Skip to content

Science1 publisher2 min readPublished

A camera above 30 turkeys forecasts each bird's weight three weeks ahead

The Penn State system read color and depth images of 30 male turkeys in one pen and forecast their weights three weeks out at roughly 93 percent accuracy. Every training label came off a hand scale.

The Scientist · Science desk

Photograph accompanying A camera above 30 turkeys forecasts each bird's weight three weeks ahead
Photo: psu.edu

What happened

  • Penn State researchers report that an overhead camera paired with a deep learning model estimated individual turkey body weight and forecast it up to three weeks ahead with roughly 93 percent accuracy.
  • The experiment followed 30 male turkeys housed together at the university's Poultry Education and Research Center from day 37 to day 133 of age, imaged in both color and depth from above.
  • Because several birds often shared the frame, the model had to assign each group of pixels to one individual animal, a step called instance segmentation.

Compiled by The ScientistSomething wrong?How this is made

Why it matters

  • constraint Every new barn, breed or camera position needs its own reference weights, so the hand weighing the system is meant to reduce is also what it costs to commission one.
  • capability A three-week horizon is long enough to book processing slots and change a feed plan before birds reach market weight. The forecast is useful to the people doing that booking and feeding.
  • decision A producer pricing cameras has to ask the vendor for the per-bird error in pounds and for the score of a calendar-only forecast, because the public account of this study carries neither.
  • precedent If forecasting over time is new to poultry vision, the next papers get judged on horizon length as well as current-weight error, and 21 days is the number they have to beat.

Days 37 to 133 of age is 96 days, a little under 14 weeks [1]. Mireia Molins and colleagues weighed the birds by hand five times a week across that stretch to give the network something to learn against [6][13]. That works out to about 68 weighing sessions per bird, and roughly 2,060 individual weights for the pen of 30 [2][3]. Enrico Casella, the senior author, is an assistant professor of data science for animal systems at Penn State. He said "Traditional approaches to individual body weight monitoring require extensive manual labor and frequent animal handling, creating both economic and animal welfare concerns" [2].

The forecast is the genuinely new part of this. Casella said earlier computer vision systems were not capable of temporal forecasting over time, and that similar forecasting had not previously been explored in the industry [8]. Twenty-one days is about 22 percent of the window the birds were watched over [4]. The system's prediction of future weight came out nearly as accurate as its estimate of current weight [8].

Then there is the control. All 30 birds were male, the same age, and housed together in one pen [3], so a predictor holding nothing but the calendar would recover some share of that 93 percent on its own. The phys.org account reports no comparison against such a baseline [15]. Without it, the camera's contribution above knowing a bird's age is not separable from the number.

Casella also said "In the poultry industry, weight information is essential for maximizing the value of each individual animal, as the average weight of a flock determines equipment settings for processing operations" [9]. That job and the per-bird job are not equally hard. Errors on individual birds partly cancel when you average thousands of them, so a flock mean is the forgiving target. The unforgiving one is also on Casella's list: identifying birds that are not growing normally [11].

"Imagine a commercial turkey farm with thousands of birds ... If farmers could reliably estimate weights using cameras, they wouldn't need to catch and weigh large numbers of birds manually," Casella said [10]. The study he is describing had 30 birds under relatively controlled conditions. He said larger studies are needed to determine how well the model works across different farms, breeds, environments, lighting conditions, poultry densities and much larger populations [12].

What to watch

  • A multi-house trial with mixed sexes, commercial stocking density and per-bird error reported in units of weight.
  • Whether the Frontiers of Animal Science paper reports an age-only baseline forecast and names the error metric behind the 93 percent.
  • Whether processing plants will accept a camera-derived flock average when setting equipment for a kill line.
Loading claim ledger
Loading source directory links
Loading share composer
Loading topic controls
Loading related stories