Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
research-article

Improvement of feedlot operations through statistical learning and business analytics tools

Published: 01 December 2017 Publication History

Abstract

Gradient boosting and random forest regression are used topredict future cattle growth.An ensemble method further improves prediction accuracy fromindividual modeling outputs.Hierarchical clustering is used for group homogeneity whenassigning cattle to feeding pens.The method estimates the optimal time each individual cattle should remain in the system.A case study based on an operation in Sonora, Mexico ispresented. A decision-support, modeling tool is developed that can project future cattle growth patterns in a feedlot based on a low dimensionality dataset available at the start of the feeding process. This work adapts the predictive performance of two well-known statistical machine modeling tools, gradient boosting and random forest regression, to predict future cattle growth. Time series analysis techniques are then used to create an ensemble method that further improves prediction accuracy from individual modeling outputs. Hierarchical clustering techniques are used to leverage projected growth patterns to increase group homogeneity when assigning cattle to different feeding pens. Finally, a profit maximization method is developed that estimates the optimal time each individual cattle should remain in the system under different revenue and cost estimates.The purpose of this work is to incentivize the implementation of modern statistical learning tools in cattle management operations, especially within low-to-mid scale operations that traditionally rely on the expertise of its workers and have limited cattle and process information. Access to off-the-shelf statistical learning tools, requiring minimal user-interaction, not only enhances prediction accuracy but helps automate operational decisions. This results in higher process efficiencies and improved standardization practices, while also helping identify profit opportunities. Finally, integrating these components into a single operating framework allows the tool to adapt to changes in data characteristics, which is especially important within non-standardized processes. We show the application of this tool through a case study implementation on a mid-scale operation in the northwestern state of Sonora, Mexico. From our case-study results, it was found that the modeling tool can satisfactorily predict growth patterns based on a low-dimensional set. It also can also capture historic decision-making when segmenting cattle into homogenous groups during their feeding process. Furthermore, it can help identify profit opportunities when estimating optimal cattle system times under varying market conditions.

References

[1]
J. Alonso, A. Villa, A. Bahamonde, Improved estimation of bovine weight trajectories using Support Vector Machine Classification, Comput. Electron. Agric., 110 (2015) 36-41.
[2]
J.A. Archer, L. Bergh, Duration of performance tests for growth rate, feed intake and feed efficiency in four biological types of beef cattle, Livest. Prod. Sci., 65 (2000) 47-55.
[3]
R.N. Arnold, G.L. Bennett, Evaluation of four simulation models of cattle growth and body composition: Part IComparison and characterization of the models, Agric. Syst., 35 (1991) 401-432.
[4]
R.N. Arnold, G.L. Bennett, Evaluation of four simulation models of cattle growth and body composition: Part IISimulation and comparison with experimental growth data, Agric. Syst., 36 (1991) 17-41.
[5]
J.A. Basarab, J.R. Brethour, D.R. Zobell, B. Graham, Sorting feeder cattle with a system that integrates ultrasound backfat and marbling estimates with a model that maximizes feedlot profitability in value-based marketing, Can. J. Anim. Sci., 79 (1999) 327-334.
[6]
J.M. Bates, C.W.J. Granger, The combination of forecasts, OR, 20 (1969) 451-468.
[7]
J.R. Bergstrom, Effects of Birth Weight, Finishing Feeder Design, and Dietary Astaxanthin and Ractopamine HCl on the Growth, Carcass, and Pork Quality Characteristics of Pigs; and Meta-Analyses to Improve the Prediction of Pork Fat Quality, Kansas State University, Kansas, 2011.
[8]
J.R. Bergstrom, J.L. Nelssen, M.D. Tokach, S.S. Dritz, R.D. Goodband, J.M. Derouchey, Effects of two feeder designs and adjustment strategies on the growth performance and carcass characteristics of growing-finishing pigs, J. Anim. Sci., 90 (2012) 4555-4566.
[9]
J. Bohmanova, I. Misztal, J.K. Bertrand, Studies on multiple trait and random regression models for genetic evaluation of beef cattle for growth, J. Anim. Sci., 83 (2005) 62-67.
[10]
J.R. Brethour, The relationship of average backfat thickness of feedlot steers to performance and relative efficiency of fat and protein retention, J. Anim. Sci., 82 (2004) 3366-3372.
[11]
J. Bryant, N. Lopez-Villalobos, C. Holmes, J. Pryce, J. Rossi, K. Macdonald, Development and evaluation of a pastoral simulation model that predicts dairy cattle performance based on animal genotype and environmental sensitivity information, Agric. Syst., 97 (2008) 13-25.
[12]
O.J. Cacho, J.D. Finlayson, A.C. Bywater, A simulation model of grazing sheep: II. Whole farm model, Agric. Syst., 48 (1995) 27-50.
[13]
Casas, A., Cianzio, D., Rivera, A., 1999. La Res Informativa, Volumen 4, Numero 2. Colegio de Ciencias Agrcolas Recinto Universitario de Mayagez, UPR, Departamento de Industria Pecuaria.
[14]
M. Dror, J.M. Leung, Combinatorial optimization in a cattle yard: Feed distribution, vehicle scheduling, lot sizing, and dynamic pen assignment, in: Industrial Applications of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, US, 1998, pp. 142-171.
[15]
J.D. Finlayson, O.J. Cacho, A.C. Bywater, A simulation model of grazing sheep: I. Animal growth and intake, Agric. Syst., 48 (1995) 1-25.
[16]
T.M. Fischer, J.H.J. Van der Werf, R.G. Banks, A.J. Ball, Description of lamb growth using random regression on field data, Livest. Prod. Sci., 89 (2004) 175-185.
[17]
D.E. Franke, O. Habet, L.C. Tawah, A.R. Williams, S.M. DeRouen, Direct and maternal genetic effects on birth and weaning traits in multibreed cattle data and predicted performance of breed crosses, J. Anim. Sci., 79 (2001) 1713-1722.
[18]
R. Gebbers, V.I. Adamchuk, Precision agriculture and food security, Science, 327 (2010) 828-831.
[19]
T. Hastie, R. Tibshirani, J. Friedman, Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, Springer Series in Statistics, 2009.
[20]
D.J. Kilpatrick, R.W.J. Steen, A predictive model for beef cattle growth and carcass composition, Agric. Syst., 61 (1999) 95-107.
[21]
P.J. Kononoff, P.J. Defoor, M.J. Engler, R.S. Swingle, S.T. James, H.M. Deobald, F.L.S. Marquess, Performance and carcass characteristics when sorting feedlot cattle on the basis of phenotype, and leptin genotype along with differential use of -adrenergic agonists, Can. J. Anim. Sci., 95 (2015) 455-463.
[22]
K. Meyer, Random regression analyses using B-splines to model growth of Australian Angus cattle, Genet. Sel. Evol., 37 (2005) 473.
[23]
K. Meyer, Estimates of genetic parameters for mature weight of Australian beef cows and its relationship to early growth and skeletal measures, Livest. Prod. Sci., 44 (1995) 125-137.
[24]
D.C. Montgomery, C.L. Jennings, M. Kulahci, Introduction to Time Series Analysis and Forecasting, Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey, 2015.
[25]
D.C. Montgomery, E.A. Peck, G.G. Vining, Introduction to Linear Regression Analysis, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2012.
[26]
B.L. Nielsen, A.B. Lawrence, C.T. Whittemore, Effects of single-space feeder design on feeding behaviour and performance of growing pigs, Anim. Sci., 61 (1995) 575-579.
[27]
H. Okut, X.-L. Wu, G.J. Rosa, S. Bauck, B.W. Woodward, R.D. Schnabel, J.F. Taylor, D. Gianola, Predicting expected progeny difference for marbling score in Angus cattle using artificial neural networks and Bayesian regression models, Genet. Sel. Evol., 45 (2013) 34.
[28]
J. Pibyl, H. Krejov, J. Pibylov, I. Misztal, J. Bohmanov, Trajectory of body weight of performance tested dual-purpose bulls, ResearchGate, 52 (2007).
[29]
L.R. Schaeffer, Application of random regression models in animal breeding, Livest. Prod. Sci., 86 (2004) 35-45.
[30]
S. Shahinfar, D. Page, J. Guenther, V. Cabrera, P. Fricke, K. Weigel, Prediction of insemination outcomes in Holstein dairy cattle using alternative machine learning algorithms, J. Dairy Sci., 97 (2014) 731-742.
[31]
L.O. Tedeschi, D.G. Fox, P.J. Guiroy, A decision support system to improve individual cattle management. 1. A mechanistic, dynamic model for animal growth, Agric. Syst., 79 (2004) 171-204.
[32]
USDA, Beef Feedlot Industry Manual, The United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Services, 2011.
[33]
D. Villalba, G. Ripoll, R. Ruiz, A. Bernus, Long-term stochastic simulation of mountain beef cattle herds under diverse management strategies, Agric. Syst., 103 (2010) 210-220.
  1. Improvement of feedlot operations through statistical learning and business analytics tools

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image Computers and Electronics in Agriculture
    Computers and Electronics in Agriculture  Volume 143, Issue C
    December 2017
    325 pages

    Publisher

    Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

    Netherlands

    Publication History

    Published: 01 December 2017

    Author Tags

    1. Cattle industry
    2. Feedlot
    3. Growth patterns
    4. Statistical machine learning

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 0
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 18 Dec 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    View options

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media