Abstract

Measuring temperature with a rectal thermometer in conscious animals can be exacting and time-consuming, especially in a herd without adequate restraint. This research compared the accuracy and reliability of non-contact infrared thermometry with the established rectal thermometry in measuring body temperature in cattle. Twenty-one apparently healthy Sokoto Gudali cattle were used for the study. Skin infrared thermometry from four sites across the body (forehead, eye, abdominal region and base of the tail) was compared with rectal thermometry (RT). The parameters were recorded at 07:00 h, 12:00 h and 18:00 h each experimental day. The recordings were carried out twice within three weeks. Environmental parameters, dry-bulb temperature (DBT), relative humidity (RH) and temperature-humidity index (THI) were determined during the study period. The result of the THI was significantly (p < .05) increased in the afternoon (87.48 ± 4.0) and evening (83.64 ± 1.2) hours compared to the value obtained in the morning hours, indicating thermal stress. RT was significantly (p < .05) increased in the afternoon and evening hours (38.56 ± 0.5℃ and 39.34 ± 0.4℃, respectively) compared to the value recorded in the morning (37.65 ± 0.4℃). In comparison to RT, the base of the tail temperature (-1.917 ± 2.0) had the least mean bias difference, while the forehead temperature (-2.815 ± 2.0) was the farthest. In conclusion, rectal thermometry remains a valid means of obtaining the true reflection of the core body temperature. The base of the tail infrared thermometry was the closest to the rectal temperature, but may require further studies to verify its reliability and validity as an alternative to rectal thermometry in cattle.

Key words: Cattle, Critical care, Infrared, Rectal temperature, Skin temperature