From unloading to trimming: studying bruising in individual slaughter cattle. Issue 3 (8th September 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kline, Helen C; Weller, Zachary D; Grandin, Temple; Algino, Ryan J; Edwards-Callaway, Lily N
• Is Part Of: Translational animal science. Volume 4:Issue 3(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-09-08
• Subjects: bruises -- cull cows -- traumatic event -- trim loss; Livestock -- Periodicals; Livestock; Periodicals; 636.005
• DOI: 10.1093/tas/txaa165
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2573-2102

Abstract

Abstract: Livestock bruising is both an animal welfare concern and a detriment to the economic value of carcasses. Understanding the causes of bruising is challenging due to the numerous factors that have been shown to be related to bruise prevalence. While most cattle bruising studies collect and analyze data on truckload lots of cattle, this study followed a large number ( n = 585) of individual animals from unloading through postmortem processing at five different slaughter plants. Both visual bruise presence and location was recorded postmortem prior to carcass trimming. By linking postmortem data to animal sex, breed, trailer compartment, and traumatic events at unloading, a rich analysis of a number of factors related to bruise prevalence was developed. Results showed varying levels of agreement with other published bruising studies, underscoring the complexity of assessing the factors that affect bruising. Bruising prevalence varied across different sex class types ( P < 0.001); 36.5% of steers [95% confidence interval (CI): 31.7, 41.6; n = 378], 52.8% of cows (45.6, 60.0; 193), and 64.3% of bulls (no CI calculated due to sample size; 14) were bruised. There was a difference in bruise prevalence by trailer compartment ( P = 0.035) in potbelly trailers, indicating that cattle transported in the top deck were less likely to be bruised (95% CI: 26.6, 40.4; n = 63) compared to cattle that were transported in the bottom deck (95% CI: 39.6, 54.2; n = 89). Results indicated that visual assessment of bruising underestimated carcass bruise trimming. While 42.6% of the carcasses were visibly bruised, 57.9% of carcasses were trimmed due to bruising, suggesting that visual assessment is not able to capture all of the carcass loss associated with bruising. Furthermore, bruises that appeared small visually were often indicators of larger, subsurface bruising, creating an "iceberg effect" of trim loss due to bruising.