Article Text

Pig welfare and carcase quality: a comparison of the influence of slaughter handling systems at two abattoirs
  1. EJ Hunter,
  2. CM Weeding,
  3. HJ Guise,
  4. TA Abbott and
  5. RH Penny
  1. Cambac JMA Research Ltd, Lower Cadleys, South Stoke, Reading.


Pigs from four farms (two producing 'easy' and two 'difficult to handle' pigs) were slaughtered at two abattoirs, each with two slaughter handling systems, so that 25 pigs of each behavioural type were slaughtered by all four handling systems on each day; there were 16 replicates (3200 pigs) in total. The pigs at abattoir X were electrically stunned, either in a floor pen holding five pigs or in a race-restrainer. At abattoir Y the pigs were stunned either in a floor pen holding five pigs or in a dip-lift carbon dioxide stunner. The following measurements were made: hot carcase weight and backfat thickness at P2, degree of rigor mortis 35 minutes post mortem, skin blemish, pH and muscle reflectance in the m longissimus dorsi at 60 minutes and 18 hours post mortem, and pH and muscle reflectance in the m adductor at 18 hours post mortem. At abattoir X, the pigs slaughtered in the race-restrainer had heavier carcases (74.0 kg vs 73.0 kg, P < 0.05), developed rigor mortis more rapidly (8.1 mm vs 7.3 mm, P < 0.01), had more skin blemish (2.8 vs 2.7, P < 0.01), paler m longissimus dorsi muscles after one hour (15.7 vs 13.9, P < 0.01) and 18 hours (27.8 vs 26.6, P < 0.05), and paler m adductor muscles (24.5 vs 22.7, P < 0.001) after 18 hours. At abattoir Y, the pigs handled through the floor pen system had more skin blemish (2.7 vs 2.6, P < 0.05) and a tendency to develop rigor mortis more quickly (6.11 vs 5.32, P = 0.089).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.