Risk factors for lameness in cubicle housed Austrian Simmental dairy cows

Welfare of dairy cows

This Scientific Opinion addresses a European Commission's mandate on the welfare of dairy cows as part of the Farm to Fork strategy. It includes three assessments carried out based on literature reviews and complemented by expert opinion. Assessment 1 describes the most prevalent housing systems for dairy cows in Europe: tie-stalls, cubicle housing, open-bedded systems and systems with access to an outdoor area. Per each system, the scientific opinion describes the distribution in the EU and assesses the main strengths, weaknesses and hazards potentially reducing the welfare of dairy cows. Assessment 2 addresses five welfare consequences as requested in the mandate: locomotory disorders (including lameness), mastitis, restriction of movement and resting problems, inability to perform comfort behaviour and metabolic disorders. Per each welfare consequence, a set of animal-based measures is suggested, a detailed analysis of the prevalence in different housing systems is provided, and subsequently, a comparison of the housing systems is given. Common and specific system-related hazards as well as management-related hazards and respective preventive measures are investigated. Assessment 3 includes an analysis of farm characteristics (e.g. milk yield, herd size) that could be used to classify the level of on-farm welfare. From the available scientific literature, it was not possible to derive relevant associations between available farm data and cow welfare. Therefore, an approach based on expert knowledge elicitation (EKE) was developed. The EKE resulted in the identification of five farm characteristics (more than one cow per cubicle at maximum stocking density, limited space for cows, inappropriate cubicle size, high on-farm mortality and farms with less than 2 months access to pasture). If one or more of these farm characteristics are present, it is recommended to conduct an assessment of cow welfare on the farm in question using animal-based measures for specified welfare consequences.

A multistate modeling approach to investigate long-term effects of claw horn disruption lesions and early lesion development in dairy cows

Claw horn disruption lesions (CHDL) are a leading cause of lameness in dairy cattle, and the development, effect, and pathology of these lesions remains an open area of interest within dairy cattle health. Current literature typically attempts to measure the effect of risk factors on the development of CHDL over a relatively short time period. Further understanding of the interaction of CHDL and the long-term effect of early CHDL in a cow's life remains an important area of research which is so far mostly unexplored. In this study 57,974 cows from 1,332 herds were selected and their regular claw trimming records containing important claw health information were used to model the long-term effect of lesions in a cow's lifetime in a 6-state multistate model. A multistate model predicts the time before transition from any one state to another and the probability of transition to a future state. The 6 lesion states that were modeled were as follows: never had a lesion, first recorded lesion event, no recorded lesion after first lesion event, second or subsequent recorded lesion event, no recorded lesion after second or subsequent lesion event, and culled. The effect of various cow level covariates on the transition probabilities between various states was tested. For the first time, this study shows the importance and effect of the first lesion and other cow level factors on long-term claw health. Model results showed that the timing and severity of the first recorded lesion event significantly influenced the likelihood of a future lesion being present. Cows with CHDL present within the 180 d of first calving had a short-term increased risk and long-term decreased risk of a future lesion, compared with cows that present with CHDL later than 180 d of first lactation. Moreover, presence of a severe first lesion increased a cow's risk of a future lesion being present. The model was used to evaluate the relative difference between high-risk cows (age of first calving ≥793 d, breeding values in the lowest quartile) and low-risk cows (age of first calving ≤718 d, breeding values in the highest quartile). Our results indicated that these low-risk cows present with a lesion on an average 3 mo later than high-risk cows. Furthermore, results from the model evaluation of a simulated herd with cows with breeding values in the higher quartile indicated that cows present with a CHDL on an average 7.5 mo later compared with a herd where cows have breeding values distributed in a lower quartile.

Risk factors associated with indicators of dairy cow welfare during the housing period in Irish, spring-calving, hybrid pasture-based systems

In a dairy production system where cows are grazing for a large portion of their lactation, little attention has been afforded to investigating multiple indicators of welfare for risk factors associated with the housing period. Yet regardless of the length of the housing period, cows still experience the positive and negative welfare impacts of both indoor and outdoor environments in a hybrid system. Thus, the objective of this study was to identify risk factors for indicators of dairy cow welfare during the housing period in a spring-calving, hybrid pasture-based system. Herd-level scores for seven indicators of welfare (locomotion, body condition, ocular and nasal discharge, integument damage, tail injury and human avoidance response) were collected from 82 Irish dairy farms during the housing period (October - February). Data were analysed using multiple beta regression or zero-inflated beta regression to identify associations between these welfare indicators and measured herd-level housing, resource and management factors. Thirty-six unique risk factors were associated with one or more welfare indicators (P < 0.05). Analyses identified two risk factors for body condition < 3.0 and four for body condition > 3.5, the target range during the housing period. Four risk factors were identified for each of ocular discharge, nasal discharge and avoidance response of > 1 m from human approach. Six risk factors each were associated with the proportion of lame cows and integument damage to the head-neck-back or hindquarter regions. The greatest number of risk factors, 12, were associated with tail injury (broken, lacerated or incomplete tails). Risk factors associated with multiple indicators of welfare were cow comfort index (tail lacerations and hindquarter integument damage), cubicle width (broken and incomplete tails), shed floor slipperiness (lameness and head-neck-back integument damage), shed light-level (tail lacerations, avoidance response and below target body condition), shed passage width (broken tails and head-neck-back integument damage) and presence (incomplete tails) or absence (broken tails) of a collecting yard backing gate. With the large number of risk factors associated with tail injury, continued research is necessary to identify causes and determine prevention methods to contribute to improved overall welfare of dairy cows. Housing features meeting recommended guidelines from the literature were frequently associated with greater negative indicators of welfare. In light of this, housing guidelines may benefit from regular re-evaluation to ensure facilities meet the welfare needs of cows during the housing period.

Effects of Housing and Management Factors on Selected Indicators of the Welfare Quality® Protocol in Loose-Housed Dairy Cows

The objective of this study was to examine the effects of housing and management factors on animal welfare indicators in dairy cows using a benchmarking approach. In total, 63 conventional dairy cattle farms with zero-grazing in Northern Germany were assessed using selected animal welfare indicators (body condition score, integument alterations, lameness, milk somatic cell count, and social behaviour) of the Welfare Quality® protocol. Additionally, housing characteristics such as designs of barns, cubicles, and floors were documented during farm visits and farmers were interviewed concerning their common management routines. Farms were categorized into a high welfare or low welfare group by calculating upper and lower tertiles for each of the animal welfare indicators separately. Both groups were compared regarding housing conditions and management practices using univariable and multivariable logistic regressions. Several associations between housing and management factors and animal welfare indicators were demonstrated in univariable analysis (p < 0.20). Significant effects within multivariable logistic regression analysis were determined for lameness (routine use of foot-baths), milk somatic cell count (milking frequency) and social behaviour (cow-to-stall ratio) (p < 0.05). Comparing farms with higher and lower animal welfare status can provide useful information about effective options to improve animal welfare.

Lameness prevalence and management practices on Irish pasture-based dairy farms

Background

Lameness is a painful disease, which negatively impacts dairy cow production and welfare. The aim of this observational study was to determine herd lameness prevalence, describe current lameness management practices and identify the presence of established risk factors for lameness on Irish pasture-based dairy farms. Farms were visited once during grazing (99 farms) and again during housing (85 farms). Lameness scoring was carried out at each visit (AHDB 0–3 scale); cows were classified as lame if they scored two or three. Farm management practices and infrastructure characteristics were evaluated via farmer questionnaires and direct measurements of farm infrastructure.

Results

Median herd-level lameness prevalence was 7.9% (interquartile range = 5.6 – 13.0) during grazing and 9.1% (interquartile range = 4.9 – 12.0) during housing; 10.9% of cows were lame at a single visit and 3.5% were lame at both visits (chronically lame or had a repeat episode of lameness). Fifty-seven percent of farmers were not familiar with lameness scoring and only one farm carried out lameness scoring. Only 22% of farmers kept records of lame cows detected, and 15% had a lameness herd health plan. Twenty-eight percent of farmers waited more than 48 h to treat a lame cow, and 21% waited for more than one cow to be identified as lame before treating. Six percent of farmers carried out routine trimming and 31% regularly footbathed (> 12 times per year). Twelve percent put severely lame cows in a closer paddock and 8% stated that they used pain relief to treat severely lame cows. Over 50% of farms had at least one cow track measurement that was classified as rough or very rough, and cow tracks were commonly narrow for the herd size. On 6% of farms, all cubicle beds were bare concrete (no matting or bedding) and on a further 6% of farms, there was a combination of cubicles with and without matting or bedding. On 56% of farms, all pens contained less than 1.1 cubicles per cow and on 28% of farms, a proportion of pens contained less than 1.1 cubicles per cow.

Conclusions

Overall, this study identified infrastructure and management practices which could be improved upon. The comparatively low lameness prevalence demonstrated, compared to fully housed systems, also highlights the benefits of a pasture-based system for animal welfare; however, there remains scope for improvement.

Benchmarking Based on Regularly Recorded Claw Health Data of Austrian Dairy Cattle for Implementation in the Cattle Data Network (RDV)

While benchmarking is already used for the assessment of performance gaps in cattle herd management and welfare concerns, its application to quantifying claw health performance is relatively new. The goal here was to establish a benchmarking system for claw health in Austrian dairy cattle. We used electronically registered claw health data of cows from 512 dairy herds documented by professional hoof trimmers, culling data from the same herds, and locomotion scores taken at regular milk performance testings in 99 dairy herds during 2020. Mean, median and the 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles of the incidences of risk of lameness, 13 common claw lesions, and the annual culling risk directly related to claw and limb disorders were used as key performance indicators. Only validated data sets were used and participating trimmers and locomotion scorers had to pass interobserver reliability tests with weighted Cohen's kappa values ≥ 0.61 indicating substantial interobserver agreement. This claw health benchmarking system is intended to be used henceforth in the transnational cattle data network (RDV) by all participating farmers and is also available for veterinarians and consultants, with the agreement of respective farmers.

Cow- and herd-level risk factors for lameness in partly housed pasture-based dairy cows

Lameness in dairy cows is a major animal welfare concern and has substantial economic impact through reduced production and fertility. Previous risk factor analyses have focused on housed systems, rather than those where cows were grazed for the majority of the year and housed only for the winter period. Therefore, the aim of this observational study was to identify a robust set of cow-level and herd-level risk factors for lameness in a pasture-based system, based on predictors from the housing and grazing periods. Ninety-nine farms were visited during the grazing period (April 2019-September 2019), and 85 farms were revisited during the housing period (October 2019-February 2020). At each visit, all lactating cows were scored for lameness (0 = good mobility, 1 = imperfect mobility, 2 = impaired mobility, 3 = severely impaired mobility), and potential herd-level risk factors were recorded through questionnaires and infrastructure measurements. Routine cow-level management data were also collected. Important risk factors for lameness were derived though triangulation of results from elastic net regression, and from logistic regression model selection using modified Bayesian information criterion. Both selection methods were implemented using bootstrapping. This novel approach has not previously been used in a cow-level or herd-level risk factor analysis in dairy cows, to the authors' knowledge. The binary outcome variable was lameness status, whereby cows with a lameness score of 0 or 1 were classed as non-lame and cows with a score of 2 or 3 were classed as lame. Cow-level risk factors for increased lameness prevalence were age and genetic predicted transmitting ability for lameness. Herd-level risk factors included farm and herd size, stones in paddock gateways, slats on cow tracks near the collecting yard, a sharper turn at the parlor exit, presence of digital dermatitis on the farm, and the farmers' perception of whether lameness was a problem on the farm. This large-scale study identified the most important associations between risk factors and lameness, based on the entire year (grazing and housing periods), providing a focus for future randomized clinical trials.

Lameness in Beef Cattle: A Cross-Sectional Descriptive Survey of On-Farm Practices and Approaches

Cattle lameness is a concern to the United Kingdom (UK) cattle industry, negatively impacting upon welfare and production. Previous work involving one small study (n = 21) has identified that some UK beef farmers underestimate lameness prevalence, but also that farmers vary in their perception of the impact of lameness. Knowledge and skills of farmers were identified as a potential concern, and farmer-reported barriers were identified. However, the extent to which these views can be extrapolated is unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to produce descriptive results of UK beef farmer lameness-related activities concerning lameness identification, examination, treatment, and prevention. Questionnaires were circulated online and via post. Postal questionnaires were sent to registered Approved Finishing Units (a specific cohort of beef fattening units subject to strict biosecurity measures as part of UK bovine tuberculosis control) and a stratified sample of all registered beef enterprises in England and Wales. Online questionnaires were circulated on social media and via targeted emails asking selected industry bodies and veterinary practices to distribute to farmers. Descriptive results were produced, and thematic analysis was performed on free text responses. There were 532 usable responses, with most farmers self-reporting their current lameness prevalence as zero (mean 1.2%, range 0–20%). Most respondents did not locomotion score cattle, and most reported that it was not safe to examine feet. Most farmers did not use a foot bath, but of those who did, formaldehyde was the most commonly used product. Some farmers reported use of antibiotic foot baths. Most farmers reported dealing with lame animals within 48 h, but some only dealt with severe cases, and some felt that lame animals would get better by themselves. To deal with animals that have an ongoing lameness problem, transportation to slaughter was considered an option by 35% of farmers. It is worth noting, however, that the majority of lame animals would be precluded from transport under UK legislation. Farmers reported staff shortages, as well as a lack of time, training, and knowledge as barriers to lameness prevention and control. Overall, these results suggest that farmers may be underestimating lameness. Diagnosis is likely to be challenging, with unsafe facilities for lifting feet. The reported high threshold by some farmers for attending to a lame animal is a cause for concern, negatively impacting upon animal welfare, but this is also likely to have negative consequences for animal performance and farm profitability. Many participants in this study expressed a desire for farmer training in several aspects relating to lameness prevention and control, and this represents an opportunity for further knowledge exchange regarding lameness in beef cattle.

Refinement of international recommendations for cubicles, based on the identification of associations between cubicle characteristics and dairy cow welfare measures

Maladjusted cubicles for dairy cattle may cause increased skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. The International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering has produced several recommendations for cubicle design, but a previous study showed that not all of them seem efficient. Here, we aim to refine and complete these recommendations. We collected data on 76 dairy farms (2,404 cows). We modeled the association between combinations of cubicle properties (e.g., type of bedding litter) and dimensions (e.g., cubicle width) relative to cow size, and prevalence of cow skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. We used weighted multivariable logistic regression models to predict the presence of skin alteration on the carpus; the neck, shoulder, and back; the flank, side, and udder; and the tarsus or hindquarters. We also evaluated the presence of lameness as well as the dirtiness of the lower hind legs including hocks; the hindquarters, upper hind legs, and flank; the cow rear including tail; and the udder. The risk factors highlighted led us to recommend (1) position cubicles in a way that leaves more than 1 m of clearance from any obstacle in front of the cubicle; (2) if there is an obstacle on the lateral plane (i.e., where the cubicle partition is) in front ahead of the cow, put the obstacle in front of the fore knees; (3) if there is an obstacle in front of the cow on the median plane (e.g., neck or front rail), the position the obstacle between 1.25 and 1.5 of the cow length from the curb and between 1.0 and 1.25 of its height; (4) use curb height between 0.11 and 0.15 of cow height with no sharp edges on the curb; (5) use round or at least has no sharp edges brisket board; (6) use a stone-free soil instead of concrete or use a mattress thicker than 1 cm, with microrelief, and a soft fixing area at the curb, (7) litter with straw (rather than nothing or sawdust) and keep it dry. This risk factor analysis should be followed by experiments in controlled environments to further validate these conclusions and used to update the International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering recommendations.

Assessment of welfare indicators in dairy farms offering pasture at differing levels

In terms of animal welfare, farming systems of dairy cows are perceived positively by consumers when compared to pigs or poultry. A main reason is that the majority of consumers associate dairy farming with pasture, which in turn they relate with benefits for animal health and welfare. However, holistic scientific assessments of the effects of pasturing on animal welfare are rare. Hence, it was the aim to study the animal welfare level in 61 German loose housing dairy farms by using the measures of the Welfare Quality® protocol for dairy cattle (WQP). Data were collected twice per farm at the end of the pasture season (July to October) and approximately 6 months later at the end of the barn season (December to April). Farms were classified based on the duration cows had access to pasture per day during the pasture season: group 1 (G1)>10 h; group 2 (G2) 6 to 10 h; group 3 (G3)<6 h and group 4 (G4) without pasture access. The average herd size was 129 Holstein-Friesian or Red-Holstein cows (range 58 to 527). In addition to WQP data, performance data were gathered from routine herd data recordings. The indicators were aggregated to criteria applying the scoring system of the WQP. G4 received lower scores at the first than at the second visit for the criterion absence of hunger, while there were no differences between visits in the other groups (P=0.58 - group×farm visit effect). All pasturing groups were scored better at the end of the pasture season than G4 for the criterion comfort around resting (P<0.01). Compared with G1 for both farm visits and G2 for the end of the barn season, G4 reached inferior scores for the criterion absence of injuries, including indicators such as hairless patches, lesions, and swellings and lameness. At both assessments G2 was scored higher than the other groups for the criterion absence of diseases (P=0.04). In conclusion, pasture access had positive effects only on selected welfare indicators, however, these effects were not maintained throughout the barn season.

A Cross-Sectional Study Into the Prevalence of Dairy Cattle Lameness and Associated Herd-Level Risk Factors in England and Wales

Lameness is one of the most pressing issues within the dairy industry; it has severe economic implications while causing a serious impact on animal welfare. A study conducted approximately 10 years ago found the within farm lameness prevalence in the UK to be 36.8%. Our objective here is to provide an update on within farm lameness prevalence in the UK, and to provide further evidence on farm level risk factors. A convenience sample of 61 dairy farms were recruited across England and Wales from September 2015 to December 2016. A single farm visit was made and the milking herd was mobility scored, as the cows exited the milking parlor after morning, afternoon, or evening milking. Information regarding the farm and management system was then collected using a short interview with the farmer followed by collection of various subjective and objective measurements of the environment. The same, trained researcher performed all animal and facility-based measures on all visits. A series of univariable analyses were conducted to evaluate the association between various risk factors and herd lameness prevalence (logit transformed). A multivariable linear regression model was then fitted. The median number of milking cows per herd was 193, ranging from 74 to 1,519 cows. The mean within farm lameness prevalence was 31.6%, ranging from 5.8 to 65.4%. In total, 14,700 cows were mobility scored with 4,145 cows found to be lame (28.2%). A number of risk factors were associated with lameness at the univariable analysis level. Categorical risk factors retained in the final model were: resting area type, collecting yard groove spacing width, whether farms were undertaking the 60- to 100-day post calving claw trimming and the frequency of footbathing in the winter. The amount of concentrates fed in the milking parlors or out of parlor feeders was also associated with lameness prevalence. The results of this study have provided an update on the UK herd lameness prevalence and have confirmed the importance of cow comfort and footbathing frequency. The association between early lactation claw trimming and reduced lameness prevalence is, to the best of our knowledge, reported for the first time.

Cow- and herd-level factors associated with lameness in small-scale grazing dairy herds in Brazil

This cross-sectional study aimed to assess lameness occurrence and to identify the associated risk factors in small-scale grazing dairy herds. Forty four farms (mean lactating herd size was 42 cows, SD = 11.2, range: 28-74) located in the south of Brazil were visited twice, approximately 4 months apart, in 2015. Locomotion was scored in 1633 and 1836 cows at the first and second visit, respectively. Potential risk factors for lameness were assessed through inspection of cows and facilities, and a questionnaire for farmers about herd management practices. Multilevel logistic regressions, using herd as random effect, were fitted to investigate the cow-level risk factors for accumulated incident (not lame at the first visit but lame on the second), chronic (lame on both visits) and recovered (lame at the first visit but sound on the second) cases of lameness. A multilevel linear regression, using municipality as a random effect, was fitted for herd-level analysis. Cumulative lameness incidence between two visits (1110 cows in 41 herds) was 29.6% (range: 0-80); lameness prevalence (n = 44 herds) was 31% (10-70) and 35% (5-76) at the first and second visits, respectively. The odds of incident cases were greater in Holstein cows [odds ratio (OR) = 4.0, 95% confidence interval 2.1-7.6] compared with Jerseys, in cows in parities 2-3 (OR 2.5, 1.4-4.4) or >3 (OR 6.6, 3.3-13.1) relative to parity 1, in cows having a low body condition score (BCS) of 2-2.75 or 3 on the first visit (OR 2, 1.1-3.7), and in cows with observed hoof abnormalities (OR 2.5, 1.3-4.7). Similar associations were found for chronic cases, with Holstein and crossbred cows having greater odds of lameness, compared to Jersey, and chronic cases being more likely in cows with increasing parity, with BCS at first visit of 2-2.75, and with presence of hoof abnormalities. Jersey or crossbred cows (OR 3.2, 1.3-8.1) and cows in parity 1-2 (OR 3.6, 1.6-8.4) had higher probability of recovery from lameness. Having a herd composed of Holstein cows was associated with 13.5% (CI 4.3-22.8) greater incidence of lameness (n = 35). For every 1 km/h increase in the average speed of movement of the herd to or from milking, lameness incidence increased by 5% (CI 0.1-10). Given that the occurrence of lameness was high there is great opportunity to reduce lameness in this population. This study highlights some management and prevention practices that may reduce lameness in these grazing herds.

INVITED REVIEW: Farm size and animal welfare

Critics of agricultural intensification have argued that the transition from smaller to larger farms has compromised animal welfare. To critically examine evidence relevant to this claim, we reviewed more than 150 publications that examined the relationship between farm size and at least one animal welfare indicator. Although much of this literature focuses on dairy cattle, we also reference other farmed species where appropriate. We found little evidence of any simple relationship, negative or positive, between farm size and animal welfare. Instead, the evidence suggests that larger farms provide some opportunities to improve animal welfare but may also create welfare risks. For example, larger farms permit more specialized and professional management of animal health but can make it more difficult to accommodate outdoor access that some view as integral to animal welfare. Future research should attempt to specify the underlying casual mechanisms by which statistical associations between farm size and indicators of welfare are believed to occur. We also suggest that policy and advocacy efforts aimed at reversing increases in farm size would be better directed toward improving welfare on farms of all sizes.

Prevalence and Determinants of Cryptosporidium Infection in an Underdeveloped Rural Region of Southwestern China

Few studies have focused on the epidemiology of Cryptosporidium in resource-challenged settings in China. We report a community-based cross-sectional study to investigate the prevalence of Cryptosporidium infection and its risk factors and associations with hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections. The prevalence of Cryptosporidium infection was 12.6% (95% confidence interval = 11.0-14.3). Individuals living in households with ≥ 5 family members and raising domestic pigs tended to have a greater risk of Cryptosporidium infection. In addition, Cryptosporidium infection was significantly associated with HBV infection. There were no significant associations of Cryptosporidium infection with HIV viral load and HBV viral load. Further studies are needed to determine the association of Cryptosporidium infection with HBV infection.

Analysis of behavioral changes in dairy cows associated with claw horn lesions

Detecting lame cows is important in improving animal welfare. Automated tools are potentially useful to enable identification and monitoring of lame cows. The goals of this study were to evaluate the suitability of various physiological and behavioral parameters to automatically detect lameness in dairy cows housed in a cubicle barn. Lame cows suffering from a claw horn lesion (sole ulcer or white line disease) of one claw of the same hind limb (n=32; group L) and 10 nonlame healthy cows (group C) were included in this study. Lying and standing behavior at night by tridimensional accelerometers, weight distribution between hind limbs by the 4-scale weighing platform, feeding behavior at night by the nose band sensor, and heart activity by the Polar device (Polar Electro Oy, Kempele, Finland) were assessed. Either the entire data set or parts of the data collected over a 48-h period were used for statistical analysis, depending upon the parameter in question. The standing time at night over 12 h and the limb weight ratio (LWR) were significantly higher in group C as compared with group L, whereas the lying time at night over 12 h, the mean limb difference (△weight), and the standard deviation (SD) of the weight applied on the limb taking less weight were significantly lower in group C as compared with group L. No significant difference was noted between the groups for the parameters of heart activity and feeding behavior at night. The locomotion score of cows in group L was positively correlated with the lying time and △weight, whereas it was negatively correlated with LWR and SD. The highest sensitivity (0.97) for lameness detection was found for the parameter SD [specificity of 0.80 and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84]. The highest specificity (0.90) for lameness detection was present for Δweight (sensitivity=0.78; AUC=0.88) and LWR (sensitivity=0.81; AUC=0.87). The model considering the data of SD together with lying time at night was the best predictor of cows being lame, accounting for 40% of the variation in the likelihood of a cow being lame (sensitivity=0.94; specificity=0.80; AUC=0.86). In conclusion, the data derived from the 4-scale-weighing platform, either alone or combined with the lying time at night over 12 h, represent the most valuable parameters for automated identification of lame cows suffering from a claw horn lesion of one individual hind limb.