Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T11:30:41.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors influencing the welfare and carcass and meat quality of pigs 1. The effects of stocking density in transport and the use of electric goads

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

H. J. Guise  and
R. H. C. Penny
H. J. Guise
Affiliation:
Cambac JMA Research Ltd, Unit 4, Wards Farm, Greenmore Lane, Woodcote, Reading RG8 0RB
R. H. C. Penny
Affiliation:
Cambac JMA Research Ltd, Unit 4, Wards Farm, Greenmore Lane, Woodcote, Reading RG8 0RB
Get access

Abstract

This experiment was designed to study the effects of stocking density in transit and the use of electric goads on pig welfare and subsequent meat quality. Sixty-four pens, totalling 1400 commercial crossbred hybrid pigs, were transported from a farm to a large commercial abattoir at either high (0·3 m2 per pig) or low (>0·4 m2 per pig) stocking densities. The lorry drivers loaded and unloaded the pens of pigs at either end of their journey with, or without, an electric goad. Similarly, lairage men moved groups of pigs from their lairage pens to the stunning and slaughter area with, or without, goads. Consequently, eight possible treatment combinations arose from this 2 × 2 × 2 factorial experiment. About 20 h after slaughter, the fibre optic probe (FOP) value of the longissimus dorsi muscle was recorded and carcasses were scored for the extent of skin blemish. Pigs in high stocking density groups (HSD) had lower FOP values than those on low stocking density groups (LSD) (P < 0·05) and more severe skin blemish (P < 0·001). The effect of goading in transport or in the lairage, had no significant effect on the FOP values. However, the skin blemish data showed a significant interaction between the use of goads during transport and the stocking density treatment (P < 0·05). This interaction implied that the use of goads when loading pigs at a HSD was associated with a reduction in skin blemish. Conversely, the lowest skin blemish frequency was observed in the LSD treatment group handled without the aid of goads. Pigs in the HSD groups were visibly more skin damaged and exhibited evidence of rectal prolapse which was absent in pigs transported at LSD. Lower stocking densities are to be recommended as carcass, meat quality and pig welfare are probably improved. The use of goads is associated with a higher degree of carcass damage unless pigs are to be densely packed during transport.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 49 , Issue 3 , December 1989 , pp. 511 - 515
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Becker, B. A., Neinaber, J. A., Christenson, R. K., Manak, R. C., Deshazer, J. A. and Hahn, G. L. 1985. Peripheral concentrations of cortisol as an indicator of stress in the pig. American Journal of Veterinary Research 46: 1034–1038.Google ScholarPubMed
Dawkins, M. S. 1980. Animal Suffering. The Science of Animal Welfare 7. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar
Eikelenboom, G. 1972. Stress susceptibility in swine and its relationship with energy metabolism in skeletal structure. Thesis, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
Lambooy, E., Garssen, G. J., Walstra, P., Mateman, G. and Merkus, G. S. M. 1985. Transport of pigs by car for two days; some aspects of watering and loading density. Livestock Production Science 13: 289–299.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1985. Rindside Damage Scale. MLC, Bletchley.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1986. Handling pigs from farm to slaughterhouse. Marketing and Meat Trade Technical Bulletin, No. 14.Google Scholar
Sybesma, W. and Van Looestijn, J. G. 1967. Rigor mortis und fleisch qualitat. Fleischwirtschaft 4: 408–410.Google Scholar
Veum, T. L., Ellersieck, M. R., Durham, T. L., McVickers, W. R., McWilliams, S. N. and Lasley, J. F. 1979. Response of stress-susceptible and stress-resistant Hampshire pigs to electrical stress. I. Physiological and biochemical effects. Journal of Animal Science 48: 446–452.Google Scholar