Skip to main content
. 2023 Dec 1;13(23):3728. doi: 10.3390/ani13233728

Table 4.

Final evaluation score calculated with each farm being analyzed once from (a) to (f) in Figure 1.

Farm Name Evaluation Score Final Evaluation Score
(a) S(a):(b) = 45, S(a):(c) = 30, S(a):(d) = 48, S(a):(e) = 32, S(a):(f) = 38 FS(a)=38.6
(b) S(b):(a) = 50, S(b):(c) = 54, S(b):(d) = 55, S(b):(e) = 60, S(b):(f) = 58 FS(b)=55.4
(c) S(c):(a) = 12, S(c):(b) = 16, S(c):(d) = 18, S(c):(e) = 20, S(c):(f) = 9 FS(c)=15
(d) S(d):(a) = 50, S(d):(b) = 54, S(d):(c) = 55, S(d):(e) = 60, S(d):(f) = 58 FS(d)=55.4
(e) S(e):(a) = 88, S(e):(b) = 76, S(e):(c) = 74, S(e):(d) = 79, S(e):(f) = 85 FS(e)=80.4
(f) S(f):(a) = 33, S(f):(b) = 35, S(f):(c) = 50, S(f):(d) = 48, S(f):(e) = 39 FS(f)=41