A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Diversity, not uniformity: slaughter and electrical waterbath stunning procedures in Belgian slaughterhouses. | LitMetric

Diversity, not uniformity: slaughter and electrical waterbath stunning procedures in Belgian slaughterhouses.

Poult Sci

Department of Veterinary Public Health and Food Safety, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.

Published: September 2018

Data on slaughter and stunning protocols in Belgian poultry abattoirs were collected, and subsequently the survival rate after electrical waterbath stunning in 1,400 animals across 7 selected slaughterhouses was determined. The majority of the abattoirs applied electrical waterbath stunning (72%), whereas the other methods were gas stunning (13%), head-only stunning (6%), and dry stunning (3%). In 6% of the slaughterhouses, the birds were killed without previous stunning, according to religious rites (i.e., ritual or religious slaughter). Although religious slaughter occurred in a substantial number of abattoirs, the customers of the majority of them allowed stunning, provided the animals were not killed by the stunning procedure. Substantial variation both in electrical waterbath devices and technical settings (electrical current type, wave type, voltage, frequency) combinations was observed. These settings did not only differ between slaughterhouses, but also between subsequent visits to the same slaughterhouse. Despite this variation, all systems comprised a constant voltage, multiple bird stunner. The minimum average electrical current that every chicken should receive at a certain frequency, as stated by the European Regulation No 1099/2009, was not achieved for each animal monitored due to the bird's characteristics and the different applied stunning settings, with the exception of all ISA laying hens and broiler breeders in one particular slaughterhouse. The survival rate ranged from 96.0 to 100%, 97.0 to 100%, 68.0%, 72.0 to 85.1%, and 5.6 to 52.4% in 5-wk-old broilers, 6-wk-old broilers, LSL laying hens, ISA laying hens, and broiler breeders, respectively. Monitoring of unconsciousness after passing through the waterbath was not always performed and when it was, there was no uniformity in the applied criteria. It was concluded that a large variation in slaughter and stunning practices exists among slaughterhouses in Belgium. Further research should explore the effect of the different settings on inducing a successful stun and on carcass quality, and assess if the observed variation also exists in other EU member states.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3382/ps/pey181DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

electrical waterbath
16
stunning
12
waterbath stunning
12
laying hens
12
slaughter stunning
8
survival rate
8
religious slaughter
8
electrical current
8
isa laying
8
hens broiler
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!