Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T04:47:58.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Effect of Routine Handling of Pigs on Behaviour and Subsequent Meat Quality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2017

T.A. Abbott ,
E.J. Hunter ,
H.J. Guise  and
R.H.C. Penny
T.A. Abbott
Affiliation:
Cambac JMA Research Ltd, Lower Cadleys, South StokeREADING RG8 0LX
E.J. Hunter
Affiliation:
Cambac JMA Research Ltd, Lower Cadleys, South StokeREADING RG8 0LX
H.J. Guise
Affiliation:
Cambac JMA Research Ltd, Lower Cadleys, South StokeREADING RG8 0LX
R.H.C. Penny
Affiliation:
Cambac JMA Research Ltd, Lower Cadleys, South StokeREADING RG8 0LX
Get access

Extract

Many finishing pigs have little experience of handling, especially during the final management stage before slaughter. Earlier work (Weeding et al 1993) suggested that certain farms, producing pigs which were more difficult-to-handle than others, had a tendency towards dark, firm and dry meat (DFD). The effect of routine movement on behaviour during pre-slaughter handling and subsequent meat quality was evaluated using groups of finishing pigs.

Forty pens of pigs (17-19 pigs per pen) from two similar, fully-slatted finishing houses were involved. When pigs reached 16 weeks of age, pens were randomly allocated to treatment or control. Pigs in control pens were not moved before transport to the abattoir.

Type
Pigs
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production (1972) , Volume 1994 , March 1994 , pp. 47
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Production 1994

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

Weeding, C M, Hunter, E J, Guise, H J and Penny, R H C (1993) The effect of pig behavioural type on carcase quality and welfare. In: Proceedings of Conference on Livestock Science into Practice, RASE, May 1993.Google Scholar