
body movement
Lying bout The number of events a cow changed position from standing to laying in 24 h
Lying time The duration of time from when hindquarters touched the ground to when the hindquarters were lifted off the ground
191
and until day 9 for the pregnant cows (day 0 PGF or
sham treatment, respectively; see Fig. 1).
This study was conducted between October 2009 and
January 2010, in five replicates, with seven to eight cows
per replicate. Cows were relocated from their original
stall into one of the eight video-monitored stalls and
given a 3-d habituation period (days 3 to 1) to
get accustomed to their new stall. A pedometer
was attached to the rear right leg (day 3) and
estrus-inducing treatment given on day 0. During the
habituation period, pedometer scans and rectal tem-
perature monitoring were initiated. Pedometers were
scanned twice daily (0630 and 2130) from day 3 until
day of ovulation or until day 9 in cows that did
not ovulate. Rectal temperatures were taken twice
daily (0830 and 2130) using a digital thermometer
(PharmaSystems Inc, Markham, ON).
Estrus Synchronization, Blood Collection, and
Ultrasonography
The estrus-induced cows were given two intramuscular
treatments of prostaglandin F2a (PGF; 500 mg clopros-
tenol; Estrumate; Schering-Plough Animal Health,
Pointe-Claire, QC), 12 h apart on day 0. Control cows
were given sham treatments 12 h apart. Blood samples
were collected in estrus-induced cows every 12 h, from
day 0 (starting immediately before PGF treatment)
to day 3 by coccygeal venipuncture into evacuated
tubes containing sodium heparin (Vacutainer, Beckton
Dickinson and Co., Franklin Lakes, NJ). Samples were
immediately placed on ice and centrifuged within one
hour at 48C for 20 min at 1500g. Plasma was
separated and stored at 208C, and progesterone (P4)
concentrations were determined using a solid phase
radioimmunoassay procedure (Coat-a-Count; Diagnos-
tic Products Corp., Los Angeles, CA) to determine if the
cows responded to the PGF treatment. Responding
animals were expected to have plasma P4 concentra-
tions below 1 ng mL 1 24 to 96 h following PGF
administration (Hittinger et al. 2004). Transrectal ultra-
sonography (Aloka-500V scanner equipped with a
7.5 MHz linear transducer, Aloka Co., Tokyo, Japan)
was performed, once daily, from day 3 until ovulation
was confirmed or until day 9 in cows that failed to
ovulate. Control cows had their manure manually
removed to simulate a transrectal ultrasonography
procedure.
Description
 192 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE
Can. J. Anim. Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 188.72.127.148 on 12/02/16

Fig. 1. Experimental design and treatment schedule. PGF prostaglandin F2a. Pedometers were attached 3 d before estrus-induced
cows were given two treatments of PGF and control cows were given sham treatments (day 0). To determine if luteal regression
occurred following PGF treatment, blood samples were taken twice daily to determine plasma progesterone concentrations from
day 0 to day 3.

Statistical Analysis (Fig. 2). Ultrasonography confirmed that 16 out of 17

All statistical analyses were performed using SAS
software (SAS Institute, Inc. 2010). Steps, frequency of
lying bouts and lying time were tested for the assump-
tion of normality using PROC UNIVARIATE and were
found not to be normally distributed. Therefore, data on
steps were subjected to a log10 transformation, and
For personal use only.
(94.1%) responding cows ovulated within 9 d of PGF
treatment. The mean interval from PGF treatment to
ovulation was 5.590.6 d. Six (37.5%) cows ovulated on
day 4, four (25.0%) on day 5, two (12.5%) on day 6, two
(12.5%) on day 7, and two (12.5%) on day 9.

PROC MIXED was used to determine activity changes
over time. Lying bouts and lying time could not be
normalized after transformation; therefore, PROC
GENMOD was used because normality assumption is
not necessary with GENMOD. Least square means
were calculated for day, treatment, and treatment by
day interactions. A similar model was used to determine
changes in feed intake, rectal temperatures, and milk
production.
Increase in stepping activity occurs approximately
29 h prior to ovulation (Roelofs et al. 2005); therefore,
to compare estrus-induced activity in relation to ovula-
tion, data from all cows were centralized to the day
of ovulation. PROC GENMOD and PROC MIXED
procedures were used to determine activity changes
preceding ovulation in estrus-induced cows. Cows that
did not respond to the PGF treatment or did not ovulate
based on ovarian ultrasonography were removed from
all statistical analysis. Feed intake, rectal temperatures
and milk production were analyzed using the same
model for estrus-induced cows centralized to day of
ovulation.
Probability values of 50.05 were considered signifi-
cant; P values 0.05 but B0.10 were considered trends,
and P values ]0.10 were considered not significant.
RESULTS
Estrus Detection
A decline in plasma P4 concentrations by 24 h after
PGF treatment confirmed that 17 out of 19 (89.5%)
estrus-induced cows responded to the PGF treatment
Activity Data after PGF or Sham Treatment
Overall daily mean steps (13059212 vs. 15719155
steps; P 0.32) and frequency of lying bouts (1391
vs. 1391 lying bouts; P 0.88) per 24 h, over a 10-d
period (days 3 to 6), did not differ between estrus-
induced and control cows; however, estrus-induced cows
had lower overall mean lying time during that 10 d
period (646930 vs. 790923 min; P 0.01) compared
with control cows. During the predicted estrus period
(48 to 96 h after PGF) there were no significant changes
in steps, frequency of lying bouts, or lying time (by day)
in the estrus-induced cows before or after the
PGF injection. Pedometer records were also analyzed
Fig. 2. Daily average (days 0, 1, 2 and 3) of plasma
progesterone (P4) concentrations in cows that responded
(n 17) to the prostaglandin F2a (PGF) treatment and under-
went luteal regression; PGF was given on day 0, 3 d after
pedometers were attached. A significant decline of P4 occurred
within 24 h of PGF from day 0 to day 1 in 17 of the 19 estrus-
induced cows (P0.01).
 FELTON ET AL. * ESTRUS DETECTION IN TIE-STALL DAIRY COWS 193

separately for daytime (0630 to 2130) and nighttime
(2130 to 0630). Over the 10-d period, daytime mean
steps, frequency of lying bouts and lying time did not
differ (P0.56, P0.81, P0.38, respectively) between
estrus-induced and control cows, although estrus-
induced cows had lower lying time compared with con-
trol cows on days 3, 2, 0, 1, 2, and 6 (Table 2). Over
the 10-d period, nighttime steps and frequency of lying
bouts also did not differ (P0.19, P0.52, res-
pectively) between estrus-induced and control cows,
however, over the 10-d period lying time was lower
(286912 vs. 357915 min; P 0.01) for estrus-induced
Can. J. Anim. Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 188.72.127.148 on 12/02/16
free-stall housed cattle (steps, lying bouts and lying time;
r 0.82, r 0.98, r0.90, respectively). The pedometers
were closely related to video records in the present study;
therefore, we inferred that they accurately record cow
activity in a tie-stall facility.
Results did not support our second hypothesis that
pedometers would retrospectively facilitate estrus detec-
tion because estrus-induced tie-stall-cows manifested no
significant changes in steps, frequency of lying bouts
and lying time during the predicted estrus period. Unal
et al. (1986) found somewhat similar results for lying
activity by visually observing five heifers and five

cows compared with controls.
Feed intake (40.191.7 vs. 36.491.7 kg), and rectal
temperatures (38.790.3 vs. 38.390.38C) did not differ
between estrus-induced and control cows. Estrus-
induced cows had higher milk production (38.890.3 vs.
30.691.3 kg d1; P 0.02) compared with control cows.
Data Centralized to Day of Ovulation
In cows that ovulated (n 16) pedometer data were
centralized to day of ovulation. In the 48 to 72 h
preceding ovulation, daily steps, frequency of lying
bouts, and lying time (Figs. 3, 4 and 5, respectively)
did not change significantly. Steps, frequency of lying
bouts, and lying time did not change throughout the
For personal use only.
lactating cows that were stanchion-housed throughout
a 9-h undisturbed period (1900 to 0400). They deter-
mined that lying bouts and standing time increased
in only two of the 16 estrus periods; based on these
findings they concluded that lying bouts and standing
time are weak estrus detection indicators in stanchion-
housed cattle. The present study differed in design from
that of Unal et al. (1986) in that we observed the cows
continuously for 24 h each day and used a larger sample
size to determine changes in estrus activity.
Our results were quite different from the findings of
Kiddy (1977), Walton and King (1986), Redden et al.
(1993), and Kennedy and Ingalls (1995), who described

daytime (0630 to 2130) or nighttime (2130 to 0630)

activity events. Feed intake, rectal temperature and milk
production also did not change significantly in the
estrus-induced cows during the expected period of estrus
or during the peri-ovulatory period.

DISCUSSION
Our first hypothesis, that pedometers could accurately
record cow activity, was supported; results indicated that
pedometers accurately record steps, frequency of lying
bouts, and lying time in cows continuously housed in tie-
stalls. Our result is supported by Higginson et al. (2009)
who compared the same type of Afimilk pedometers with
IceTag pedometers (IceRobotics, UK). These authors
found that the two pedometers were highly correlated in


Table 2. Average lying time (min) during the day (0630 2130)
between control and estrus-induced cows. Day 0sham (control) or
PGF (estrus-induced) treatment
Fig. 3. Daily steps centralized to ovulation (day 0) in cows that
Day Control Estrus-induced P ovulated (n 16). To determine estrus-related activity changes
cows were induced into estrus, by prostaglandin F2a (PGF),
3 372.4 310.5 0.05 then monitored daily with pedometers until ovulation. Ovula-
2 453.4 389.3 0.04 tion was determined by daily transrectal ultrasonographic
1 456.2 421.9 NSz examinations. The mean interval from PGF treatment to
0 434.4 356.3 0.01
ovulation was 5.5 d. There were no significant changes in
1 456.7 383.4 0.02
2 472.0 372.2 0.01 stepping activity prior to ovulation (P0.13). The box itself
3 442.5 386.3 NS represents 50% of the data, while the upper limit of the box
4 443.6 395.1 NS represents the 75th percentile and the lower limit represents the
5 424.5 372.8 NS 25th percentile. The central dark line through the box
6 447.5 369.5 0.02 represents the median. The whiskers (vertical lines outside
box) represent the minimum and maximum values. The dots
z
NS, not significant. that fall outside the whiskers are outliers.
 194 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE
Can. J. Anim. Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 188.72.127.148 on 12/02/16
Fig. 4. Daily frequency of lying bouts centralized to ovulation
(day 0) in cows that ovulated (n 16). To determine estrus-
related activity changes cows were induced into estrus, by
prostaglandin F2a (PGF), then monitored daily with ped-
ometers until ovulation. Ovulation was determined by daily
transrectal ultrasonographic examinations. The mean interval
from PGF treatment to ovulation was 5.5 d. There were no
significant changes in the frequency of lying bouts prior to
For personal use only.
ovulation (P0.74). The box itself represents 50% of the data,
while the upper limit of the box represents the 75th percentile
and the lower limit represents the 25th percentile. The central
dark line through the box represents the median. The whiskers
(vertical lines outside box) represent the minimum and
maximum values. The dots that fall outside the whiskers are
outliers.
that activity increased during estrus in cows housed in
tie-stalls. This may be due to differences in the methods
between the studies. Cows in the current study remained
continuously in-stall, unlike cows in the previous reports
by Kiddy (1977), Redden et al. (1993), and Kennedy and
Ingalls (1995). Cows in those studies were given an out-
of-stall exercise period ranging from 30 min to 5 h d1.
Thus, estrus-related activity would have occurred during
these out-of-stall periods, when cows were free to move
around interacting with one another. There was no
opportunity for the cows in the current study to move
freely during the experimental period as, by design, they
were continuously housed in tie-stalls. When cows are
able to interact with herdmates, and when more than
one cow is in estrus at the same time, the expression
of estrous behavior and mounting activity increases
(Hurnik et al. 1975). Tie-stalls restrict the freedom of
movement and alter normal activity patterns in dairy
cattle (Krohn 1994). We believe that if cows in the
current study were given defined out-of-stall activity
periods, changes in activity associated with estrus would
have been manifested, increasing the possibility of estrus
detection by the pedometers. Even in cows housed
Fig. 5. Daily lying times centralized to ovulation (day 0) in
cows that ovulated (n 16). To determine estrus-related
activity changes cows were induced into estrus, by Prostaglan-
din F2a (PGF), then monitored daily with pedometers until
ovulation. Ovulation was determined by daily transrectal
ultrasonographic examinations. The mean interval from PGF
treatment to ovulation was 5.5 d. There were no significant
changes in lying time prior to ovulation (P0.34). The box
itself represents 50% of the data, while the upper limit of the
box represents the 75th percentile and the lower limit
represents the 25th percentile. The central dark line through
the box represents the median. The whiskers (vertical lines
outside box) represent the minimum and maximum values.
The dots that fall outside the whiskers are outliers.
in free-stall barns, pedometer-based estrus detection is
subject to inaccuracies with missed estrus events ranging
from 13 to 49%, depending on the threshold set for
estrus alerts (Roelofs et al. 2005).
There are also physiological reasons that may explain
the lack of changes in activity; one in particular is the
incidence of silent estrus. Silent estrus is when cows do
not express overt sexual behavior or do not increase
their activity in association with estrus. Ranasinghe
et al. (2010) used pedometers to record changes in
activity surrounding estrus in a free-stall facility. They
reported that silent estrus occurred in 55, 23, and 21%
of cows during their first, second, and third ovulation
postpartum, respectively.
Ranasinghe et al. (2010) also reported that the risk
of silent estrus increases greatly in cows producing
]27.8 kg d 1. In the current study estrus-induced
cows produced, on average, 38.8 kg d1, which could
also have increased the risk of silent estrus.
Our finding that estrus-induced cows (that were in
mid-to-peak milk production) had shorter overall lying
time is similar to that of Fregonesi and Leaver (2001),
who reported that higher-yielding cows have shor-
ter lying times. The decrease in lying time in cows
 FELTON ET AL. * ESTRUS DETECTION IN TIE-STALL DAIRY COWS
producing more milk may be due to increased time
standing to ingest feed in order to meet their higher
nutritional requirements during peak lactation (Bewley
et al. 2010).
Rectal temperatures did not differ between estrus-
induced and control cows in the present study. However,
Walton and King (1986) found an increase in rectal
temperatures during estrus in tie-stall cows that were
given an out-of-stall activity period. These authors
reported that cows with the largest increase in tempera-
ture were also observed in estrus during the exercise
period that immediately preceded the temperature
Can. J. Anim. Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 188.72.127.148 on 12/02/16
measurement. Based on this observation, Walton and
King (1986) concluded that the increase in rectal
temperature resulted from the increased activity preced-
ing the temperature measurement. Considering that
estrus-induced cows in this study were continuously
housed in tie-stalls and exhibited no changes in estrus-
related activity, the lack of change in rectal temperatures
was not surprising.
Feed intake did not change in association with estrus
in our study, which is consistent with the results of De
Silva et al. (1981) and Kerbrat and Disenhaus (2004). De
Silva et al. (1981) neither found a correlation between
feed intake and estrous activity, nor any changes in feed
intake up to 3 d before or after estrus. Kerbrat and
For personal use only.
Disenhaus (2004) also found no differences in time spent
eating on the day of estrus. Walton and King (1986)
found that the mean daily feed intake was lower on the
day of estrus; however, this difference was the result of
only seven cows. Interestingly, depression in feed intake
occurred on several other occasions and was distributed
randomly across all phases of the estrous cycle (Walton
and King 1986). Clearly, feed intake depression is a poor
predictor of estrus in dairy cows.
In summary, although most cows responded to estrus-
induction treatment and underwent luteolysis within
24 h, the interval from PGF treatment to ovulation
varied considerably, ranging from 4 to 9 d. The expected
changes in estrus-related activity did not occur in any of
the cows studied. Although the pedometers were ac-
curate in detecting cow activity, they did not facilitate
estrus detection as cows continuously housed in tie-
stalls did not manifest detectable changes in activity
associated with estrus. It is not clear if a longer pre-
treatment habituation period would have created a
stronger baseline of normal behavior facilitating detec-
tion of behavior deviations easier. Future studies should
address this question.
CONCLUSION
The pedometers tested in this study accurately measured
steps, frequency of lying bouts, and lying time in cows
continuously housed in tie-stalls. However, because cow
activity did not significantly change during estrus, the
pedometers did not facilitate estrus detection. Findings
indicate that poor estrus expression in lactating dairy
cows is an impediment to estrus detection, even with
195
electronic aids, particularly, when cows are housed
continuously in tie-stalls.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Research supported by Alberta Milk, Alberta Innovates
 BioSolutions, Alberta Livestock and Meat Agency,
Agriculture and Food Council of Alberta, and Alberta
Agriculture and Rural Development. The authors thank
Jamie Kratchkowski, Natasha Kutryk, Mandy Van
Wolde and Andrew Ambrocichuk and the Dairy
Research and Technology Centre staff for their assis-
tance, Dr. Derek Haley for his technical advice and
Dr. Laki Goonewardene for his suggestions on sta-
tistical analyses. We gratefully acknowledge Afikim
(Israel) for donating theAfiMilk Pedometer Plus Tag
system used in this study.
Ambrose, D. J. and Colazo, M. G. 2007. Reproductive status of
dairy herds in Alberta: a closer look. Proc. 2007 Western Can.
Dairy Sem. Adv. Dairy Technol. 19: 227244.
At-Taras, E. E. and Spahr, S. L. 2001. Detection and
characterization of estrus in dairy cattle with an electronic
heatmount detector and an electronic activity tag. J. Dairy Sci.
84: 792798.
Bewley, J. M., Boyce, R. E., Hockin, J., Munksgaard, L.,
Eicher, S. D., Einstein, M. E. and Schutz, M. M. 2010.
Influence of milk yield, stage of lactation, and body condition
on dairy cattle lying behaviour measured using an automated
activity monitoring sensor. J. Dairy Res. 77: 16.
Britt, J. H., Scott, R. G., Armstrong, J. D. and Whitacre, M. D.
1986. Determinants of estrous behavior in lactating Holstein
cows. J. Dairy Sci. 69: 21952202.
Canadian Council of Animal Care. 2009. The care and use of
farm animals in research, teaching, and testing. E. D. Olfert,
B. M. Cross, and A. A. McWilliam, eds. Vol. 1. 2nd ed.
CCAC, Ottawa, ON.
Canadian Dairy Information Centre. 2011. Dairy barns by
type in Canada 2011. 2011: 1. [Online] Available: http://www.
dairyinfo.gc.ca/index_e.php?s1dff-fcil&s2farm-ferme&page
barn [2011 Jul. 05].
De Silva, A. W. M. V., Anderson, G. W., Gwazdauskas, F. C.,
McGilliard, M. L. and Lineweaver, J. A. 1981. Interrelation-
ships with estrous behavior and conception in dairy cattle.
J. Dairy Sci. 64: 24092418.
Firk, R., Stamer, E., Junge, W. and Krieter, J. 2002. Automa-
tion of oestrus detection in dairy cows: a review. Livest. Prod.
Sci. 75: 219232.
Fregonesi, J. A. and Leaver, J. D. 2001. Behaviour, perfor-
mance and health indicators of welfare for dairy cows housed
in strawyard or cubicle systems. Livest. Prod. Sci. 68: 205216.
Higginson, J. H., Leslie, K. E., Millman, S. T. and Kelton, D. F.
2009. Evaluation of the Pedometry Plus system for the
detection of pedometric activity and lying behaviour in dairy
cattle. J. Dairy. Sci. 92: (E-Suppl. 1) 346.
Hittinger, M. A., Ambrose, J. D. and Kastelic, J. P. 2004.
Luteolysis, onset of estrus, and ovulation in Holstein heifers
given prostaglandin F2a concurrent with, or 24 hours prior to,
removal of an intravaginal, progesterone-releasing device.
Can. J. Vet. Res. 68: 283287.
Hurnik, J. F., King, G. J. and Robertson, H. A. 1975. Estrus
behavior and estrus detection in postpartum dairy cows.
Can. J. Anim. Sci. 55: 473474.
 196 CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE
Kennedy, A. D. and Ingalls, J. R. 1995. Estrus detection with
activity tags in dairy cows housed in tie-stalls. Can. J. Anim.
Sci. 75: 633636.
Kerbrat, S. and Disenhaus, C. 2004. A proposition for an
updated behavioural characterization of the oestrus period in
dairy cows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 87: 223238.
Kiddy, C. A. 1977. Variation in physical activity as an
indication of estrus in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 60: 235243.
Krohn, C. C. 1994. Behaviour of dairy cows kept in extensive
(loose housing/pasture) or intensive (tie stall) environments.
III. Grooming, exploration and abnormal behaviour. Appl.
Anim. Behav. Sci. 42: 7386.
LeBlanc, S. 2005. Using DHI records on-farm to evaluate
reproductive performance. Proc. 2005 Western Can. Dairy
Can. J. Anim. Sci. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by 188.72.127.148 on 12/02/16
Sem. Adv. Dairy Technol. 17: 319330.
Lin, L. I-K. 1989. A concordance correlation coefficient to
evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 45: 255268.
Lin, L. I-K. 1992. Assay validation using the concordance
correlation coefficient. Biometrics 48: 588604.
National Research Council. 2001. Nutrient requirements for
dairy cattle. 7th rev. ed. National Acad. Press, Washington,
DC.
Nebel, R. L. and Jobst, S. M. 1998. Evaluation of systematic
breeding programs for lactating dairy cows: A Review.
J. Dairy Sci. 81: 11691174.
Pollock, W. E. and Hurnick, L. F. 1979. Effect of two
confinement systems on estrus detection and diestrus beha-
viour in dairy cows. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 59: 799803.
Ranasinghe, R. M. S. B. K., Nakao, T., Yamada, K. and Koike,
For personal use only.
K. 2010. Silent ovulation, based on walking activity and milk
progesterone concentrations, in Holstein cows housed in a
free-stall barn. Theriogenology 73: 942949.
Redden, K. D., Kennedy, A. D., Ingalls, J. R. and Gilson, T. L.
1993. Detection of estrus by radiotelemetric monitoring of
vaginal and ear skin temperature and pedometer measure-
ments of activity. J. Dairy Sci. 76: 713721.
Roelofs, J., López-Gatius, F., Hunter, R. H. F., van Eerdenburg,
F. J. C. M. and Hanzen, C. 2010. When is a cow in estrus?
Clinical and practical aspects. Theriogenology 74: 327344.
Roelofs, J. B., van Eerdenburg, F. J. C. M., Soede, N. M. and
Kemp, B. 2005. Pedometer readings for estrous detection
and as predictor for time of ovulation in dairy cattle.
Theriogenology 64: 16901703.
SAS Institute, Inc. 2010. SAS user’s guide: Statistics version
9.2. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC.
Senger, P. L. 1994. The estrus detection problem: new
concepts, technologies, and possibilities. J. Dairy Sci. 77:
27452753.
Unal, M. B., Crackel, W. C. and Whitmore, H. L. 1986.
Detection of estrus in cattle housed in stanchions by constant
human observation of behavioral traits. Theriogenology 25:
303308.
Walton, J. S. and King, G. J. 1986. Indicators of estrus in
Holstein cows housed in tie stalls. J. Dairy Sci. 69: 29662973.
Xu, Z. Z., McKnight, D. J., Vishwanath, R., Pitt, C. J. and
Burton, L. J. 1998. Estrus detection using radiotelemetry or
visual observation and tail painting for dairy cows on pasture.
J. Dairy Sci. 81: 28902896.