Hostname: page-component-76dd75c94c-68sx7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T08:08:20.170Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using sensors to detect individual responses of lambs during transport and pre-slaughter handling and their relationship with meat quality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

S Ogun ,
I Viola ,
M Obertino ,
I Manenti ,
U Ala ,
A Brugiapaglia ,
L Battaglini ,
G Perona  and
M Baratta
S Ogun
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Science, University of Turin, Grugliasco (TO), Italy
I Viola
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Science, University of Turin, Grugliasco (TO), Italy
M Obertino
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Science, University of Turin, Grugliasco (TO), Italy
I Manenti
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Science, University of Turin, Grugliasco (TO), Italy
U Ala
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Science, University of Turin, Grugliasco (TO), Italy
A Brugiapaglia
Affiliation:
DISAFA, University of Turin, Grugliasco (TO), Italy
L Battaglini
Affiliation:
DISAFA, University of Turin, Grugliasco (TO), Italy
G Perona
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Science, University of Turin, Grugliasco (TO), Italy
M Baratta*
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Science, University of Turin, Grugliasco (TO), Italy Department of Chemistry, Life Science and Environmental Sustainability, SCVSA, University of Parma, Italy
*
* Contact for correspondence: mario.baratta@unipr.it
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Rapid analysis of animal welfare is a crucial component of the assessment of the meat quality supply chain, ensuring management procedures confer optimum standards of welfare. Further, there is increasing interest in monitoring the welfare state of each individual animal. This study looked at transport and pre-slaughter management in terms of meat quality evaluated in two breeds (Biellese and Sambucana) across two different farming systems. Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) technologies were implemented, including accelerometer and rumination activity ear-tag sensors, as potential welfare indicators during transportation and pre-slaughter. Significant correlations were found between sensors’ parameters, such as total activity and rumination and physical and chemical meat quality characteristics such as drip loss. Lambs with lower rumination and/or lower total activity were found to have lower drip loss indicating reduced meat quality. Sensors have the potential to help detect those animals particularly sensitive to stressors during transport and pre-slaughter handling and may allow real-time measurement of the impact of transport and handling in abattoirs, enabling better animal management via specific customised strategies.

Keywords

animal welfarecortisollambmeat qualitysensorstransportation
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , November 2022 , pp. 505 - 516
Copyright
© 2022 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Alonso, ME, González-Montaña, JR and Lomillos, JM 2020 Consumers’ concerns and perceptions of farm animal welfare. Animals 10: 385–391. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10030385CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
AWIN 2015 AWIN Welfare Assessment Protocol for Sheep. https://doi.org/10.13130/AWIN_sheep_2015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bodas, R, García-García, JJ, Montanes, M, Benito, A, Peric, T, Baratta, M, Viola, I, Geß, A, Ko, N, Cadavez, V, Gonzales-Barron, U, Domínguez, E and Olmedo, S 2021 On farm welfare assessment of European fattening lambs. Small Ruminant Research 204: 106533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2021.106533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bramlet, VD, Judge, MD and Vail, GE 1963 Stress during growth 2. Effect on palatability and cooking characteristics of lamb meat. Journal of Animal Science 22: 1064–1067. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1963.2241064xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 2005 The effect of land transport on animal welfare. Revue scientifique et technique-Office international des epizooties 24: 683–687CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caja, G, Castro-Costa, A and Knight, CH 2016 Engineering to support wellbeing of dairy animals. Journal of Dairy Research 83(2): 136–147. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022029916000261CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caja, G, Castro-Costa, A, Salama, AAK, Oliver, J, Baratta, M, Ferrer, C and Knight, CH 2020 Sensing solutions for improving the performance, health and wellbeing of small ruminants. Journal of Dairy Research 87(S1): 34–46. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022029920000667CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carrasco-García, AA, Pardío-Sedas, VT, León-Banda, GG, Ahuja-Aguirre, C, Paredes Ramos, P, Hernández-Cruz, BC and Murillo, VV 2020 Effect of stress during slaughter on carcass characteristics and meat quality in tropical beef cattle. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science 33(10): 1656–1665. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.19.0804CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cockram, MS 2004 A review of behavioural and physiological responses of sheep to stressors to identify potential behavioural signs of distress. Animal Welfare 13: 283–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockram, MS 2019 Sheep transport. In: Grandin, (ed) Livestock Handling and Transport, Third Edition. CABI International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Danso, AS, Richardson, RI and Khalid, R 2017 Assessment of the meat quality of lamb M. longissimus thoracis et lumborum and M. triceps brachii following three different Halal slaughter procedures. Meat Science 127: 6–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.12.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) 2014 Scientific Opinion on the welfare risks related to the farming of sheep for wool, meat and milk production. EFSA Journal 12: 3933. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3933Google Scholar
EU 2017 Consortium of the Animal Transport Guides Project 2017. Guide to good practices for the transport of sheep. http://animaltrans-portguides.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Animal-Transport-Guides-Sheep-2017-2.pdfGoogle Scholar
EU Council Regulation No 1099/2005 2005a The protection of animals at time of killing. https://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L2009:303:0001:0030:EN:PDFGoogle Scholar
EU Council Regulation No 1/2005 2005b The protection of animals during transport and related operations and amending Directives 64/432/EEC and 93/119/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1255/97. EU: Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Forrest, JC, Morgan, MT, Borgard, C, Rasmussen, AJ, Jespersen, BL and Andersen, JR 2000 Development of technology for the early post mortem prediction of water holding capacity and drip loss in fresh pork. Meat Science 55: 115–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/S03091740(99)00133-3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geß, A, Viola, I, Miretti, S, Macchi, E, Perona, G, Battaglini, L and Baratta, M 2020 A new approach to LCA evaluation of lamb meat production in two different breeding systems in Northern Italy. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 7: 651. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00651CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gonzales-Barron, U, Popova, T, Bermúdez Piedra, R, Tolsdorf, A, Geß, A, Pateiro, M, Chiesa, F, Brugiapaglia, A, Viola, I, Battaglini, L, Baratta, M, Lorenzo, JM and Cadavez, V 2021 Fatty acid composition of lamb meat from Italian and German local breeds. Small Ruminant Research 200: 106384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2021.106384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halachmi, I, Guarino, M, Bewley, J and Pastell, 2019 Smart animal agriculture:Application of real-time sensors to improve animal well-being and production. Annual Review of Animal Biosciences 7: 403–425. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-animal-020518-114851CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hemsworth, PH, Rice, M, Borg, S, Edwards, LE, Ponnampalam, EN and Coleman, GJ 2019 Relationships between handling, behaviour and stress in lambs at abattoirs. Animal 13: 1287–1296. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731118002744CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Honikel, KO 1998 Reference methods for the assessment of physical characteristics of meat. Meat Science 49: 447–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(98)00034-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knowles, TG 1995 Effect of sheep transport by road for up to 24 hours. Veterinary Records 136: 431–438. https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.136.17.431CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knowles, TG 1998 A review of the road transport of slaughter sheep. Veterinary Record 143: 212–219. https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.143.8.212CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krueger, A, Cruickshank, J, Trevisi, E and Bionaz, M 2020 Systems for evaluation of welfare on dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Research. 87(S1): 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022029920000461CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Llonch, P, King, EM, Clarke, KA and Downes, JM 2015 A systematic review of animal-based indicators of sheep welfare on farm, at market and during transport, and qualitative appraisal of their validity and feasibility for use in UK abattoirs. The Veterinary Journal 206: 289–297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2015.10.019CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maltz, E 2020 Individual dairy cow management: Achievements, obstacles and prospects. Journal of Dairy Research 87(S1) 2: 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022029920000382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maroto-Molina, F, Navarro-García, J, Príncipe-Aguirre, K, Gómez-Maqueda, I, Guerrero Ginel, JE, Garrido-Varo, A and Pérez-Marín, DC 2019 A low-cost lOT-based system to monitor the location of a whole herd. Sensors 19(10): 2298–2313. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19102298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mepham, B 2000 Animal welfare and meat science. Meat Science 56: 101. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0309-1740(00)00009-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Messouri, S, Sossidou, E, Buonanno, M, Mounaix, B, Barnard, S, Vousdouka, V, Dalla Villa, P, de Roest, K and Spoolder, H 2015 A pilot study to develop an assessment tool for sheep welfare after long journey transport. Animal Welfare 24: 407–416. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.24.4.407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mialon, MM, Boivin, X, Durand, D, Boissy, A, Delval, E, Bage, AS, Clanet, C, Cornilleau, F, Parias, C, Foury, A, Moisan, MP, Fassier, T, Marcon, D, Guilloteau, LA and Nowak, R 2021 Short- and mid-term effects on performance, health and qualitative behavioural assessment of Romane lambs in different milk feeding conditions. Animal: 100157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2020.100157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan-Davies, C, Lambe, N, Wishart, H, Waterhouse, T, Kenyon, F, McBean, D and McCracken, D 2018 Impacts of using a precision livestock system targeted approach in mountain sheep flocks. Livestock Science 208: 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2017.12.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Percie du Sert, N, Hurst, V, Ahluwalia, A, Alam, S, Avey, MT, Baker, M, Browne, WJ, Clark, A, Cuthill, IC, Dirnagl, U, Emerson, M, Garner, P, Holgate, ST, Howells, DW, Karp, NA, Lazic, SE, Lidster, K, MacCallum, CJ, Macleod, M, Pearl, EJ, Petersen, O, Rawle, F, Peynolds, P, Rooney, K, Sena, ES, Silberberg, SD, Steckler, T and Wurbel, H 2020 The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: updated guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przybylski, W, Sionek, B, Jaworska, D and Santé-Lhoutellier, V 2016 The application of biosensors for drip loss analysis and glycolytic potential evaluation. Meat Science 117: 7–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2016.02.025CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romyer, A and Bouissou, MF 1992 Assessment of fear reactions in domestic sheep and influence of breed and rearing conditions. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 34: 93–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(05)80060-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rutter, SM 2017 Advanced livestock management solutions. Advances in Sheep Welfare 13: 245–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100718-1.00013-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schilling, J, Bennet, R and Rose, CR 2021 Exploring the potential of precision livestock farming technologies to help address farm animal welfare. Frontiers of Animal Science 2: 639678. https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2021.639678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sionek, B, Przybylski, W and Tambor, K 2020 Biosensors in evaluation of quality of meat and meat products-a review. Annals of Animal Science 20: 1151–1168 https://doi.org/10.2478/aoas-20200057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Składanowska-Baryza, J, Ludwiczak, A, Pruszyńska-Oszmałek, E, Kołodziejski, P and Stanisz, M 2020 Effect of two different stunning methods on the quality traits of rabbit meat. Animals 10: 700–714. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10040700CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stubsjøen, SM, Bohlin, J, Dahl, E, Knappe-Poindecker, M, Fjeldaas, and Lepschy, M 2015 Assessment of chronic stress in sheep (part i): the use of cortisol and cortisone in hair as noninvasive biological markers. Small Ruminant Research 132: 25–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2015.09.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stubsjøen, SM, Sørheim, K, Chincarini, M, Bohlin, J, Brunberg, E and Fuchs, B 2018 Exploring hair cortisone concentration as a novel tool to assess chronic stress in sheep with tick-borne fever. Small Ruminant Research 164: 110–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2018.05.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutherland, MA, Worth, GM, Stuart, AD, Dobbie, PM and Clerens, S 2016 Effect of pre-slaughter handling, exercise and the presence of a dog on lamb welfare and meat quality. Animal 10: 1360–1367. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731116000197CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walshe, BE, Sheehan, EM, Delahunty, CM, Morrissey, PA and Kerry, JP 2006 Composition, sensory and shelf life stability analyses of Longissimus dorsi muscle from steers reared under organic and conventional production systems. Meat Science 73: 319–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.12.008CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zheng, A, Lin, S, Pirzado, SA, Chen, Z, Chang, W, Cai, H and Liu, G 2020 Stress associated with simulated transport, changes serum biochemistry, postmortem muscle metabolism, and meat quality of broilers. Animals 10: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081442CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Ogun et al. supplementary material
Download undefined(File)
File 234.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Ogun et al. supplementary material
Download undefined(File)
File 196.4 KB
Supplementary material: File

Ogun et al. supplementary material
Download undefined(File)
File 229 KB