Relationship between animal-based on-farm indicators and meat inspection data in pigs.

IF 3 2区 农林科学 Q1 VETERINARY SCIENCES Porcine Health Management Pub Date : 2024-01-25 DOI:10.1186/s40813-024-00359-9
Johanna Witt, Joachim Krieter, Kathrin Büttner, Thore Wilder, Mario Hasler, Ralf Bussemas, Stephanie Witten, Irena Czycholl
{"title":"Relationship between animal-based on-farm indicators and meat inspection data in pigs.","authors":"Johanna Witt, Joachim Krieter, Kathrin Büttner, Thore Wilder, Mario Hasler, Ralf Bussemas, Stephanie Witten, Irena Czycholl","doi":"10.1186/s40813-024-00359-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to validate slaughterhouse indicators collected during meat inspection as an alternative to on-farm animal welfare indicators. For this purpose, the assessments of twelve on-farm and seven slaughterhouse indicators of 628 pigs from three different farms were combined into three indices, differentiated between on-farm and slaughterhouse: (1) limb health, (2) other organ health, and (3) respiratory health. At first, an assessment at animal-level using agreement parameters was carried out to ascertain whether the same welfare or health issues were identified on-farm and at slaughterhouse, taking the production period (farrowing, rearing and fattening period) and the last weeks before slaughtering into account. Second, the connection of slaughterhouse findings on the individual on-farm health indices was examined using logistic regressions, to determine whether certain welfare issues can be better monitored using slaughterhouse indicators.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Acceptable agreement was determined using the Prevalence-Adjusted Bias-Adjusted Kappa (PABAK) for the farrowing and fattening period, but not for the rearing period. A more detailed analysis of the weeks before slaughter shows that there is still a poor agreement 8 weeks before slaughter and an acceptable agreement 4 weeks before slaughter. This indicated the slaughterhouse indicators pneumonia, pleuritis and pericarditis as possible estimators of fever and deviant behavior on-farm and the slaughterhouse indicators bursitis and joint inflammations as possible estimators of lameness. In the second part of the analysis, the connection of slaughterhouse findings on the individual on-farm health indices was investigated; a significant influence of the farm on the limb and respiratory indices and no significant influence of the slaughterhouse findings could be determined, provided that all weekly assessments during the lifetime of the pigs have been taken into account. However, an influence of the slaughterhouse findings on the respiratory index and on the other organ index could be determined if only the weekly assessments four and eight weeks before slaughter, respectively, were taken into account.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In general, the possible suitable indicators detected by the PABAK, could replace some health-related indicators but a complete substitution of on-farm welfare assessment is not possible. In addition, the traceability over time must be investigated further.</p>","PeriodicalId":20352,"journal":{"name":"Porcine Health Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10811934/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Porcine Health Management","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40813-024-00359-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to validate slaughterhouse indicators collected during meat inspection as an alternative to on-farm animal welfare indicators. For this purpose, the assessments of twelve on-farm and seven slaughterhouse indicators of 628 pigs from three different farms were combined into three indices, differentiated between on-farm and slaughterhouse: (1) limb health, (2) other organ health, and (3) respiratory health. At first, an assessment at animal-level using agreement parameters was carried out to ascertain whether the same welfare or health issues were identified on-farm and at slaughterhouse, taking the production period (farrowing, rearing and fattening period) and the last weeks before slaughtering into account. Second, the connection of slaughterhouse findings on the individual on-farm health indices was examined using logistic regressions, to determine whether certain welfare issues can be better monitored using slaughterhouse indicators.

Results: Acceptable agreement was determined using the Prevalence-Adjusted Bias-Adjusted Kappa (PABAK) for the farrowing and fattening period, but not for the rearing period. A more detailed analysis of the weeks before slaughter shows that there is still a poor agreement 8 weeks before slaughter and an acceptable agreement 4 weeks before slaughter. This indicated the slaughterhouse indicators pneumonia, pleuritis and pericarditis as possible estimators of fever and deviant behavior on-farm and the slaughterhouse indicators bursitis and joint inflammations as possible estimators of lameness. In the second part of the analysis, the connection of slaughterhouse findings on the individual on-farm health indices was investigated; a significant influence of the farm on the limb and respiratory indices and no significant influence of the slaughterhouse findings could be determined, provided that all weekly assessments during the lifetime of the pigs have been taken into account. However, an influence of the slaughterhouse findings on the respiratory index and on the other organ index could be determined if only the weekly assessments four and eight weeks before slaughter, respectively, were taken into account.

Conclusions: In general, the possible suitable indicators detected by the PABAK, could replace some health-related indicators but a complete substitution of on-farm welfare assessment is not possible. In addition, the traceability over time must be investigated further.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以动物为基础的猪场指标与肉类检验数据之间的关系。
背景:本研究旨在验证屠宰场在肉类检验过程中收集的指标,以替代农场动物福利指标。为此,对来自三个不同农场的 628 头猪的 12 项农场指标和 7 项屠宰场指标的评估结果合并为三个指数,并对农场和屠宰场加以区分:(1) 肢体健康;(2) 其他器官健康;(3) 呼吸系统健康。首先,根据生产期(产仔、育雏和育肥期)和屠宰前最后几周的情况,使用协议参数对动物进行评估,以确定农场和屠宰场是否发现相同的福利或健康问题。其次,使用逻辑回归法研究了屠宰场调查结果与农场健康指数之间的联系,以确定某些福利问题是否能通过屠宰场指标得到更好的监测:使用流行率调整偏差调整卡帕(PABAK)确定了产仔和育肥期的可接受一致性,但育成期的一致性不佳。对屠宰前几周的详细分析显示,屠宰前 8 周的一致性仍然较差,屠宰前 4 周的一致性尚可。这表明屠宰场的肺炎、胸膜炎和心包炎指标可能是发烧和农场异常行为的估计指标,而屠宰场的滑囊炎和关节炎指标可能是跛足的估计指标。在分析的第二部分,研究了屠宰场调查结果与猪场各项健康指数之间的联系;可以确定猪场对肢体和呼吸系统指数有显著影响,而屠宰场调查结果没有显著影响,前提是考虑到猪只一生中的所有每周评估。但是,如果只考虑屠宰前四周和八周的每周评估结果,则可以确定屠宰场的结果对呼吸系统指数和其他器官指数有影响:总的来说,PABAK 检测到的可能合适的指标可以替代一些与健康相关的指标,但不可能完全替代农场福利评估。此外,还必须进一步研究随时间变化的可追溯性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Porcine Health Management
Porcine Health Management Veterinary-Food Animals
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
49
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Porcine Health Management (PHM) is an open access peer-reviewed journal that aims to publish relevant, novel and revised information regarding all aspects of swine health medicine and production.
期刊最新文献
Short communication: Estimation of the dietary standardized ileal digestible valine to lysine ratio required for 40 to 130 kg pigs during the finisher periods. Early behavioral indicators of aberrant feces in newly-weaned piglets. Exploring the role of riboflavin in swine well-being: a literature review. Development and evaluation of a standardised sampling protocol to determine the effect of cleaning in the pig sty. Linear epitopes of PRRSV-1 envelope proteins ectodomains are not correlated with broad neutralization.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1