A comparison of RFID and visual ear tag retention in dairy cattle in Malaysia
Animal identification is a basic tool to identify animals for all activities including for farm management. Electronic ear tag using radio frequency identification (RFID) technology has been newly introduced in the dairy population. The objective of this study was to evaluate the retention of RFID a...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Conference or Workshop Item |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Indonesian Center for Animal Research and Development
2016
|
| Online Access: | http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/56847/1/A%20comparison%20of%20RFID%20and%20visual%20ear%20tag%20retention%20in%20dairy%20cattle%20in%20Malaysia.pdf |
| _version_ | 1825931496485027840 |
|---|---|
| author | Amad Bugis, Salina Hassan, Latiffah Saharee, Abdul Aziz Stevenson, M. A. Ghazali, K. |
| author_facet | Amad Bugis, Salina Hassan, Latiffah Saharee, Abdul Aziz Stevenson, M. A. Ghazali, K. |
| author_sort | Amad Bugis, Salina |
| collection | UPM |
| description | Animal identification is a basic tool to identify animals for all activities including for farm management. Electronic ear tag using radio frequency identification (RFID) technology has been newly introduced in the dairy population. The objective of this study was to evaluate the retention of RFID and visual ear tag of various brands in dairy cattle in Malaysia. A field trial was carried out on 102 dairy cattle to assess the retention of four brands of RFID tags (Allflex, Cybortra, TSG and Ecosensa) and three brands of visual ear tags (Allflex, Cybortra, and Ecosensa). The presence or lost of the tag was evaluated every three month for one year. Cybortra RFID tag and Allflex visual ear tag have the highest percentage of tag retention at 81.5 and 96.1%, respectively when compared to other brands. The percentage of cattle that lost both of its tag (RFID and visual ear tag) was low at 3.7% for Cybortra brand and 0.0% for Allflex brand. Whereas, the percentage of cattle that lost its single identification was highest (45.5%) for TSG RFID tag. Severe ear necrosis was observed to be one of the reasons that influence the tag lost. Cattle with two identifications was found to be traced more efficiently compared to the cattle with single identification. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-06T09:27:38Z |
| format | Conference or Workshop Item |
| id | upm.eprints-56847 |
| institution | Universiti Putra Malaysia |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-06T09:27:38Z |
| publishDate | 2016 |
| publisher | Indonesian Center for Animal Research and Development |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | upm.eprints-568472017-09-05T09:57:17Z http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/56847/ A comparison of RFID and visual ear tag retention in dairy cattle in Malaysia Amad Bugis, Salina Hassan, Latiffah Saharee, Abdul Aziz Stevenson, M. A. Ghazali, K. Animal identification is a basic tool to identify animals for all activities including for farm management. Electronic ear tag using radio frequency identification (RFID) technology has been newly introduced in the dairy population. The objective of this study was to evaluate the retention of RFID and visual ear tag of various brands in dairy cattle in Malaysia. A field trial was carried out on 102 dairy cattle to assess the retention of four brands of RFID tags (Allflex, Cybortra, TSG and Ecosensa) and three brands of visual ear tags (Allflex, Cybortra, and Ecosensa). The presence or lost of the tag was evaluated every three month for one year. Cybortra RFID tag and Allflex visual ear tag have the highest percentage of tag retention at 81.5 and 96.1%, respectively when compared to other brands. The percentage of cattle that lost both of its tag (RFID and visual ear tag) was low at 3.7% for Cybortra brand and 0.0% for Allflex brand. Whereas, the percentage of cattle that lost its single identification was highest (45.5%) for TSG RFID tag. Severe ear necrosis was observed to be one of the reasons that influence the tag lost. Cattle with two identifications was found to be traced more efficiently compared to the cattle with single identification. Indonesian Center for Animal Research and Development 2016 Conference or Workshop Item PeerReviewed application/pdf en http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/56847/1/A%20comparison%20of%20RFID%20and%20visual%20ear%20tag%20retention%20in%20dairy%20cattle%20in%20Malaysia.pdf Amad Bugis, Salina and Hassan, Latiffah and Saharee, Abdul Aziz and Stevenson, M. A. and Ghazali, K. (2016) A comparison of RFID and visual ear tag retention in dairy cattle in Malaysia. In: International Seminar on Livestock Production and Veterinary Technology 2016, 10-12 Aug. 2016, Bali, Indonesia. (pp. 178-182). http://medpub.litbang.pertanian.go.id/index.php/proceedings/article/view/1477 |
| spellingShingle | Amad Bugis, Salina Hassan, Latiffah Saharee, Abdul Aziz Stevenson, M. A. Ghazali, K. A comparison of RFID and visual ear tag retention in dairy cattle in Malaysia |
| title | A comparison of RFID and visual ear tag retention in dairy cattle in Malaysia |
| title_full | A comparison of RFID and visual ear tag retention in dairy cattle in Malaysia |
| title_fullStr | A comparison of RFID and visual ear tag retention in dairy cattle in Malaysia |
| title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of RFID and visual ear tag retention in dairy cattle in Malaysia |
| title_short | A comparison of RFID and visual ear tag retention in dairy cattle in Malaysia |
| title_sort | comparison of rfid and visual ear tag retention in dairy cattle in malaysia |
| url | http://psasir.upm.edu.my/id/eprint/56847/1/A%20comparison%20of%20RFID%20and%20visual%20ear%20tag%20retention%20in%20dairy%20cattle%20in%20Malaysia.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT amadbugissalina acomparisonofrfidandvisualeartagretentionindairycattleinmalaysia AT hassanlatiffah acomparisonofrfidandvisualeartagretentionindairycattleinmalaysia AT sahareeabdulaziz acomparisonofrfidandvisualeartagretentionindairycattleinmalaysia AT stevensonma acomparisonofrfidandvisualeartagretentionindairycattleinmalaysia AT ghazalik acomparisonofrfidandvisualeartagretentionindairycattleinmalaysia AT amadbugissalina comparisonofrfidandvisualeartagretentionindairycattleinmalaysia AT hassanlatiffah comparisonofrfidandvisualeartagretentionindairycattleinmalaysia AT sahareeabdulaziz comparisonofrfidandvisualeartagretentionindairycattleinmalaysia AT stevensonma comparisonofrfidandvisualeartagretentionindairycattleinmalaysia AT ghazalik comparisonofrfidandvisualeartagretentionindairycattleinmalaysia |