Literature DB >> 20181854

Animal welfare concerns during the use of the water bath for stunning broilers, hens, and ducks.

V A Hindle1, E Lambooij, H G M Reimert, L D Workel, M A Gerritzen.   

Abstract

European legislation demands that slaughter animals, including poultry, be rendered immediately unconscious and insensible until death occurs through blood loss at slaughter. This study addressed requirements for stunner settings (i.e., voltage, wave oscillation frequency) and response parameters (i.e., applied current, behavior) affecting effective water bath stunning. An inventory of current electrical stunning practice was performed in 10 slaughterhouses in the Netherlands. Thereafter, measurements were performed using a single-bird water bath to examine the effects of stunner settings based on the average technical settings observed in the slaughterhouses. Responses were recorded at 50, 400, and 1,000 Hz on broilers and hens and at 50 and 400 Hz on ducks under controlled laboratory conditions. Effects of voltage settings (broilers: 100 to 400 V; hens: 150 to 300 V; ducks: 150 to 400 V) on current levels (broilers: 45 to 444 mA; hens: 40 to 219 mA; ducks: 64 to 362 mA) and consciousness (response to pain stimulus) were recorded immediately after stunning. Brain and heart activity was monitored using electroencephalogram and electrocardiogram technology. Results show that effective stunning using the conventional water bath almost exclusively produces blood splashing in broilers. Effective stunning current levels did not differ significantly between broilers, hens, and ducks effectively stunned hens tended to require lower currents. Effective stuns at higher frequencies resulted in higher currents. Similar input voltage (V) levels (within and between bird type) resulted in significant variation (P < 0.001) in current levels (mA) required for an effective stun, indicating variability in electrical impedance between individual birds. Body weight and bird type did not affect the probability of an effective stun. Multi-bird water bath usage does not ensure effective stunning and technical adjustments can result in detrimental effects on meat quality. Future legislation should consider wave form, relationships between frequency and current allowing for individual impedance variation and effects on meat quality while safeguarding animal welfare.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20181854     DOI: 10.3382/ps.2009-00297

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Poult Sci        ISSN: 0032-5791            Impact factor:   3.352


  7 in total

1.  Electrical stunning parameters: impact on the quality of turkey meat (Meleagris gallopavo).

Authors:  Sandro Parteca; Ivane Benedetti Tonial; Naimara Vieira do Prado; Alexandre da Trindade Alfaro
Journal:  J Food Sci Technol       Date:  2020-02-22       Impact factor: 2.701

2.  Humanely Ending the Life of Animals: Research Priorities to Identify Alternatives to Carbon Dioxide.

Authors:  Aline R Steiner; Shannon Axiak Flammer; Ngaio J Beausoleil; Charlotte Berg; Regula Bettschart-Wolfensberger; Rebeca García Pinillos; Huw D W Golledge; Michael Marahrens; Robert Meyer; Tobias Schnitzer; Michael J Toscano; Patricia V Turner; Daniel M Weary; Thomas C Gent
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-11-02       Impact factor: 2.752

3.  Head-Only Stunning of Turkeys Part 2: Subjective and Objective Assessment of the Application of AC and DC Waveforms.

Authors:  Steve Wotton; Andrew Grist; Mike O'Callaghan; Ed van Klink
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-23       Impact factor: 2.752

4.  The Influence of Broilers' Body Weight on the Efficiency of Electrical Stunning and Meat Quality under Field Conditions.

Authors:  Giorgio Smaldone; Stefano Capezzuto; Rosa Luisa Ambrosio; Maria Francesca Peruzy; Raffaele Marrone; Giacomo Peres; Aniello Anastasio
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-11       Impact factor: 2.752

Review 5.  A Review of Different Stunning Methods for Poultry-Animal Welfare Aspects (Stunning Methods for Poultry).

Authors:  Charlotte Berg; Mohan Raj
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2015-11-30       Impact factor: 2.752

6.  Assessment of the effectiveness of head only and back-of-the-head electrical stunning of chickens.

Authors:  T J Gibson; A H Taylor; N G Gregory
Journal:  Br Poult Sci       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 2.095

7.  Time to Loss of Behavioral and Brainstem Responses of Ducks following Non-Stunned Slaughter.

Authors:  Alexandra Friedman; Filipe Antonio Dalla Costa; Osmar Antonio Dalla Costa; Alicia Godsell-Ryan; Troy John Gibson
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-11       Impact factor: 2.752

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.