Cargando…
Data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs
We investigated the prevalence of tail lesions in batches of undocked slaughter pigs in herds just before delivery to an abattoir. At the abattoir, dehaired and scalded carcasses were submitted to routine meat inspection which included recording of tail lesions. The purpose of the study was to inves...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7155330/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32313682 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-020-00149-z |
_version_ | 1783522011244396544 |
---|---|
author | Kongsted, Hanne Foldager, Leslie Sørensen, Jan Tind |
author_facet | Kongsted, Hanne Foldager, Leslie Sørensen, Jan Tind |
author_sort | Kongsted, Hanne |
collection | PubMed |
description | We investigated the prevalence of tail lesions in batches of undocked slaughter pigs in herds just before delivery to an abattoir. At the abattoir, dehaired and scalded carcasses were submitted to routine meat inspection which included recording of tail lesions. The purpose of the study was to investigate the relationship between clinically and abattoir- detected tail lesions in undocked pigs. During visits in 15 label-production herds, 2346 slaughter pigs from 24 batches were examined. Tail lesions were registered as mild healed, mild unhealed or severe. The median prevalence of the three categories in batches was 13, 9 and 6%, respectively. At the abattoir, tails were evaluated by public inspectors. Between 0 and 10% of pigs within batches (median: 1%) were registered with tail lesions at the abattoir. A linear regression model was used to compare the proportions of severe tail lesions registered in each batch within the herds with the proportions registered at the abattoir. We applied a leave-one-batch-out internal cross-validation on the model in order to explore a systematic relationship. The mean absolute difference between the predicted and the observed proportion was 9%-points. The coefficient of determination (r(2)) was 0.006. Our results indicate that there is no systematic relationship between clinically and abattoir-registered tail lesions in undocked pigs. Thus, abattoir registrations as carried out in the present study did not mirror the clinical situation properly. If meat inspection recordings should be used to reflect tail lesions in the herds, efforts must be undertaken to ensure a positive correlation between the two. Thus, abattoir registrations used as an indicator of tail bite prevalence in herds are currently not reliable. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7155330 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71553302020-04-20 Data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs Kongsted, Hanne Foldager, Leslie Sørensen, Jan Tind Porcine Health Manag Short Communication We investigated the prevalence of tail lesions in batches of undocked slaughter pigs in herds just before delivery to an abattoir. At the abattoir, dehaired and scalded carcasses were submitted to routine meat inspection which included recording of tail lesions. The purpose of the study was to investigate the relationship between clinically and abattoir- detected tail lesions in undocked pigs. During visits in 15 label-production herds, 2346 slaughter pigs from 24 batches were examined. Tail lesions were registered as mild healed, mild unhealed or severe. The median prevalence of the three categories in batches was 13, 9 and 6%, respectively. At the abattoir, tails were evaluated by public inspectors. Between 0 and 10% of pigs within batches (median: 1%) were registered with tail lesions at the abattoir. A linear regression model was used to compare the proportions of severe tail lesions registered in each batch within the herds with the proportions registered at the abattoir. We applied a leave-one-batch-out internal cross-validation on the model in order to explore a systematic relationship. The mean absolute difference between the predicted and the observed proportion was 9%-points. The coefficient of determination (r(2)) was 0.006. Our results indicate that there is no systematic relationship between clinically and abattoir-registered tail lesions in undocked pigs. Thus, abattoir registrations as carried out in the present study did not mirror the clinical situation properly. If meat inspection recordings should be used to reflect tail lesions in the herds, efforts must be undertaken to ensure a positive correlation between the two. Thus, abattoir registrations used as an indicator of tail bite prevalence in herds are currently not reliable. BioMed Central 2020-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7155330/ /pubmed/32313682 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-020-00149-z Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Short Communication Kongsted, Hanne Foldager, Leslie Sørensen, Jan Tind Data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs |
title | Data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs |
title_full | Data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs |
title_fullStr | Data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs |
title_full_unstemmed | Data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs |
title_short | Data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs |
title_sort | data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs |
topic | Short Communication |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7155330/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32313682 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-020-00149-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kongstedhanne datafromroutinemeatinspectionisapoorindicatoroftheprevalenceoftaillesionsinundockedpigs AT foldagerleslie datafromroutinemeatinspectionisapoorindicatoroftheprevalenceoftaillesionsinundockedpigs AT sørensenjantind datafromroutinemeatinspectionisapoorindicatoroftheprevalenceoftaillesionsinundockedpigs |