Literature DB >> 24235223

Comparison of water-based foam and carbon dioxide gas emergency depopulation methods of turkeys.

M K Rankin1, R L Alphin, E R Benson, A L Johnson, D P Hougentogler, P Mohankumar.   

Abstract

Recommended response strategies for outbreaks of avian influenza and other highly contagious poultry diseases include surveillance, quarantine, depopulation, disposal, and decontamination. The best methods of emergency mass depopulation should maximize human health and safety while minimizing disease spread and animal welfare concerns. The goal of this project was to evaluate the effectiveness of 2 mass depopulation methods on adult tom turkeys. The methods tested were carbon dioxide gassing and water-based foam. The time to unconsciousness, motion cessation, brain death, and altered terminal cardiac activity were recorded for each bird through the use of an electroencephalogram, accelerometer, and electrocardiogram. Critical times for physiological events were extracted from sensor data and compiled in a spreadsheet for statistical analysis. A statistically significant difference was observed in time to brain death, with water-based foam resulting in faster brain death (µ = 190 s) than CO2 gas (µ = 242 s). Though not statistically significant, differences were found comparing the time to unconsciousness (foam: µ = 64 s; CO2 gas: µ = 90 s), motion cessation (foam: µ = 182 s; CO2 gas: µ = 153 s), and altered terminal cardiac activity (foam: µ = 208 s; CO2 gas µ = 242 s) between foam and CO2 depopulation treatments. The results of this study demonstrate that water-based foam can be used to effectively depopulate market size male turkeys.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24235223     DOI: 10.3382/ps.2013-03341

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


  2 in total

1.  Description of electroencephalographic data gathered using water-based medium-expansion foam as a depopulation method for nursery pigs.

Authors:  Jack Korenyi-Both; Jorge Vidaurre; Tim Held; Magnus R Campler; Justin Kieffer; Ting-Yu Cheng; Steven J Moeller; Andrew S Bowman; Andréia G Arruda
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-10-07       Impact factor: 4.996

2.  Evaluation of Two Compressed Air Foam Systems for Culling Caged Layer Hens.

Authors:  Eric R Benson; Jaclyn A Weiher; Robert L Alphin; Morgan Farnell; Daniel P Hougentogler
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2018-04-24       Impact factor: 2.752

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.