TY - CONF
T1 - Evaluation of a low cost thermographic camera for poultry temperature
AU - Cândido, Marcia G.L.
AU - Tinôco, Ilda de F.F.
AU - Herker, Lucas P.
AU - Ireno, Talissa F.P.
AU - Andrade, Rafaella R.
AU - Gates, Richard S.
N1 - Funding Information:
To the Department of Agricultural Engineering of Federal University of Viçosa (UFV), and also the Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). We also thank the Brazilian Government support through Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. All rights reserved.
Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2018/1/1
Y1 - 2018/1/1
N2 - Temperature and humidity directly affect poultry performance. To monitor temperature effects on a bird’s thermal state, different devices and methodologies are currently used, including dataloggers, infrared thermometers and cameras. The use of thermographic cameras is increasing in animal production because it is noninvasive, and not require handling, which reduces stress. Despite these advantages, the equipment cost is still high, being a barrier for popularization of its use. The aim of this study was to verify if a low cost mobile thermographic camera (LC) can replace a high cost one (HC). The research was conducted with 420 pullets (Lohmann LSL Lite) raised in four controlled environments: thermoneutral (TN, 20°C), mild heat (MiH, 25°C), moderate heat (MoH, 30°C) and severe heat (SH, 35°C). Two thermographic cameras were utilized: HC (ThermaCAM® b60), LC (FLIR One), both from the same company (FLIR Systems). Pictures were taken using both cameras in equal time and distance. Images were analyzed using the software FLIR ResearchIR. From each image, temperature of 8 distinct parts were collected, divided into six points and two areas. Data were analyzed by ANOVA using the software SigmaPlot. For all situations HC showed higher temperatures (P<0.001). Images from LC at the SH environment were the hardest to analyze. The leg temperature had the highest difference (ΔT=7.4°C) between the tested cameras. Measurement by area indicated less difference than point measures. The differences found between the thermographic cameras is significant (P<0.001). A calibration procedure is offered that allows the LC to be used with improved accuracy. Keywords. image analysis, poultry, temperature, thermographic camera
AB - Temperature and humidity directly affect poultry performance. To monitor temperature effects on a bird’s thermal state, different devices and methodologies are currently used, including dataloggers, infrared thermometers and cameras. The use of thermographic cameras is increasing in animal production because it is noninvasive, and not require handling, which reduces stress. Despite these advantages, the equipment cost is still high, being a barrier for popularization of its use. The aim of this study was to verify if a low cost mobile thermographic camera (LC) can replace a high cost one (HC). The research was conducted with 420 pullets (Lohmann LSL Lite) raised in four controlled environments: thermoneutral (TN, 20°C), mild heat (MiH, 25°C), moderate heat (MoH, 30°C) and severe heat (SH, 35°C). Two thermographic cameras were utilized: HC (ThermaCAM® b60), LC (FLIR One), both from the same company (FLIR Systems). Pictures were taken using both cameras in equal time and distance. Images were analyzed using the software FLIR ResearchIR. From each image, temperature of 8 distinct parts were collected, divided into six points and two areas. Data were analyzed by ANOVA using the software SigmaPlot. For all situations HC showed higher temperatures (P<0.001). Images from LC at the SH environment were the hardest to analyze. The leg temperature had the highest difference (ΔT=7.4°C) between the tested cameras. Measurement by area indicated less difference than point measures. The differences found between the thermographic cameras is significant (P<0.001). A calibration procedure is offered that allows the LC to be used with improved accuracy. Keywords. image analysis, poultry, temperature, thermographic camera
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85084095588&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85084095588&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.13031/iles.18-143
DO - 10.13031/iles.18-143
M3 - Paper
T2 - 10th International Livestock Environment Symposium, ILES 2018
Y2 - 25 September 2018 through 27 September 2018
ER -