Publikationsdatenbank

Status quo and improvements of food chain information for broilers, pigs, and bovines in Europe:
results from an online survey (2023)

Art

Vortrag

Autoren

Langforth, Susann (WE 8)

Li, Ting-Ting (WE 8)

Oswaldi, Verena (WE 8)

Isbrandt, Rudi (WE 8)

Sotiraki, Smaragda

Anastasiadou, Sofia

Nesbakken, Truls

Langkabel, Nina (WE 8)

Meemken, Diana (WE 8)

Kongress

3rd RIBMINS Scientific Conference "Shaping the Future of RB-MSAS"

Bukarest (Rumänien), 29. – 30.03.2023

Quelle

3rd RIBMINS scientific conference "shaping the future of RB-MSAS" : 29-30 March 2023 – Bucharest + online : book of abstracts — COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) ; editors: Nevijo Zdolec & Brigitte Sperner (Hrsg.)

— S. 13

Sprache

Englisch

Verweise

URL (Volltext): https://ribmins.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/RIBMINS-Proceedings-2023.pdf

Kontakt

Institut für Lebensmittelsicherheit und -hygiene

Königsweg 69
14163 Berlin
+49 30 838 62551 / 52790
lebensmittelhygiene@vetmed.fu-berlin.de / fleischhygiene@vetmed.fu-berlin.de

Abstract / Zusammenfassung

Food chain information (FCI) according to Reg. (EC) No 853/2004 is data collected along the food chain for animals intended for slaughter. FCI includes inter alia information about the health status, treatment data, and previous ante- and post-mortem reports. The content of FCI determines the intensity and methods for the official meat inspection in the framework of risk-based meat safety assurance systems (RB-MSAS). Official veterinarians are expected to play a central role as risk managers in RB-MSAS and will benefit from the use of FCI. The specifications laid down in the EU regulation, however, are not very precise, causing country-specific implementations. The aim of this study was to obtain an overview of the information content of FCI in European countries to identify similarities, differences and optimisation potential. Separate questionnaires were designed for broilers, pigs and bovines. In total, 32 respondents completed the questionnaire for broilers, 51 for pigs and 58 for bovines. They were from 14, 17 and 18 different European countries, respectively. For broilers, 75% of the respondents regarded FCI as helpful, while for pigs it was 57% and for bovines 48%. The percentage of respondents with access to certain information was mostly the largest for broilers, followed by pigs and bovines. For example, mortality rate was transmitted to 88% of respondents for broilers, to 20% for pigs and to 16% for bovines. In total 81% (broilers), 65% (pigs) and 55% (bovines) of the respondents had access to previous ante-mortem inspections of animals from the same holding. For post-mortem inspections, this was 91% (broilers), 63% (pigs) and 64% (bovines) of the respondents. Currently, ante- and post-mortem findings must be requested as FCI since they are regulated in Reg. (EC) No 853/2004, but especially for pigs and bovines, information transmission is not implemented Europe-wide. Overall, our study detected a species-specific implementation of FCI with the best data availability for broilers. This is probably due to the common integrated systems in poultry production and since the significance of flock data is higher compared to individually slaughtered animals like dairy cattle. Nevertheless, at least statutory information must be transmitted, which was not always present in the results of our study. There is still potential for optimisation both in the implementation of the FCI and in the regulation itself.