Animal Welfare Science Centre, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia.
Animal Welfare Science Centre, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia.
Animal. 2021 Feb;15(2):100134. doi: 10.1016/j.animal.2020.100134. Epub 2020 Dec 28.
The stunning process is an important component of slaughter with implications for animal welfare due to the potential distress and pain in the case of a sub-effective or lengthy stun. This study examined the factors correlated with variation in responses to carbon dioxide (CO) stunning of pigs in five Australian commercial abattoirs. A total of 1 769 pigs (199-492 focal pigs per abattoir) were individually followed from lairage to post-stunning. A standardised observation protocol was used based on a literature review of the pre-slaughter factors that may influence the reaction to CO stunning, such as animal background, lairage conditions, handling, stunning system and conditions. Pigs lost posture 22.5 ± 0.2 s after commencement of descent of the gondola into the CO chamber. Latency to loss of posture was associated with farm of origin and time of day, which could be linked to various factors. Pigs that crawled or attempted to escape while in the gondola within the CO chamber took longer to lose posture. Crawl and escape attempts differed between abattoirs (0.6-46.2% of the pigs observed) as well as mounting other pigs (1.0-24.3%). Greater amounts of forceful contacts during handling in the race were related to more mounting in the gondola, but to less pigs crawling or attempting to escape. Mounting in the gondola was more frequent for pigs from lairage pens of mixed sexes, followed by pens of entire males and finally pens of females. Males were also twice as likely to show crawl and escape attempts than females. Gasping in the gondola was relatively frequent (63.1-81.8%) and was associated with higher activity in the lairage pen and higher skin injuries. Convulsions (60.1-69.6%) were generally observed after loss of posture. The type of CO system (group-wise vs single-file loading) had no significant effect on behaviour in the gondola. Nevertheless, pigs slaughtered in abattoirs with group-wise loading systems and automatic gates had lower cortisol concentrations post-stunning, which may be linked to minimal handling by stockpeople, other factors related to the systems, or differences in timing of when blood samples were taken. In conclusion, substantial variation in the reaction of pigs to CO stunning was observed between and within abattoirs using a uniform protocol for data collection. This variation in outcomes between abattoirs and stunning systems and the relationships between handling and behavioural outcomes indicates that improvements can be made to reduce aversive responses to CO stunning. In particular, avoiding mixing pigs of different sexes in lairage and aversive handling in the race may reduce aversive response to CO stunning.
令人震惊的过程是屠宰的一个重要组成部分,由于在电击效果不佳或时间过长的情况下,动物可能会感到痛苦和不适,因此这对动物福利有影响。本研究检查了在澳大利亚五个商业屠宰场中,二氧化碳(CO)电击对猪的反应变化相关的因素。共有 1769 头猪(每个屠宰场 199-492 头焦点猪)从待宰圈到电击后被单独跟踪。使用了一种基于文献综述的标准化观察方案,该综述涉及可能影响 CO 电击反应的预屠宰因素,例如动物背景、待宰圈条件、处理、电击系统和条件。猪从吊笼下降到 CO 室开始后 22.5±0.2 秒失去姿势。失去姿势的潜伏期与原产地和一天中的时间有关,这可能与各种因素有关。在 CO 室中的吊笼中爬行或试图逃跑的猪需要更长的时间才能失去姿势。在屠宰场中,爬行和逃跑尝试(观察到的猪的 0.6-46.2%)以及爬上其他猪(1.0-24.3%)之间存在差异。在赛道上处理过程中用力接触的次数越多,在吊笼中就越有可能出现攀爬和逃跑的情况,但猪的数量就越少。来自男女混合待宰圈的猪在吊笼中攀爬的频率更高,其次是全雄性待宰圈,最后是雌性待宰圈。雄性比雌性更有可能出现爬行和逃跑的尝试。在吊笼中喘气比较频繁(63.1-81.8%),并且与待宰圈中的较高活动度和较高的皮肤损伤有关。抽搐(60.1-69.6%)通常在失去姿势后发生。CO 系统的类型(分组加载与单文件加载)对吊笼中的行为没有显著影响。然而,在使用分组加载系统和自动门的屠宰场中,电击后猪的皮质醇浓度较低,这可能与工人的最小处理、与系统相关的其他因素或采血时间的差异有关。总之,使用统一的数据收集协议,在不同的屠宰场和屠宰场之间观察到猪对 CO 电击的反应存在很大差异。屠宰场和电击系统之间的结果差异以及处理和行为结果之间的关系表明,可以进行改进以减少对 CO 电击的不良反应。特别是,避免在待宰圈中混合不同性别的猪,以及在赛道上进行不良处理,可能会减少对 CO 电击的不良反应。