Publication Database

Comparing visual-only and visual-palpation post-mortem lung scoring systems in slaughtering pigs (2023)

Art

Zeitschriftenartikel / wissenschaftlicher Beitrag

Autoren

Ghidini, Sergio

De Luca, Silvio

Rinaldi, Elena

Zanardi, Emanuela

Ianieri, Adriana

Guadagno, Federica

Alborali, Giovanni Loris

Meemken, Diana (WE 8)

Conter, Mauro

Varrà, Maria Olga

Quelle

Animals

Bandzählung: 13

Heftzählung: 15

Seiten: Artikel 2419

ISSN: 2076-2615

Sprache

Englisch

Verweise

URL (Volltext): https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/13/15/2419

DOI: 10.3390/ani13152419

Pubmed: 37570228

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

Respiratory diseases continue to pose significant challenges in pig production, and the assessment of lung lesions at the abattoir can provide valuable data for epidemiological investigations and disease surveillance. The evaluation of lung lesions at slaughter is a relatively simple, fast, and straightforward process but variations arising from different abattoirs, observers, and scoring methods can introduce uncertainty; moreover, the presence of multiple scoring systems complicates the comparisons of different studies, and currently, there are limited studies that compare these systems among each other. The objective of this study was to compare validated, simplified, and standardized schemes for assessing surface-related lung lesions in slaughtered pigs and analyze their reliability under field conditions. This study was conducted in a high-throughput abattoir in Italy, where two different scoring methods (Madec and Blaha) were benchmarked using 637 plucks. Statistical analysis revealed a good agreement between the two methods when severe or medium lesions were observed; however, their ability to accurately identify healthy lungs and minor injuries diverged significantly. These findings demonstrate that the Blaha method is more suitable for routine surveillance of swine respiratory diseases, whereas the Madec method can give more detailed and reliable results for the respiratory and welfare status of the animals at the farm level.