| Literature DB >> 33774372 |
Austin M Stiewert1, Brian Wooming2, Gregory S Archer3.
Abstract
On-farm euthanasia of poultry is a necessity for minimizing disease spread and removing sick or injured birds to maintain optimum animal welfare. There are numerous methods that are approved for euthanasia of poultry by organizations like the American Veterinary Medical Association; however, all approved methods are not easily carried out on-farm or as effective as one another. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare several captive bolt devices (Turkey Euthanasia Device, Zephyr-EXL, Jarvis Stunner, Experimental Crossbow), mechanical cervical dislocation (Broomstick method [BRM] and Koechner Euthanasia Device [KED]), and manual cervical dislocation (MAN) methods on 8 and 12-week-old turkey hens. Each method was assessed for impact on loss of brain stem reflexes, euthanasia success, and torn skin. The cervical dislocation techniques were also analyzed via radiograph for proper dislocation. Furthermore, each device was assessed for physical parameters. Turkeys (n = 1,400) were euthanized on 20 sampling days, 10 sampling days for each age period. All methods resulted in euthanasia of all turkeys in this study. The captive bolt devices all resulted in immediate loss of nictitating membrane and pupillary reflex at both the ages tested. The cervical dislocation methods differed in both nictitating membrane and pupillary reflex cessation at both ages (P < 0.05). The pattern was the same at both ages with the KED device have longer latencies to cessation of both reflexes when compared to the BRM and MAN methods (P < 0.05). Cessation of movement was also generally longer in dislocation methods compared to captive bolt at both ages. However, captive bolt devices resulted in more lacerations of the skin in general. MAN was also found to result in less damage to the vertebrae and proper location of separation than the mechanical methods of dislocation. All methods resulted in effective euthanasia; however, captive bolt methods resulted in immediate loss of brain stem reflexes indicating that they maybe more humane than cervical dislocation methods.Entities:
Keywords: captive bolt; cervical dislocation; euthanasia; turkey
Year: 2021 PMID: 33774372 PMCID: PMC8025049 DOI: 10.1016/j.psj.2021.101053
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Poult Sci ISSN: 0032-5791 Impact factor: 3.352
Figure 1Euthanasia devices: (A) Zehphyr-EXL, (B) Jarvis Stunner, (C) Turkey Euthanasia Device, (D) Experimental Crossbow, (E) Koechner Euthanasia Device, and (F) Broomstick method.
Descriptions and procedures carried out according to previous research (Woolcott et al., 2018).
| Measure | Description | Procedure |
|---|---|---|
| Nictitating membrane | Ephemeral closure of the nictitating membrane in response to physical stimulation | The medial canthus of the eye was gently touched with the fingertip |
| Pupillary | Constriction of the pupil when exposed to light | Light source from a medical pen was shown directly into the eye |
| Cessation of movement (tonic) | Final episodes of movement including body convulsions and wing flapping | Observing the animal until complete cessation of movement |
Descriptions for each type of postmortem data collection; all scores were recorded on a presence or absence basis.
| Parameter | Description | Presence | Absence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Laceration/puncture | Postmortem observation of cutaneous tearing or penetration | External skin hemorrhage | No visual signs of cutaneous penetration |
| Location of separation | Inspecting the location of cervical vertebrae separation | The primary cervical vertebrae (C1) was completely detached from the skull | Any cervical vertebrae completely separated other than the C1 vertebrae |
| Separated vertebrae crushed | Separated vertebrae were inspected for signs of damage or crushing | Separated vertebrae that were crushed or broken | Separated vertebrae that were completely intact without being cracked/broken/crushed |
Captive bolt performance (pressure data were collected using Fujifilm pressure paper and software; speed and kinetic energies were recorded using a Vicon motion high speed camera).
| Device | Minimum pressure (psi) | Maximum pressure (psi) | Average pressure (psi) | Impact radius (cm) | Average bolt speed (m/s) | Average kinetic energy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZEP | 20.30a | 71.1b | 41.35c | 0.20b | 67.76b | 143.16b |
| JAR | 18.10b | 92.4a | 30.70d | 0.40a | 60.76b | 127.71b |
| CRS | 18.9b | 92.4a | 54.24b | 0.40a | 49.10c | 108.93c |
| TED | 16.00c | 92.8a | 66.70a | 0.18b | 71.02a | 958.54a |
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
a–dIndicates significant difference within the column (P < 0.05).
Treatments: Zephyr-EXL (ZEP); Jarvis Stunner (JAR); Turkey Euthanasia Device (TED); Experimental Crossbow (CRS).
Kinetic energy = ½ (bolt mass) (bolt velocity2).
Insensibility responses and death of turkeys at 8 wk of age.
| Treatment | Nictitating membrane response (s) | Pupillary light response (s) | Cessation of movement (s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| KED | 119.07 ± 4.05a | 119.59 ± 4.64a | 184.68 ± 3.33a |
| BRM | 73.70 ± 3.39b | 72.78 ± 2.12b | 168.40 ± 4.28a,b |
| MAN | 71.95 ± 3.12b | 68.08 ± 3.31b | 166.97 ± 4.16b,c |
| ZEP | IMED | IMED | 148.08 ± 3.86c,d |
| JAR | IMED | IMED | 148.29 ± 4.25c,d |
| TED | IMED | IMED | 138.53 ± 3.99d |
| CRS | IMED | IMED | 139.23 ± 3.79d |
a–dIndicates significant difference within the column (P < 0.05).
Abbreviation: IMED, immediate cessation.
Treatments: Koechner Euthanasia Device (KED); Broomstick method (BRM); Manual Cervical Dislocation (MAN); Zephyr-EXL (ZEP); Jarvis Stunner (JAR); Turkey Euthanasia Device (TED); Experimental Crossbow (CRS).
Insensibility responses of turkeys at 12 wk of age.
| Treatment | Nictitating membrane response (s) | Pupillary light response (s) | Cessation of movement (s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| KED | 138.28 ± 3.20a | 140.71 ± 3.25a | 198.62 ± 3.40a |
| BRM | 111.19 ± 3.61b | 117.96 ± 4.91b | 191.82 ± 4.69a,b |
| MAN | 98.63 ± 3.88b | 109.00 ± 4.00b | 185.39 ± 4.56b,c |
| ZEP | IMED | IMED | 176.90 ± 4.55c |
| JAR | IMED | IMED | 163.28 ± 4.76d |
| TED | IMED | IMED | 151.81 ± 3.89d |
| CRS | IMED | IMED | 152.24 ± 5.11d |
a–dIndicates significant difference within the column (P < 0.05).
Abbreviation: IMED, immediate cessation.
Treatments: Koechner Euthanasia Device (KED); Broomstick method (BRM); Manual Cervical Dislocation (MAN); Zephyr-EXL (ZEP); Jarvis Stunner (JAR); Turkey Euthanasia Device (TED); Experimental Crossbow (CRS).
Postmortem analysis of turkeys at 8 wk of age (all data were recorded as a percentage of occurrence).
| Treatment | Separated vertebrae crushed (%) | Location of separation (%) | Lacerations or punctures (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| KED | 92.00b | 8.00b | 43.43b,c |
| BRM | 94.00b | 13.00b | 11.00d |
| MAN | 10.00a | 100.00a | 00.00e |
| ZEP | N/A | N/A | 59.00b |
| JAR | N/A | N/A | 56.00b |
| TED | N/A | N/A | 100.00a |
| CRS | N/A | N/A | 35.35c |
a–eIndicates significant difference within the column (P < 0.05).
Abbreviation: N/A, data not applicable.
Treatments: Koechner Euthanasia Device (KED); Broomstick method (BRM); Manual Cervical Dislocation (MAN); Zephyr-EXL (ZEP); Jarvis Stunner (JAR); Turkey Euthanasia Device (TED); Experimental Crossbow (CRS).
Postmortem analysis of turkeys at 12 wk of age (all data were recorded as a percentage of occurrence).
| Treatment | Separated vertebrae crushed (%) | Location of separation (%) | Lacerations or punctures (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| KED | 95.00c | 5.00c | 36.00d |
| BRM | 70.00b | 29.00b | 3.00e |
| MAN | 21.00a | 100.00a | 0.00e |
| ZEP | N/A | N/A | 100.00a |
| JAR | N/A | N/A | 73.00b,c |
| TED | N/A | N/A | 100.00a |
| CRS | N/A | N/A | 71.00c |
a–eIndicates significant difference within the column (P < 0.05).
Abbreviation: N/A, data not applicable.
Treatments: Koechner Euthanasia Device (KED); Broomstick method (BRM); Manual Cervical Dislocation (MAN); Zephyr-EXL (ZEP); Jarvis Stunner (JAR); Turkey Euthanasia Device (TED); Experimental Crossbow (CRS).