Aarhus University Seal

Data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

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.

In: Porcine Health Management, Vol. 6, No. 1, 10, 14.04.2020.

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{da5cc270236c4e90aa5a9ff9438ca260,
title = "Data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs",
abstract = "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 tocompare 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 (r2) 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.",
keywords = "tail lesions, undocked pigs, abattoir registrations, clinical registrations, Undocked pigs, Clinical registrations, WELFARE, Tail lesions, Abattoir registrations, HEALTH",
author = "Hanne Kongsted and Leslie Foldager and S{\o}rensen, {Jan Tind}",
note = "{\textcopyright} The Author(s) 2020.",
year = "2020",
month = apr,
day = "14",
doi = "10.1186/s40813-020-00149-z",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
journal = "Porcine Health Management",
issn = "2055-5660",
publisher = "BioMed Central Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Data from routine meat inspection is a poor indicator of the prevalence of tail lesions in undocked pigs

AU - Kongsted, Hanne

AU - Foldager, Leslie

AU - Sørensen, Jan Tind

N1 - © The Author(s) 2020.

PY - 2020/4/14

Y1 - 2020/4/14

N2 - 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 tocompare 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 (r2) 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.

AB - 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 tocompare 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 (r2) 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.

KW - tail lesions

KW - undocked pigs

KW - abattoir registrations

KW - clinical registrations

KW - Undocked pigs

KW - Clinical registrations

KW - WELFARE

KW - Tail lesions

KW - Abattoir registrations

KW - HEALTH

U2 - 10.1186/s40813-020-00149-z

DO - 10.1186/s40813-020-00149-z

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 32313682

VL - 6

JO - Porcine Health Management

JF - Porcine Health Management

SN - 2055-5660

IS - 1

M1 - 10

ER -