We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
New transport legislation and society demands may increase the need for a ‘fast’ method to assess animal welfare at the abattoir. The objective of this study was to identify valid and feasible parameters which could be easily assessed at slaughterline in pigs. Eight transports (4 ‘far’ and 4 ‘near’ the abattoir) were evaluated using a questionnaire which included both animal-based and environment-based parameters. A ‘welfare index’ (WI) (0 = worst to 1 = best) was estimated for each transport based on the questionnaire. Lean and fat content, skin lesions, pH and electrical conductivity (PQM) were measured in 120 or 60 pigs per transport. When pH > 6 the meat was considered dry, firm and dark (DFD) and when PQM > 9 μs meat was pale, soft and exudative (PSE). Odds ratio between welfare index and slaughterline recordings was estimated. Differences in WI between the different transports were smaller than expected (WI ranged from 0.4 to 0.6). However, a significant relationship between higher percentage of DFD meat and lower welfare index (odds ratio: 2.25) was found. These results suggest that parameters like DFD meat could be used at the abattoir to perform a ‘snapshot’ welfare evaluation.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.