Neural Computing & Applications

, Volume 15, Issue 3–4, pp 359–365 | Cite as

Empirical comparisons of feed-forward connectionist and conventional regression models for prediction of first lactation 305-day milk yield in Karan Fries dairy cows

Original Article


In this paper, two connectionist models are proposed based on different learning paradigms, viz., back propagation neural networks (BPNN) and radial basis function neural networks (RBFNN) to predict the first lactation 305-day milk yield (FLMY305) in Karan Fries (KF) dairy cattle. Also, a conventional multiple linear regression (MLR) model is developed for the prediction. In this study, all the models have been developed using a scientifically determined optimum dataset of representative breeding traits of the cattle. The prediction performances of the connectionist models are compared with that of the conventional model. This study shows that the RBFNN model performs relatively better than the MLR model. However, the BPNN model performs more or less in the close vicinity of the conventional MLR model. Hence, it is inferred that the connectionist models have potential as an alternative to the conventional models for predicting FLMY305 in KF cattle.


Back-propagation networks Connectionist models Dairy production Karan Fries cows Prediction Radial basis function networks 305-day milk yield 



The authors wish to thank the Director, National Dairy Research Institute, (ICAR), Karnal, India for granting permission to use the livestock data for this study; and In-charge, Computer Centre, NDRI, Karnal for providing preliminary data analysis facilities for this study. Also, thanks are due to Dr. A. K. Chakarvarty, Principal Scientist, and Dr. S. S. Lathwal, Scientist (SS), Dairy Cattle Breeding Division, NDRI, Karnal for their valuable advice for carrying out the data collection and preliminary analysis for this study. Last but not the least, the authors are indebted to the anonymous reviewer(s) for the critical review that has greatly helped in the improvement of this paper as well as in the future directions of our research work.


  1. 1.
    Salehi F, Lacroix R, Wade KM (1998) Improving dairy yield predictions through combined record classifiers and specialized artificial neural networks. Comput Electron Agric 20:199–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vallejo-Cordoba B, Artega GE, Nakai S (1995) Predicting milk shelf-life based on artificial neural networks and headspace gas chromatographic data. J Food Sci 60:885–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kominakis P, Abas Z, Maltaris I, Rogdakis E (2002) A preliminary study of the application of artificial neural networks to prediction of milk yield in dairy sheep. Comput Electron Agric 35:35–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sharma RK, Sharma AK (2004) Neuro-computing paradigms with application to dairy production. In: Sharma Ashwini et al (eds) Lecture compendium, National Training Programme on Information Resources on Genetics and Documentation Techniques for Livestock Improvement, Centre for Advanced Studies - AG & B, Dairy Cattle Breeding Division, NDRI, Karnal, India, pp 173–178Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Salehi F, Lacroix R, Wade KM (1998) Effects of learning parameters and data presentation on the performance of back-propagation networks for milk yield prediction. Trans Am Soc Agric Eng 41:253–259Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grzesiak W, Lacroix R, Wojcik J, Blaszczyk P (2003) A comparison of neural network and multiple regression predictions for 305-day lactation yield using partial lactation records. Can J Anim Sci 83:307–310Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lacroix R, Salehi F, Yang XZ, Wade KM (1997) Effects of data preprocessing on the performance of artificial neural network for dairy yield prediction and cow culling classification. Trans Am Soc Agric Eng 40:839–846Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lacroix R, Wade KM, Kok R, Hayes JF (1995) Prediction of cow performance with a connectionist model. Trans Am Soc Agric Eng 38:1573–1579Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sanzogni L, Kerr D (2001) Milk production estimates using feed-forward artificial neural networks. Comput Electron Agric 32:21–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Torres Mercedes, Hervas Cesar, Amador Francisco (2005) Approximating the sheep milk production curve through the use of artificial neural networks and genetic algorithms. Comput Oper Res 32(10):2653–2670. DOI: 10.1016/j.cor.2004.06.025Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kerr DV, Chaseling J, Chopping GD, Davison TM, Busby G (1998) A study of the effect of inputs on level of production of dairy farms in Queensland—a comparative analysis of survey data. Aust J Exp Agric 38(5):419–425. DOI: 10.1071/EA97153Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Heald CW, Kim T, Sischo WM, Cooper JB, Wolfgang DR (2000) A computerized mastitis decision aid using farm-based records: an artificial neural network approach. J Dairy Sci 83:711–720Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nielen M, Schukken YH, Brand A, Deluyker HA, Maatje K (1995) Detection of sub-clinical mastitis from on-line milking parlor data. J Dairy Sci 78:1039–1049Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nielen M, Schukken YH, Brand A, Haring S, Ferwerda-Van Zonneveld RT (1995) Comparison of analysis techniques for on-line detection of clinical mastitis. J Dairy Sci 78:1050–1061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yang XZ, Lacroix R, Wade KM (1999) Neural detection of mastitis from dairy herd improvement records. Trans Am Soc Agric Eng 42:1063–1071Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lüpez-Benavides MG, Samarasinghe S, Hickford JGH (2003) The use of artificial neural networks to diagnose mastitis in dairy cattle. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international joint conference on neural networks, July 2003, 1(20–24):582–55Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paquet J, Lacroix C, Thibault J (2000) Modeling of pH and acidity for individual cheese production. J Dairy Sci 83:2393–2409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Karla VR, Bakker HHC (1995) Neural-network-based model predictive control: a case study. In: Proceedings of the 2nd New Zealand two-stream international conference on artificial neural networks and expert systems, (ANNES ’95), Dunedin, New Zealand, November 20–23, pp 355Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Etzion Y, Linker R, Cogan U, Shmulevich I (2004) Determination of protein concentration in raw milk by mid-infrared Fourier transform infrared/attenuated total reflectance spectroscopy. J Dairy Sci 87:2779–2788Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Finn GD, Lister R, Szabo T, Simonetta Don, Mulder H, Young R (1996) Neural networks applied to a large biological database to analyse dairy breeding patterns. Neural Comput Appl 4:237–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gardener JW, Hines EL, Molinier F, Bartlett PN, Mottram TT (1999) Prediction of health of dairy cattle from breath samples using neural network with parametric model of dynamic response of array of semi-conducting gas sensors. In: IEEE proceedings on science, measurement and technology, March 1999, 146(2):102–106. DOI: 10.1049/ip-smt: 19990100Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Padhi Radhakant, Balakrishnan SN (2004) Development and analysis of a feedback treatment strategy for parturient paresis of cows. In: IEEE transactions on control systems technology 12(1):52–64. DOI: 10. 1109/TCST.2003.821962Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gurnani M, Sethi RK, Nagarcenkar R (1986) Development of Karan Fries cattle at NDRI, Karnal. Dairy information bulletin, vol 3. National Dairy Research Institute Press, Karnal pp 1–2Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Demuth Howard, Beale Mark (2004) Neural network toolbox for use with MATLAB, User’s Guide. Available at: The MathWorks Inc., Natick, website: Accessed 8 Feb 2004
  25. 25.
    Guedes Guilherme Luiz Lepsch (2004) FORCE (FORTRAN compiler and editor) version 2.0. Freeware available on the Internet at website: Accessed 10 March 2004
  26. 26.
    Hagan MT, Demuth HB, Beale M (2004) Neural network design. PWS Publishing Co., BostonGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sharma Adesh K, Sharma RK, Kasana HS (2005) Performance evaluation of some back-propagation training algorithms for prediction of milk yield in dairy cattle. In: Kasana HS et al (eds) Proceedings of national conference on frontiers in applied and computational mathematics organized by TIET, Patiala (India), pp 230–238, Allied Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New DelhiGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adesh K. Sharma
    • 1
    • 2
  • R. K. Sharma
    • 1
  • H. S. Kasana
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Mathematics and Computer ApplicationsThapar Institute of Engineering and Technology (Deemed University)PatialaIndia
  2. 2.Computer Applications in Agriculture, Computer CentreNational Dairy Research InstituteKarnalIndia

Personalised recommendations