A comparison of two evisceration methods on hygienic quality in the pelvic area of sheep carcasses. (March 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Røssvoll, Elin; Røtterud, Ole-Johan; Hauge, Sigrun J.; Alvseike, Ole
• Is Part Of: Meat science. Volume 137(2018)
• Page Start: 134
• Page End: 138
• Publication Date: 2018-03
• Subjects: Lamb -- Sheep -- Slaughter -- Bagging -- E. coli; Meat -- Periodicals; Meat industry and trade -- Periodicals; Viande -- Périodiques; Viande -- Industrie -- Périodiques; Meat; Meat industry and trade; Periodicals; 641.36
• DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.11.025
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0309-1740

Abstract

Abstract: The aim was to compare the effects of two evisceration methods under operational conditions, on the pelvic hygiene of sheep carcasses. Method 1: rectum sealed with plastic bag and pushed through the pelvic cavity. Method 2: rectum cut, placed back inside and pulled out from the carcass. The 18 largest Norwegian sheep abattoirs participated. Sampling areas were i) 400 cm 2 inside the pelvic cavity (n = 623), ii) 100 cm 2 outside the circum-anal incision (n = 622). There were pooled samples by swabbing the same area of five carcasses, representing totally 3115 carcasses. Mean E. coli results from Method 1: − 1.61 log CFU/cm 2 inside and − 0.25 log CFU/cm 2 for the outside area. Results from Method 2: − 1.56 log CFU/cm 2 inside and − 0.42 log CFU/cm 2 outside. There were no significant differences between the two methods. Both evisceration methods can produce carcasses that are of practically identical high hygienic quality. Highlights: Method 1, head down, rectum sealed, was compared with Method 2, head up, rectum cut. No significant difference in pelvic hygiene of lamb carcasses between the methods. Significantly more contamination outside pelvic region than inside by both methods. Choice of evisceration method should depend on type of slaughter line.