Electroencephalographic assessment of pneumatically powered penetrating and non-penetrating captive-bolt stunning of bulls

Gibson, T. J.; Oliveira, Steffan Edward Octávio; Costa, F. A. Dalla; Gregory, N.

doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2019.01.006

Cited by 23 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, a relatively large incidence of subarachnoid haemorrhage was observed in cattle, which makes this method questionable for the halal meat industry [51]. Gibson et al [52] found that the ratio of mis-stuns in adult cattle (bulls) when using a nonpenetrating captive bolt stunner was 18%, which is a serious welfare problem. European legislation allows use of this method only for poultry, lagomorphs and ruminants up to 10 kg of live weight in order to ensure that the blow is sufficient to render the animal unconscious and avoid mis-stuns.…”

Section: Stunningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Halal Criteria Versus Conventional Slaughter Technology

Abdullah

Bořilová

Steinhauserova

2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The halal meat industry is today a reality in many regions of the world, including the European Union. The main religious laws in the area of halal meat production were legislated in ancient times and may be unchangeable due to their sanctity perceived by faithful Muslims, while the modern technology used in the meat industry is constantly evolving and being updated. The objective of this study is to highlight the points of controversy between the principles of halal and the technological means currently used in the meat industry. Modern slaughter practices, including animal fasting prior to slaughter, animal body position, the location of the incision during slaughter, stunning and mechanical slaughter, are reviewed. The purpose of preslaughter feed availability according to halal criteria could be to ensure greater welfare for animals, though feed withdrawal is necessary today. Although there is no clear unified opinion among the Islamic sects, reversible stunning of animals is generally accepted. A neck cut at a higher position than the conventional low cut in cattle may reduce the compromise in welfare (the onset of unconsciousness), minimise false aneurysm and be compatible with halal criteria. This study may contribute towards consideration being given to technology that is not in conflict with the religious legislation, while at the same time meeting the requirements of the modern meat industry.

show abstract

Section: Stunningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Halal Criteria Versus Conventional Slaughter Technology

Abdullah

Bořilová

Steinhauserova

2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Oliveira et al (2018) reported that pneumatically powered penetrating and non-penetrating captive bolts resulted in immediate collapse, indicative of effective stunning, in 99% and 91% of cattle (> 400 kg live weight), respectively. Gibson et al (2019) reported that shooting bulls with a pneumatic penetrating captive bolt was 100% effective, whereas cattle shot with a non-penetrating bolt was effective in only 82% of cases, as assessed on the basis of EEG parameters indicative of unconsciousness. In both the studies, the non-penetrative captive bolts were powered by an air line pressure of 220 psi (1,517 kPa).…”

Section: Non-penetrative Captive Bolt Followed By a Killing Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Welfare of cattle during killing for purposes other than slaughter

Nielsen¹,

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2020

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cattle of different ages may have to be killed on farm for purposes other than slaughter (the latter being defined as killing for human consumption) either individually or on a large scale, e.g. for economic reasons or for disease control. The purpose of this scientific opinion is to assess the risks associated with the on-farm killing of cattle. The processes during on-farm killing that were assessed included handling and moving, stunning and/or killing methods (including restraint). The killing methods were grouped into mechanical and electrical methods as well as lethal injection. In total, 21 hazards compromising animal welfare were identified and characterised, most of these related to stunning and/or killing. Staff was identified as an origin for all hazards, either due to lack of appropriate skills needed to perform tasks or due to fatigue. Possible preventive and corrective measures were assessed: measures to correct hazards were identified for 19 hazards, and the staff was shown to have a crucial role in prevention. Three welfare consequences of hazards to which cattle can be exposed during on-farm killing were identified: impeded movement, pain and fear. The welfare consequences and relevant animal-based measures related to these were described. Outcome tables linking hazards, welfare consequences, animal-based measures, origins of the hazards, preventive and corrective measures were developed for each process. Mitigation measures to minimise the welfare consequences are proposed.

show abstract

“…Oliveira et al (2018) reported that pneumatically powered penetrating and non-penetrating captive bolts resulted in immediate collapse, indicative of effective stunning, in 99% and 91% of cattle, respectively. Gibson et al (2019) reported that shooting bulls with a pneumatic penetrating captive bolt was 100% effective, whereas cattle shot with a non-penetrating bolt was effective in only 82% on the basis of electroencephalogram (EEG) parameters indicative of unconsciousness. In both the studies, the nonpenetrative captive bolts were powered by an air line pressure of 220 psi (1,517 kPa).…”

Section: Non-penetrative Captive Bolt Stunningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gibson et al. (2019) reported that shooting bulls with a pneumatic penetrating captive bolt was 100% effective, whereas cattle shot with a non‐penetrating bolt was effective in only 82% on the basis of electroencephalogram (EEG) parameters indicative of unconsciousness. In both the studies, the non‐penetrative captive bolts were powered by an air line pressure of 220 psi (1,517 kPa).…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Welfare of cattle at slaughter

Nielsen¹,

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2020

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The killing of cattle for human consumption (slaughtering) can take place in a slaughterhouse or on farm. The processes of slaughtering that were assessed for welfare, from the arrival of cattle until their death (including slaughtering without stunning), were grouped into three main phases: pre-stunning (including arrival, unloading from the truck, lairage, handling and moving of cattle); stunning (including restraint); and bleeding. Stunning methods were grouped into two categories: mechanical and electrical. Twelve welfare consequences that cattle may be exposed to during slaughter were identified: heat stress, cold stress, fatigue, prolonged thirst, prolonged hunger, impeded movement, restriction of movements, resting problems (inability to rest or discomfort during resting), social stress, pain, fear and distress. Welfare consequences and their relevant animal-based measures are described. In total, 40 welfare hazards that could occur during slaughter were identified and characterised, most of them related to stunning and bleeding. Staff were identified as the origin of 39 hazards, which were attributed to the lack of appropriate skill sets needed to perform tasks or to fatigue. Measures to prevent and correct hazards were identified, and structural and managerial measures were identified as those with a crucial role in prevention. Outcome tables linking hazards, welfare consequences, animal-based measures, origin of hazards, and preventive and corrective measures were developed for each process. Mitigation measures to minimise welfare consequences are proposed.

show abstract

Electroencephalographic assessment of pneumatically powered penetrating and non-penetrating captive-bolt stunning of bulls

Cited by 23 publications

References 26 publications

Halal Criteria Versus Conventional Slaughter Technology

Halal Criteria Versus Conventional Slaughter Technology

Welfare of cattle during killing for purposes other than slaughter

Welfare of cattle at slaughter

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About