Abstract

Simple SummaryThe aims of this study were (1) to evaluate the prevalence of lameness, dirtiness of the body surface, and abomasal disorders of slaughter cattle; and (2) to determine the association between these welfare indicators and animal-related factors (e.g., housing type, carcass weight, and transportation and waiting duration of the animals). In contrast to dirtiness (level of contamination of the body surface, also referred to as cleanliness) and the prevalence of abomasal disorders, the determined lameness prevalence was very low. The husbandry of cattle was identified as a significant influencing factor for both the dirtiness and occurrence of abomasal disorders of slaughter cattle.Three cattle welfare indicators (lameness, dirtiness, and abomasal disorders) were evaluated in 412 slaughter cattle in a cross-sectional study in Austria. The aims of this study were (1) to evaluate the prevalence of lameness, dirtiness of slaughter cattle, and abomasal disorders; and (2) to determine the association between these welfare indicators and animal-related factors (e.g., housing type, carcass weight, transportation and waiting duration of the animals). The lameness prevalence was 0.73%, the abomasal disorders prevalence was 52.43%, and 88.59% of all cattle were contaminated. The latter result indicates that the cattle were kept in a dirty environment. The occurrence of abomasal disorders was associated with cattle housing systems (p ≤ 0.00) and slaughter weight (p = 0.03). The odds for abomasal disorders were 28.0 times higher for cattle housed on slatted flooring compared to cattle kept in a tethered system. The chance for occurrence of abomasal disorders was 3.6 times higher for cattle with a low carcass weight compared to cattle with a high carcass weight. Furthermore, significant associations were found between dirtiness (also referred to as cleanliness or contamination) and husbandry system, sex, and breed. Cattle housed in deep litter boxes had 40.8 times higher odds of being contaminated compared to cattle in a tethered housing system. Cows (odds: 32.9) and heifers (odds: 4.4) had higher odds of being contaminated with feces compared to bulls, whereby female calves (odds: 0.09) and male calves (odds: 0.02) had significantly lower odds of being contaminated. Furthermore, the breeds Brown Swiss (odds: 0.26) and Holstein-Friesian (odds: 0.14) had a significantly lower chance of being contaminated compared to Simmental cattle. Other collected factors, such as production system, transportation duration, life days of the cattle, average daily weight gain, carcass classification, and fat coverage, showed no association with the collected welfare indicators. The study presented here indicates that welfare indicators evaluated for slaughter cattle are suitable to assess cattle welfare, and improvements in husbandry may positively impact both the abomasal physiology and cleanliness of cattle.

Highlights

  • More than 70 cattle welfare indicators are described in the literature [1]

  • Locomotion of cattle can be categorized based on the severity of lameness by a five-point scoring system [10]: (1) clinically normal, i.e., cattle walks and stands with level-back posture; (2) in contrast to score 1, the animal shows an arched-back posture while walking; (3) a moderate lameness is detected if an arched-back posture is observed while the cattle is walking and standing; (4) in contrast to score 3, an arched-back posture is observed all the time; and score (5) indicates a severe lameness characterized by an inability of the cattle to bear weight on one or more of their limbs/feet [10]

  • Because other farm specific herd management factors may contribute to the cleanliness level of cattle, we considered the “farm (n = 97)” and the “individual cattle identification number (n = 412)” as random effects in the cumulative link mixed model (CLMM) [24]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

More than 70 cattle welfare indicators are described in the literature [1]. These 70 cattle welfare indicators can be assigned to four main categories: morphometric, behavior-specific, physiologic, and meat-quality-affecting indicators. Besides the evaluation of animal welfare indicators on farms, several studies have assessed animal welfare issues in abattoirs [2–5]. A benefit of using ante- and postmortem indicators, including meat inspection, is the ability to collect data on animal welfare and on food safety from different farms [6]. Injuries, emaciation, and cleanliness are considered important animal welfare indicators at the slaughterhouse [7]. Lameness is one of the most important cattle welfare issues [8,9]. Locomotion of cattle can be categorized based on the severity of lameness by a five-point scoring system [10]: (1) clinically normal, i.e., cattle walks and stands with level-back posture; (2) in contrast to score 1, the animal shows an arched-back posture while walking; (3) a moderate lameness is detected if an arched-back posture is observed while the cattle is walking and standing; (4) in contrast to score 3, an arched-back posture is observed all the time; and score (5) indicates a severe lameness characterized by an inability of the cattle to bear weight on one or more of their limbs/feet [10]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call