friskimagic
Active Member
my friend had her mare scanned with a sheep scanner....... says shes in foal but are these scanners reliable? many thanks
SHEEP SCANNERS
- Thread starter friskimagic
- Start date
Aidey
Well-Known Member
not a clue .. scan a mare u know isnt in foal n see what it says lol 
ElleSkywalker
As excited as Kitty about to be a bridesmaid
I know someone who has used sheep scanners, they were spot on, she even dated how many weeks each horse was!
They do work, but personally I would rather have a vet do it
They do work, but personally I would rather have a vet do it
jrp204
Well-Known Member
I would imagine someone who scans sheep will do more in a week than a vet will do in his career. When we had our sheep scanned they were spot on so don't see why it shouldn't be reliable.
JanetGeorge
Well-Known Member
Don't you really? Look at the difference in size between a horse and a sheep. External scanning of a mare's belly would require a FAR more powerful (and expensive) scanner than one suitable for sheep. External scanning is sometimes done for Miniatures (as they are too small for safe rectal scanning.) But it is nowhere near as accurate as rectal scanning!
jrp204
Well-Known Member
Point taken JG.
Alec Swan
Well-Known Member
J_G,
I suppose that eventually technology will catch up! The guy who scans my in-lamb ewes, assures me of a failure rate, of less than 0.02%. With sheep, it isn't that important if the odd ewe slips through the net, but with horses, obviously it is.
It seems to me, and assuming that those who do equine scannings aren't pulling the wool over our eyes, that twins in mares, can be positioned one behind the other, and the second foal can be missed. An external scanning for mares, would prove even more risky, as to the accuracy, were this the case. I strongly suspect that we are many years away from a scanning system which whilst external, can be virtually guaranteed to identify twins, in a mare.
Alec.
I suppose that eventually technology will catch up! The guy who scans my in-lamb ewes, assures me of a failure rate, of less than 0.02%. With sheep, it isn't that important if the odd ewe slips through the net, but with horses, obviously it is.
It seems to me, and assuming that those who do equine scannings aren't pulling the wool over our eyes, that twins in mares, can be positioned one behind the other, and the second foal can be missed. An external scanning for mares, would prove even more risky, as to the accuracy, were this the case. I strongly suspect that we are many years away from a scanning system which whilst external, can be virtually guaranteed to identify twins, in a mare.
Alec.
Rosehip
Well-Known Member
In theory you could externally scan a mare with sheep scanners, but as JG says, they arent powerful enough to be acurate externally or internally. I wouldnt trust an ovine scanner to do an equine, and we have 350 + sheep and a brilliant scanning chap.
One other thing to note is that it is illegal for someone without the correct training to scan and PD any animal, 99.9% of ovine and bovine scanners are not licenced to do external or internal equine scans.
One other thing to note is that it is illegal for someone without the correct training to scan and PD any animal, 99.9% of ovine and bovine scanners are not licenced to do external or internal equine scans.
friskimagic
Active Member
repro vet scanning the mare in 2 weeks time will post the result and thanks guys for the replies xxx also she has been scanned 4 times with equine scanner in may after several coverings which were all negative so she went to another stallion now shes in foal... hmm sounds a bit sus to me
Last edited:
JanetGeorge
Well-Known Member
If he's claiming .02% failure rate in ewes in-lamb or empty, he may be right. The accuracy comes with detecting multiples which is where the real saving come in for a sheep farmer. Ewes with singles are fed sparingly - saving feed and preventing huge lambs, and mares with triplets can be given the best of care! I doubt he has a .02% failure rate on counting lambs!
The first year I did early lambing with Charollais ewes the (ex) vet MIS-advised me on the amount of PG to bring them into season - we had multiples coming out our ears. Our scanner would only say 3 or 4 - although he was much more definitive on twins. In fact one ewe had 6!!With mares, the risks are greater, of course. A scan can miss back-to-backs - unless the vet is VERY careful and scans back and forth a couple of times to get a slightly different angle each time. And of course the most common cause of missing twins at the 14 day scan is a late ovulation. I doubt there'll be an external scanner for mares in my lifetime - there's just too much fat and muscle to get through - and even if a scanner was powerful enough to 'see' that deep, the view would be obscured by the layers of fat and muscle.
friskimagic
Active Member
Got my mare scanned today which was a full rectal scan and she is NOT in foal.....so sheep scanners are NOT accurate thanks for all replies xxx
JanetGeorge
Well-Known Member
I'm not at all surprised! Of course, if she HAD been in foal, it wouldn't have proved that sheep scanners WERE accurate (you'd have a 50/50 chance of being right whatever!)
Alec Swan
Well-Known Member
magic104
Well-Known Member
Well I am confused because when I asked my vet why they cant scan from the outside the reply was the same as before (5yrs ago) "because we dont yet have scanners powerful enough".
JanetGeorge
Well-Known Member
And that's the correct (if over simplified) answer! But the other problem - even if you have a VERY powerful scanner - is that there is too much between the outside belly area and the uterus. You are looking for VERY tiny objects - at least in 14 and 30 day scans - and you need quite a LOT of clarity to spot - say - back to back twins - or to be sure that what you're seeing IS a 15 day vesicle and not a cyst! There's just too much in the way!
Sportznight
Well-Known Member
It depends on the stage of the pregnancy. We ab scan a lot, mainly to check CUPT and last week we ab scanned a mare at 152 days last week, as we hadn't sexed her and there is a potential sale depending on the sex and she's carrying a filly, which is perfect We've done this before and it's been 100% accurate.
We've done this before and it's been 100% accurate.