Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T20:46:22.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of stunning methods on product qualities in force-fed ducks and geese. 1. Carcass downgrading and meat quality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2009

X. Fernandez ,
E. Lahirigoyen ,
A. Auvergne ,
C. Molette  and
M. Bouillier-Oudot
X. Fernandez*
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France Université de Toulouse, INPT ENSAT, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France ENVT, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31076 Toulouse, France
E. Lahirigoyen
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France Université de Toulouse, INPT ENSAT, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France ENVT, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31076 Toulouse, France
A. Auvergne
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France Université de Toulouse, INPT ENSAT, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France ENVT, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31076 Toulouse, France
C. Molette
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France Université de Toulouse, INPT ENSAT, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France ENVT, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31076 Toulouse, France
M. Bouillier-Oudot
Affiliation:
INRA, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France Université de Toulouse, INPT ENSAT, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France ENVT, UMR1289 Tissus Animaux Nutrition Digestion Ecosystème et Métabolisme, F-31076 Toulouse, France
*
†E-mail: fernandez@ensat.fr
Get access

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of various stunning methods on the quality of carcass and meat in ducks and geese force-fed for the production of French ‘foie gras’. The ducks (n = 30 per group) were stunned with one of the following techniques: electrical stunning in a water bath (50 Hz AC, 130 mA, 4 s), head-only electrical stunning (50 Hz AC, 600 mA, 4 s), mechanical stunning (captive bolt) and controlled atmosphere stunning (CAS: phase 1, CO2 (40%)–O2 (30%)–N2 (30%), for 2 min followed by phase 2, CO2 > 85% in air, for 2 min). The same methods (except head-only stunning which was not applied) were used in geese (n = 40 per group). During the first 5 min after slaughter, the stunning techniques that did not kill the animals were associated with a high incidence of head movements (mechanical and electrical head-only stunning), convulsions and convulsive wing flapping (mechanical stunning), in both species. Consequently, the rate of post-mortem pH fall in breast muscle was enhanced and the meat was paler when measured at 24 h or 6 days post mortem (L*, a*, b* coordinates). In ducks, the animals stunned in the water bath showed the lowest bleeding efficiency, compared to the three other procedures. In geese, the mechanical stunning allowed the highest recovery of blood compared to the CAS and the water-bath methods. Meat texture assessed instrumentally and fluid losses during storage and processing were not affected by the stunning method in any species. Sensory analysis showed a higher score for bloody appearance of raw meat in ducks stunned with the methods that kill before neck cutting (water-bath and CAS). This effect was, however, not linked to the rate of bleeding. The sensory properties of cooked meat were not affected by the stunning method. In both ducks and geese, CAS was associated with the lowest rate of fractures of humeral bone but CAS-stunned geese showed the most engorged wing veins. Overall, these results show the positive effect of CAS on the appearance defects of carcass and meat of ducks and geese, and, on the contrary, they confirm the detrimental effects of water-bath stunning on these criteria. However, the incidences on meat sensory qualities were scarce.

Keywords

ducksgeesestunning methodmeat qualitycarcass quality
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , January 2010 , pp. 128 - 138
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

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

Bendall, JR 1973. Post mortem changes in muscle. In Structure and function of muscle (ed. GH Bourne), pp. 243–309. Academic Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergmeyer, HU 1974. In Methods of enzymatic analysis (ed. GH Bourne), pp. 1127, 1196, 1238, 1464. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Beyssen, C, Babilé, R, Fernandez, X 2004. Effect of current intensity during ‘head-only’ electrical stunning on the brain function in force-fed ducks. Animal Research 53, 155–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Channon, HA, Payne, AM, Warner, RD 2002. Comparison of CO2 stunning with manual electrical stunning (50 Hz) of pigs on carcass and meat quality. Meat Science 60, 63–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Channon, HA, Payne, AM, Warner, RD 2003. Effect of stun duration and current level applied during head to back and head only electrical stunning of pigs on pork quality compared with pigs stunned with CO2. Meat Science 65, 1325–1333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dalrymple, RH, Hamm, R 1973. A method for the extraction of glycogen and metabolites from a single muscle sample. Journal of Food Technology 8, 439–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 2004. Welfare aspects of animal stunning and killing methods. Scientific Report of the Scientific Panel for Animal Health and Welfare, pp. 116–152.Google Scholar
Fernandez, X, Leprettre, S, Dubois, JP, Auvergne, A, Babilé, R 2003. The influence of current parameters during the water-bath stunning of overfed geese (Anser anser) on blood loss and on fatty liver and meat downgrading. Animal Research 52, 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez, X, Auvergne, A, Santacruz, B, Seidlinger, S, Leprettre, S, Dubois, JP, Babilé, R 2006. Réponses comportementales des canards et des oies gavés à différentes procédures d’étourdissement en atmosphère modifiée et à différents mélanges gazeux. In Comptes Rendus des 7èmes Journées de la Recherche sur les Palmipèdes à Foie Gras, Arcachon, 18–19 Octobre, pp. 74–77.Google Scholar
Hillebrand, S, Lambooy, E, Veerkamp, CH 1996. The effects of alternative electrical and mechanical stunning methods on haemorrhaging and meat quality of broiler breast and thigh muscles. Poultry Science 75, 664–671.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Honikel, K 1998. Reference methods for the assessment of the physical characteristics of meat. Meat Science 49, 447–457.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jeacocke, RE 1977. Continuous measurement of the pH of beef muscle in intact beef carcass. Journal of Food Technology 12, 375–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamoun, M, Culioli, J 1989. Influence of ageing on the mechanical properties of bovine cooked meat. Sciences des Aliments 9, 3–18.Google Scholar
Kotula, AW, Helbacka, NV 1966. Blood retained by chicken carcasses and cut up parts as influenced by slaughter method. Poultry Science 45, 404–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambooij, E, Pieterse, C 1997. Alternative stunning methods for poultry. In Proceedings Symposium “Alternative stunning methods for poultry” (ed. E Lambooij), ID-DLO nr: 97.037, Lelystad, The Netherlands, 19 November 1997, pp. 7–14.Google Scholar
Lepetit, J, Salé, P, Ouali, A 1986. Post-mortem evolution of rheological properties of the myofibrillar structure. Meat Science 16, 161–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leprettre, S, Babilé, R, Auvergne, A, Dubois, JP, Manse, H, Verdier, M 1997. Food restriction in Landese geese breeding: influences on growth and carcass composition during the growing period and after force-feeding. In Proceedings of the 11th European Waterfowls Symposium, World Poultry Science Association, Nantes, France, pp. 569–574.Google Scholar
Molee, W, Bouillier-Oudot, M, Auvergne, A, Babilé, R 2005. Changes in lipid composition of hepatocyte plasma membrane induced by overfeeding in duck. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part B 141, 437–444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monin, G, Sellier, P 1985. Pork of low technological quality with a normal rate of muscle pH fall in the immediate post mortem period: the case of the Hampshire breed. Meat Science 13, 49–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mouchonière, M, Le Pottier, G, Fernandez, X 1999. The effect of current frequency during waterbath stunning on the physical recovery and rate and extent of bleed out in turkeys. Poultry Science 78, 485–489.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poole, GH, Fletcher, DL 1998. Comparison of a modified atmosphere stunning-killing system to conventional electrical stunning and killing on selected broiler breast muscle rigor development and meat quality attributes. Poultry Science 77, 342–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raj, ABM 1995. Poultry stunning/killing methods: effects on carcass and meat quality. In Proceedings of the 12th WPSA European Symposium on the Quality of Poultry Meat, Zaragoza, Spain, pp. 289–297.Google Scholar
Raj, ABM, Johnson, SP 1997. Effect of the method of killing, interval between killing and neck cutting and blood vessels cut on blood loss in broilers. British Poultry Science 30, 190–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raj, ABM, Grey, TC, Audsely, AR, Gregory, NG 1990. Effect of electrical and gaseous stunning on the carcase and meat quality of broilers. British Poultry Science 31, 725–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raj, ABM, Richardson, RI, Wilkins, LJ, Wotton, SB 1998. Carcase and meat quality in ducks killed with either gas mixtures or an electric current under commercial processing conditions. British Poultry Science 39, 404–407.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Santé, V, Le Pottier, G, Astruc, T, Mouchonière, M, Fernandez, X 2000. Effect of stunning current frequency on carcass downgrading and meat quality of turkey. Poultry Science 79, 1208–1214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SAS Institute 1989. SAS® User’s Guide for personal computers. Release 6.03. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Turcsán, ZS, Szigeti, J, Varga, L, Farkas, L, Birkás, E, Turcsán, J 2001. The effects of electrical and controlled atmosphere stunning methods on meat and liver quality of geese. Poultry Science 80, 1647–1651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turcsán, ZS, Varga, L, Szigeti, J, Turcsán, J, Csurák, I, Szalai, M 2003. Effects of electrical stunning frequency and voltage combinations on the presence of engorged blood vessels in goose liver. Poultry Science 82, 1816–1819.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warriss, PD 1987. The effect of time and conditions of transport and lairage on pig meat quality. In Evaluation and control of meat quality in pigs. Proceedings of the Seminar in the CEC Agricultural Research Programme, Dublin, Ireland, 21–22 November 1985, pp. 245–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar