Wajid ALİ
(Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi, Tarım Bilimleri ve Teknolojileri Fakültesi, Hayvansal Üretim ve Teknolojileri Bölümü, Niğde, Türkiye)
Moazam ALİ
(Faysalabad Ziraat Üniversitesi, Klinik Tıp ve Cerrahi Bölümü, Pakistan)
Muhammad AHMAD
(University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences,Faculty of veterinary sciences, Department of clinical medicine and surgery, Lahore, Pakistan)
(Bahauddin Zakariya University, Faculty of Veterinary Sciences, Department of livestock production, Multan, Pakistan.)
(University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Faculty of veterinary sciences, Department of Theriogeniology, Lahore, Pakistan)
(University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Department of microbiology, Faculty of veterinary sciences, Lahore, Pakistan)
Yıl: 2020Cilt: 8Sayı: 2ISSN: 2148-127X / 2148-127XSayfa Aralığı: 457 - 463İngilizce

4 0
Application of Modern Techniques in Animal Production Sector for Human and Animal Welfare
In this epoch, the tremendous increase in the world population accounts for the continuous supply of foodstuff. According to the FAO report, the global population is probable to cross the 9 billion in 2050. With constant population pressure, we are going to face the challenges of food shortage globally about agriculture. The animal production field provides a major share in the supply of foodstuff to compensate for the stress of food scarcity. By adopting the advanced technologies in the animal production field, its productivity can enhance significantly. Innovation in technology has made work easier with the development of different software and the internet. Technologic development made farmers work more contentedly hence, ultimately amplifying the animal production, proficiency, profitability as well as providing a prompt way for livestock sustainability. The animal production consists mainly of 8 factors including 3 major (animal breeding and genetics, animal nutrition, and reproductive performances) and 5 minor (health observation, farm management, water, manure, machinery, environment control, milking automation and electronic identification). The use of advanced technologiesin these sectorsisfound to be fluent by intensifying the ratio of sustainable livestock farming and the welfare of mankind in terms of food security. In this review, innovative tactics and techniques for animal production are potted with positive research results and their drawbacks as well. The use ofinnovative technologiesin theirrespective fields is close to taking control of whole world manufacturing under its hand to accomplish the world prerequisite regarding food scarcity
DergiAraştırma MakalesiErişime Açık
  • Abdalla CW, Lawton JL. 2006. Environmental issues in animal agriculture. Choices, 21: 177-182. Abdelwahid HH, Abdallah AA, Mohammed RM, Shulukh ESA,
  • Habib AB. 2019. Effects of Timed Artificial Insemination Following Oestrous Synchronization on Pregnancy Rate of Dairy Cattle in the tropics. Int. J. of Multidisciplinary and Current research, 7.
  • Akin S, Kara A. 2019. Factors affecting the farmers’decision on artificial insemination: a case study of diyarbakir province, turkey. Appl Ecol Environ Res, 17: 1389-1399.
  • Barge P, Gay P.Merlino V. Tortia C. 2013. Radio frequency identification technologies for livestock management and meat supply chain traceability. Can. J. Anim. Sci., 93: 23-33.
  • Benetton J, Neave H, Costa J, von Keyserlingk M, Weary D. 2019. Automatic weaning based on individual solid feed intake: Effects on behavior and performance of dairy calves. J Dairy Sci, 102: 5475-5491.
  • Cameron KC, Di HJ. 2019. A new method to treat farm dairy effluent to produce clarified water for recycling and to reduce environmental risks from the land application of effluent. J Soils Sed, 19: 2290-2302.
  • Cappai MG, Gambella F, Piccirilli D, Rubiu NG, Dimauro C,Pazzona AL, Pinna W. 2019. Integrating the RFID identification system for Charolaise breeding bulls with 3D imaging for virtual archive creation. PeerJ Computer Science,5: e179.
  • Celi P, Verlhac V, Calvo EP, Schmeisser J, Kluenter AM. 2019. Biomarkers of gastrointestinal functionality in animal nutrition and health. Anim Feed Sci Technol, 250: 9-31.
  • Chang K, Beuzen N, Hall A. 2003. Identification of microsatellites in expressed muscle genes: assessment of a desmin (CT) dinucleotide repeat as a marker for meat quality. The Vet. Journal, 165: 157-163.
  • Chen R, Guo R, Zhu H, Shi Z. 2019. Development of a sandwich ELISA for determining plasma prolactin concentration in domestic birds. Domest Anim Endocrinol, 67: 21-27.
  • Christensen LG. 1991. Use of embryo transfer in future cattle breeding schemes. Theriogenology, 35: 141-149. Chung Y, Oh S, Lee J, Park D, Chang HH, Kim S. 2013.
  • Automatic detection and recognition of pig wasting diseases using sound data in audio surveillance systems. Sensors, 13:12929-12942.
  • Das V, Sharma S, Kaushik A. 2019. Views of Irish Farmers on Smart Farming Technologies: An Observational Study. AgriEngineering, 1: 164-187.
  • De Koning C. 2010. Automatic milking–common practice on dairy farms.
  • De Passillé A, Borderas T, Rushen J. 2011. Weaning age of calves fed a high milk allowance by automated feeders: Effects on feed, water, and energy intake, behavioral signs of hunger, and weight gains. J Dairy Sci, 94: 1401-1408.
  • Dillard HR. 2019. Global food and nutrition security: from challenges to solutions. Food Security, 11: 249-252. FAOSTAT 2017. Statistical data. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QA access: 12.05.2019.
  • Fournel S, Rousseau AN, Laberge B. 2017. Rethinking environment control strategy of confined animal housing systems through precision livestock farming. Biosys Eng, 155: 96-123.
  • Gilani S, Howarth GS, Kitessa SM, Forder RE, Tran CD, Hughes RJ. 2016. New biomarkers for intestinal permeability induced by lipopolysaccharide in chickens. Ani Production Sci, 56:1984-1997.
  • Göncü S, Güngör C. 2018. The Innovative Techniques in Animal Husbandry. Ani Husbandry and Nut: 1.
  • Gottardo P, Gorjanc G, Battagin M, Gaynor RC, Jenko J, RosFreixedes R, Whitelaw CBA, Mileham AJ, Herring WO, Hickey JM. 2019. A strategy to exploit surrogate sire technology in livestock breeding programs. G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics, 9: 203-215.
  • Gray J. 2005. Asset management of livestock in an open range using satellite communications. Google Patents.
  • Hamilton AW, Davison C, Tachtatzis C, Andonovic I, Michie C, Ferguson HJ, Somerville L, Jonsson NN. 2019. Identification of the rumination in cattle using support vector machines with motion-sensitive bolus sensors. Sensors, 19: 1165.
  • He B, Zhang Y, Funk T, Riskowski G, Yin Y. 2000. Thermochemical conversion of swine manure: an alternative process for waste treatment and renewable energy production. Trans ASAE, 43: 1827.
  • Holloway L, Bear C, Wilkinson K. 2014. Robotic milking technologies and renegotiating situated ethical relationships on UK dairy farms. Agr Human Values, 31: 185-199.
  • Ipema A, Holster H, Hogewerf P, Bleumer E. 2012. Towards an open development environment for recording and analysis of dairy farm data.
  • Jegadeesan S, Venkatesan GP. 2016. Smart cow health monitoring, farm environmental monitoring and control system using wireless sensor networks. Int J Adv Engg Tec,7(1): 334: 339.
  • Jothilakshmi P, Mohanasundaram R, Iniyavan D, Jithin S. 2019. Design and Fabrication of 5.8 GHz ISM Band Microstrip Patch Antenna Through Aperture Coupled Feeding Technique. International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, ISSN: 2349-5162.
  • Khan S, Ullah M.W, Siddique R, Nabi G, Manan S, Yousaf M, Hou H. 2016. Role of recombinant DNA technology to improve life. Int journal of genomics, 2016. Knosby AT. 1986. Livestock identification system. Google Patents.
  • Liu H, Yao Z, Zhou W, Zhao FT. 2019. Research on Pig Transportation Management System Model Based on RFID and Sensor Technology. Available at SSRN 3319659.
  • Mobley T. 2019. Tracking and monitoring of animals with combined wireless technology and geo-fencing. Google Patents.
  • Moore RE, Kirwan J, Doherty MK, Whitfield PD. 2007. Biomarker discovery in animal health and disease: the application of post-genomic technologies. Biomarker insights, 2: 117727190700200040.
  • Niewold T. 2015. Chapter 9: Intestinal health biomarkers in vivo.In: Intestinal health: Key to maximise growth performance in livestock. Wageningen Academic Publishers. pp: 717-721.
  • Okoh E, Atuanya E. 2014. Impacts of soil composting and poultry manure on biodegradation of polyethylene. Int. J. Appl. Microbiol. Biotech. Res, 2: 18-29.
  • Orlandi R, Vallesi E, Boiti C, Polisca A, Troisi A, Righi C, Bargellini P. 2019. Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography of maternal and fetal blood flows in pregnant bitches. Theriogenology, 125: 129-134.
  • Posthuma-Trumpie G.A, van Amerongen A, Korf J, van Berkel W.J. 2009. Perspectives for on-site monitoring of progesterone. Trends Biotechnol, 27: 652-660.
  • Quirino M, Pinheiro ARA, Santos JT, d.Ulguim RDR, Mellagi APG, Bortolozzo FP. 2019. Reproductive performance of fixed-time artificial insemination in swine and factors for the technology success. Cienc. Rural, 49.
  • Ribó O, Korn C, Meloni U, Cropper M, De Winne P, Cuypers M. 2001. IDEA: a large-scale project on electronic identification of livestock. Revue Scientifique et Technique-Office International des Epizooties, 20: 426-436.
  • Rocha CC, Martins T, Cardoso BO, Silva LA, Binelli M, Pugliesi G. 2019. Ultrasonography-accessed luteal size endpoint that most closely associates with circulating progesterone during the estrous cycle and early pregnancy in beef cows. Anim Reprod Sci, 201: 12-21.
  • Rose-Dye T, Burciaga-Robles L, Krehbiel C, Step D, Fulton R, Confer A, Richards C. 2011. Rumen temperature change monitored with remote rumen temperature boluses after challenges with bovine viral diarrhea virus and Mannheimia haemolytica. J Anim Sci, 89: 1193-1200.
  • Sauer J, Zilberman D. 2012. Sequential technology implementation, network externalities, and risk: the case of automatic milking systems. Agr Econ, 43: 233-252.
  • Sheppard DC, Tomberlin JK, Joyce JA, Kiser BC, Sumner SM.2002. Rearing methods for the black soldier fly (Diptera:Stratiomyidae). J Med Entomol, 39: 695-698. Smith C. 1988. Applications of embryo transfer in animal breeding. Theriogenology, 29: 203-212.
  • Smith K, Martinez A, Craddolph R, Erickson H, Andresen D,Warren S. 2006. An integrated cattle health monitoring system. In: 2006 International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE. pp: 4659-4662.
  • Stangaferro M, Wijma R, Caixeta L, Al-Abri M, Giordano J. 2016. Use of rumination and activity monitoring for the identification of dairy cows with health disorders: Part I. Metabolic and digestive disorders. J Dairy Sci, 99: 7395- 7410.
  • Stevenson JS. 2001. Reproductive management of dairy cows in high milk-producing herds. J Dairy Sci, 84: E128-E143.
  • Sundmaeker H, Verdouw C, Wolfert S, Pérez Freire L. 2016.Internet of food and farm 2020. Digitising the IndustryInternet of Things connecting physical, digital and virtualworlds. Ed: Vermesan, O, & Friess, P: 129-151.
  • Thibier M. 2005. The zootechnical applications of biotechnology in animal reproduction: current methods and perspectives. Reprod Nutr Dev, 45: 235-242.
  • Thornton PK. 2010. Livestock production: recent trends, future prospects. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 365: 2853-2867.
  • Turchini GM, Trushenski JT, Glencross BD. 2019. Thoughts for the future of aquaculture nutrition: realigning perspectives to reflect contemporary issues related to judicious use of marine resources in aquafeeds. N Am J Aquacult, 81: 13-39.
  • Van Horn H, Wilkie A, Powers W, Nordstedt R. 1994. Components of dairy manure management systems. J Dairy Sci, 77: 2008-2030.
  • Vanotti M, Rashash D, Hunt P. 2002. Solid–liquid separation of flushed swine manure with PAM: effect of wastewater strength. Trans ASAE, 45: 1959.
  • Verbeke KA, Boobis AR, Chiodini A, Edwards CA, Franck A, Kleerebezem M, Nauta A, Raes J, Van Tol EA, Tuohy KM. 2015. Towards microbial fermentation metabolites as markers for health benefits of prebiotics. Nutr Res Rev, 28: 42-66.
  • Vlad M, Parvulet RA, Vlad MS. 2012. A survey of livestock identification systems. In: Proceedings of the 13th WSEAS International Conference on Automation and Information, (ICAI12). pp: 165-170.
  • Voulodimos AS, Patrikakis CZ, Sideridis AB, Ntafis VA, Xylouri EM. 2010. A complete farm management system based on animal identification using RFID technology. Comput Electron Agric, 70: 380-388.
  • Weatherhead PJ, Blouin‐Demers G. 2004. Long‐term effects of radiotelemetry on black ratsnakes. Wildl Soc Bull, 32: 900- 906.
  • Williams LR, Fox DR, Bishop-Hurley GJ, Swain DL. 2019. Use of radio frequency identification (RFID) technology to record grazing beef cattle water point use. Comput Electron Agric,156: 193-202.
  • Wolfert S, Ge L, Verdouw C, Bogaardt MJ. 2017. Big data in smart farming–a review. Agricultural Systems, 153: 69-80.
  • Woo SM, Uyeh DD, Kim J, Hong DH, Park T, Ha YS. 2019. A study on the optimal fermentation conditions for mixed byproducts in livestock feed production. Eng in Agri, Envir and Food.
  • Zin TT, Kai H, Sumi K, Kobayashi I, Hama H. 2016. Estrus Detection for Dairy Cow Using a Laser Range Sensor. In: 2016 Third International Conference on Computing Measurement Control and Sensor Network (CMCSN). IEEE.pp: 162-165.

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © 2019 Tüm Hakları Saklıdır.