Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T10:08:25.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of stocking rate on measures of efficacy and welfare during argon gas euthanasia of weaned pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

KJ Fiedler ,
RL Parsons ,
LJ Sadler  and
ST Millman
KJ Fiedler
Affiliation:
Department of Biomedical Sciences, Iowa State University, Iowa, USA
RL Parsons
Affiliation:
Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University, Iowa, USA
LJ Sadler
Affiliation:
Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University, Iowa, USA
ST Millman*
Affiliation:
2201 Lloyd Veterinary Medical Center, Ames, Iowa 50011-1250, USA Department of Biomedical Sciences, Iowa State University, Iowa, USA Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Iowa State University, Iowa, USA
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: smillman@iastate.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of chamber stocking rate on facets of animal welfare and efficacy during euthanasia of weaned pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus) with argon gas. Two hundred and thirty-three weaned pigs designated for euthanasia at a commercial production farm were randomly assigned to group sizes of one, two, or six pigs. Gas euthanasia of each piglet group was performed in a Euthanex® AgPro chamber. The chamber was filled with argon gas for 6 min in order to reduce the oxygen concentration to less than 2%. Pigs were then placed into the pre-filled chamber and gas flow was continued at a high rate to displace introduced air and re-establish a fatally low residual oxygen concentration. Pigs remained in the chamber for 10 min and were then removed to test for signs of sensibility and life. There was no significant evidence of an effect of stocking rate on focal pig latencies to onset of neuromuscular excitation or last movement, as scored from video recordings. Solitary pigs were more likely to pace and make righting attempts in the chamber than paired or grouped focal pigs, although pigs in higher stocking rate treatments tended to retain posture longer. The results of this study do not support seclusion during argon gas euthanasia as a method of improving animal welfare. The portable chamber did not facilitate a truly pre-filled atmosphere for euthanasia, although the procedure used in this study was consistently effective.

Keywords

animal welfareargonbehavioureuthanasiapigsstocking rate
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , February 2016 , pp. 83 - 89
Copyright
© 2016 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

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

American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) 2013 AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals: 2013 Edition. American Veterinary Medical Association: Schaumburg, USA. https://www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Documents/euthanasia.pdfGoogle Scholar
Amory, JR and Pearce, GP 2000 Alarm pheromones in urine modify the behaviour of weaner pigs. Animal Welfare 9(2): 167–175Google Scholar
Atkinson, S, Velarde, A, Llonch, P and Algers, B 2012 Assessing pig welfare at stunning in Swedish commercial abattoirs using CO2 group-stun methods. Animal Welfare 21(4): 487–495. http://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.21.4.487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) 2010 CCAC guidelines on: euthanasia of animals used in science. In: Charbonneau, R, Niel, L, Olfert, E, von Keyserlingk, M and Griffin, G (eds) Canadian Council on Animal Care. CCAC: Ottawa, CA. http://www.ccac.ca/Documents/Standards/Guidelines/Euthanasia.pdfGoogle Scholar
Dalmau, A, Rodríguez, P, Llonch, P and Velarde, A 2010 Stunning pigs with different gas mixtures: aversion in pigs. Animal Welfare 19: 325–333Google Scholar
Düpjan, S, Tuchscherer, A, Langbein, J, Schön, P-C, Manteuffel, G and Puppe, B 2011 Behavioural and cardiac responses towards conspecific distress calls in domestic pigs (Sus scrofa). Physiology & Behavior 103: 445–452. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2011.03.017CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiedler, KJ, Sadler, LJ, Parsons, RL and Millman, ST 2014 Effects of stocking rate on measures of efficacy and welfare during carbon dioxide gas euthanasia of young pigs. Animal Welfare 23(3): 309–321. http://dx.doi.org/10.7120/09627286.23.3.309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forslid, A 1987 Pre-slaughter CO2-anaesthesia in swine: Influence upon cerebral electrical activity, acid/base balance, blood oxygen tension and stress hormones. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, SwedenGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D 1975 Vocalization of isolated piglets II. Some environ-mental factors. Applied Animal Ethology 2(1): 19–24. http://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3762(75)90062-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerritzen, MA, Kluivers-Poodt, M, Reimert, HGM, Hindle, V and Lambooij, E 2008 Castration of piglets under CO2-gas anaesthe-sia. Animal 2(11): 1666. http://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731108002887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herin, RA, Hall, P and Fitch, JW 1978 Nitrogen inhalation as a method of euthanasia in dogs. American Journal of Veterinary Research 39(6): 989–991Google ScholarPubMed
Kanitz, E, Puppe, B, Tuchscherer, M, Heberer, M, Viergutz, T and Tuchscherer, A 2009 A single exposure to social isolation in domestic piglets activates behavioural arousal, neuroen-docrine stress hormones, and stress-related gene expression in the brain. Physiology & Behavior 98: 176–185. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2009.05.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Llonch, P, Rodríguez, P, Gispert, M, Dalmau, A, Manteca, X and Velarde, A 2012 Stunning pigs with nitrogen and carbon dioxide mixtures: effects on animal welfare and meat quality. Animal 6(4): 668–675. http://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731111001911CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martoft, L, Lomholt, L, Kolthoff, C, Rodríguez, BE, Jensen, EW, Jørgensen, PF, Pedersen, HD and Forslid, A 2002 Effects of CO2 anaesthesia on central nervous system activity in swine. Laboratory Animals 36: 115–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/0023677021912398CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKeegan, DEF, Abeyesinghe, SM, McLeman, MA, Lowe, JC, Demmers, TGM, White, RP, Kranen, RW, van Bemmel, H, Lankhaar, JAC and Wathes, CM 2007 Controlled atmosphere stunning of broiler chickens II. Effects on behaviour, physiology and meat quality in a commercial processing plant. British Poultry Science 48(4): 430–442. http://doi.org/10.1080/00071660701543097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mota-Rojas, D, Bolanos-Lopez, D, Concepcion-Mendez, M, Ramirez-Telles, J, Roldan-Santiago, P, Flores-Peinado, S and Mora-Medina, P 2012 Stunning swine with CO2 gas: Controversies related to animal welfare. International Journal of Pharmacology 8(3): 141–151. http://doi.org/10.3923/ijp.2012.141.151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Pork Board 2008 On-farm euthanasia of swine. Recommendations for the producer. National Pork Board: Des Moines, USA. http://www.aasv.org/aasv/documents/SwineEuthanasia.pdfGoogle Scholar
Raj, ABM 1999 Behaviour of pigs exposed to mixtures of gases and the time required to stun and kill them: welfare implications. The Veterinary Record 144: 165–168. http://doi.org/10.1136/vr.144.7.165CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raj, ABM 2006 Recent developments in stunning and slaughter of poultry. World's Poultry Science Journal 62: 467–484. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933906001097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raj, ABM and Gregory, NG 1995 Welfare implications of the gas stunning of pigs 1. Determination of aversion to the initial inhalation of carbon dioxide or argon. Animal Welfare 4: 273–280Google Scholar
Raj, ABM, Johnson, SP, Wotton, SB and McInstry, JL 1997 Welfare implications of gas stunning pigs 3. The time to loss of somatosensory evoked potentials and spontaneous electrocor-ticogram of pigs during exposure to gases. Veterinary Journal 153:329–340. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-0233(97)80067-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sadler, LJ 2013 Effect of flow rate, gas type and disease status on the welfare of suckling and nursery pig during gas euthanasia. PhD Thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, USAGoogle Scholar
Sadler, LJ, Hagen, CD, Wang, C, Widowski, TM, Johnson, AK and Millman, ST 2014a Effects of flow rate and gas mixture on the welfare of neonate and weaned pigs during gas euthanasia. Journal of Animal Science 92: 793–805. http://dx.doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6598CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sadler, LJ, Karriker, LA, Johnson, AK, Schwartz, KJ, Widowski, TM, Wang, C and Millman, ST 2014b Swine respi-ratory disease minimally affects responses of nursery pigs to gas euthanasia. Journal of Swine Health and Production 22(3): 125–133Google Scholar
Sadler, LJ, Karriker, LA, Schwartz, KJ, Johnson, AK, Widowski, TM, Wang, C, Sutherland, MA and Millman, ST 2014c Are severely depressed suckling pigs resistant to gas euthanasia? Animal Welfare 23: 145–155. http://dx.doi.org/10.7120/09627286.23.2.145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharp, J, Zammit, T, Azar, T and Lawson, D 2003 Stress-like responses to common procedures in individually and group-housed female rats. Continuing Topics in Laboratory Animal Science 42: 9–18Google ScholarPubMed
Straw, BE, Meuten, DJ and Thacker, BJ 1999 Physical exami-nation. In: Straw, BD, Allaire, S, Mengeling, W and Taylor, D (eds) Diseases of Swine, 8th Edition pp 3–5. Iowa State Press: Ames, USAGoogle Scholar
Talling, JC, Waran, NK, Wathes, CM and Lines, JA 1996 Behavioural and physiological responses of pigs to sound. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 48: 187–202. http://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(96)01029-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vieuille-Thomas, C and Signoret, JP 1992 Pheromonal transmission of an aversive experience in domestic pig. Journal of Chemical Ecology 18(9): 1551–1557. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF00993228CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed