Head-Only Stunning of Turkeys Part 2: Subjective and Objective Assessment of the Application of AC and DC Waveforms
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. General Aspects
- pulse width;
- duty cycle;
- applied voltage; and
- pulse recurring frequency (prf).
2.2. Study A
- presence of immediate wing flapping (spinal reflexes);
- time to return of rhythmic breathing (return of functional brain stem); and
- time to return of neck tension (later stage in recovery).
- AC, 50 Hz frequency, voltage calibrated as root mean square (RMS, 0.707 × peak voltage) voltage from 50 to 300 volts in 25 volt steps (33 birds in total);
- AC, 200 Hz frequency, voltage calibrated as root mean square (RMS, 0.707 × peak voltage) voltage from 50 to 300 volts in 25 volt steps (35 birds in total);
- Pulsed DC, 50 Hz frequency, 30% duty cycle, voltage calibrated by peak voltage and applied from 50 to 300 volts in 25 volt steps (31 birds in total);
- Pulsed DC, 50 Hz frequency, 50% duty cycle, voltage calibrated by peak voltage and applied from 50 to 300 volts in 25 volt steps (33 birds in total);
- Pulsed DC, 200 Hz frequency, 30% duty cycle, voltage calibrated by peak voltage and applied from 50 to 300 volts in 25 volt steps (32 birds in total);
- Pulsed DC, 200 Hz frequency, 50% duty cycle, voltage calibrated by peak voltage and applied from 50 to 300 volts in 25 volt steps (33 birds in total);
- Pulsed DC single voltage spike, 400 µs duration, at 50 Hz frequency, voltage calibrated by peak voltage applied at 50 to 300 volts (39 birds in total); and
- Pulsed DC single voltage spike, 400 µs duration, at 200 Hz frequency, voltage calibrated by peak voltage applied at 50 to 300 volts (4 birds in total).
2.3. Study B
- The occurrence of epileptiform activity in the EEGs following stunning, determined subjectively by examining EEG traces for polyspike activity;
- Reduction in the total power of the EEG to <10% of pre-stun level following epileptiform activity in three consecutive one second epochs, indicative of a quiescent EEG;
- During the manifestation of epileptiform and quiescent EEG, birds are considered unconscious and insensible.
- The effectiveness of the applied stun was evaluated using EEGs. The ability of this waveform, applied head-only for one second, to induce epileptiform activity and abolish somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) in 16 turkeys was evaluated in the laboratory.
- II.
- To assess the effect of the stun in combination with normal slaughter processing, i.e., bleeding to cause the death of the animal, 14 turkeys were implanted with EEG electrodes in the same manner as in the first part of the experiment, and sinusoidal AC at 200 Hz and 150 V (RMS), was applied for 6 s (SD ± 1.24), followed by an effective ventral neck cut within 9.86 s (SD ± 1.247). SEP’s were evoked in these turkeys by electrical stimulation (0.5–1 volt pulses) of the contralateral radial nerve at a stimulus rate of 2 stimuli per second and recorded digitally for about two minutes before and up to the induction of an isoelectric EEG following stunning and slaughter [15]. After completion of the recording, these birds were killed humanely.
- III.
- To evaluate the effect of varying voltage/frequency combinations on the effectiveness of the stun on the basis of the EEG, 14 turkeys, after EEG electrodes having been implanted in the same manner, were stunned using a variety of voltage/frequency combinations. These birds were also humanely killed after completion of the experiment.
2.4. Statistics
3. Results
- Successful electrical stunning requires a minimum of 1.0 Amp in sheep (EC Regulation 1099/2009).
- However, 1.0 Amp applied for less than 200 ms in sheep will not produce epileptiform activity in the brain [20].
- Therefore, the electrical criteria for an immediate stun with sheep is ≥1.0 Amp within 200 ms.
4. Discussion
- Different waveforms applied. Previous studies have assessed the effect of 50 Hz sine wave AC on head-only stunning of turkeys [19].
- Different methods of assessment (subjective vs. objective).
- The larger number of birds being used in this study. The accuracy of this subjective assessment to predict the minimum voltage required for stunning could be compared to the evaluation of effectiveness using EEGs.
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgment
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Council of the European Union. Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 of 24 Sept 2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing. 2009. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:303:0001:0030:EN:PDF (accessed on 19 December 2019).
- Department of the Environment and Rural Affairs. The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing (England) Regulations 2015. 2015. Available online: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2015/1782/contents/made (accessed on 19 December 2019).
- Algers, B.; Anil, H.; Blokhuis, H.; Fuchs, K.; Hultgren, J.; Lambooij, B.; Nunes, T.; Paulsen, P.; Smulders, F. Project to develop Animal Welfare Risk Assessment Guidelines on Stunning and Killing. EFSA Support. Publ. 2009, 6, 88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gibson, T.J.; Rebelo, C.B.; Gowers, T.A.; Chancellor, N.M. Electroencephalographic assessment of concussive non-penetrative captive bolt stunning of turkeys. Br. Poult. Sci. 2017, 59, 13–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mauri, S.; Guijarro, A.; Ramírez, C.A.; Peña, F. Influence of carbon dioxide stunning procedure on quality of turkey meat. Br. Poult. Sci. 2017, 58, 382–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kranen, R.W. Hemorrhages in Muscles of Broiler Chickens. Ph.D. Thesis, Catholic University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Parteca, S.; Tonial, I.B.; Prado, N.V.D.; Alfaro, A.T. Electrical stunning parameters: Impact on the quality of turkey meat (Meleagris gallopavo). J. Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 57, 2612–2618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Raj, M.; Tserveni-Gousi, A. Stunning methods for poultry. World Poult. Sci. J. 2000, 56, 291–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hindle, V.A.; Lambooij, B.; Reimert, H.G.M.; Workel, L.D.; Gerritzen, M. Animal welfare concerns during the use of the water bath for stunning broilers, hens, and ducks. Poult. Sci. 2010, 89, 401–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Devos, G.; Moons, C.P.H.; Houf, K. Diversity, not uniformity: Slaughter and electrical water bath stunning procedures in Belgian slaughterhouses. Poultry Sci. 2018, 97, 3369–3379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murphy, B.D.; Hasiak, R.J.; Sebranek, J.G. Effect of Antemortem Electrical Stunning on Functional Properties of Turkey Muscle. Poult. Sci. 1988, 67, 1062–1068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Northcutt, J.K.; Buhr, R.J.; Young, L.L. Influence of preslaughter stunning on turkey breast muscle quality. Poult. Sci. 1998, 77, 487–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wotton, S.B.; Grist, A.; O’Callaghan, M.; Van Klink, E. Head-Only Stunning of Turkeys Part 1: The Minimum Voltage Necessary to Break Down the Inherent High Resistance. Animals 2020, 10, 2427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Parliament and Council of the European Union. Directive 2010/63/EU of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. Off. J. EU 2010, L 276, 33–79.
- Raj, A.B.M.; O’Callaghan, M.; Knowles, T.G. The effects of amount and frequency of alternating current used in water bath stunning and of slaughter methods on electroencephalograms in broilers. Animal Welfare 2006, 15, 7–18. [Google Scholar]
- Raj, A.B.M.; O’Callaghan, M.; Hughes, S.I. The effects of amount and frequency of pulsed direct current used in water bath stunning and of slaughter methods on electroencephalograms in broilers. Animal Welfare 2006, 15, 19–24. [Google Scholar]
- Raj, A.B.M.; O’Callaghan, M.; Hughes, S.I. The effects of pulse width of a direct current used in water bath stunning and of slaughter methods on spontaneous electroencephalograms in broilers. Animal Welfare 2006, 15, 25–30. [Google Scholar]
- Government of Canada (Gouvernement du Canada). Mechanical, electrical or gas stunning; slaughter methods and monitoring signs of unconsciousness or consciousness. 2020. Available online: https://www.inspection.gc.ca/food-safety-for-industry/food-specific-requirements-and-guidance/meat-products-and-food-animals/slaughter-methods-and-monitoring/eng/1539372028443/1539372028884?chap=0 (accessed on 9 December 2020).
- Gregory, N.G.; Wotton, S.B. Effect of electrical stunning on somatosensory evoked responses in the turkey’s brain. Br. Vet. J. 1991, 147, 270–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cook, C.J.; Devine, C.; Gilbert, K.; Smith, D.; Maasland, S. The effect of electrical head-only stun duration on electroencephalographic-measured seizure and brain amino acid neurotransmitter release. Meat Sci. 1995, 40, 137–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wotton, S.B.; O’Callaghan, M. Electrical stunning of pigs: The effect of applied voltage on impedance to current flow and the operation of a fail-safe device. Meat Sci. 2002, 60, 203–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gregory, N.G.; Wotton, S.B. An evaluation of the effectiveness of handheld stunners for stunning chickens. Veter. Rec. 1990, 126, 290–291. [Google Scholar]
- Seyrantepe, V.; Lema, P.; Caqueret, A.; Dridi, L.; Hadj, S.B.; Carpentier, S.; Boucher, F.; Levade, T.; Carmant, L.; Gravel, R.A.; et al. Mice Doubly-Deficient in Lysosomal Hexosaminidase A and Neuraminidase 4 Show Epileptic Crises and Rapid Neuronal Loss. PLoS Genet. 2010, 6, e1001118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Timofeev, I.; Steriade, M. Neocortical seizures: Initiation, development and cessation. Neuroscience 2004, 123, 299–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Savenije, B.; Lambooij, E.; Pieterse, C.; Korf, J. Electrical Stunning and Exsanguination Decrease the Extracellular Volume in the Broiler Brain as Studied with Brain Impedance Recordings. Poultry Sci. 2000, 79, 1062–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW). Scientific Opinion on electrical requirements for poultry waterbath stunning equipment. EFSA J. 2014, 12, 3745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gregory, N.G. The physiology of electrical stunning and slaughter. In: Humane Slaughter of Animals for Food Humane Slaughter of Animals for Food. In Proceedings of the Symposium Organized by Universities Federation for Animal Welfare, Held at the Meeting Rooms, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London, UK, 18 September 1986; Universities Federation for Animal Welfare: Wheathampstead, UK; pp. 3–12. [Google Scholar]
Applied Voltage AC 50 Hz | % Stunned (n—Turkeys) | Predicted 95% CI Range |
---|---|---|
150 | 100% (10) | 72–100% |
140 | 100% (10) | 72–100% |
125 | 100% (20, in two batches of 10) | 84–100% |
110 | 80% (8) | 38–96% |
AC 1 Groups | V (RMS 2) | n | RMS Current at 0.2 s from Stun Start (A) | Birds Effectively Stunned % |
---|---|---|---|---|
AC 50 Hz | 150 | 10 | 0.50 | 100 |
125 | 20 | 0.53 | 100 | |
100 | 3 | 0.48 | 67 | |
AC 200 Hz | 150 | 10 | 0.87 | 100 |
125 | 20 | 0.52 | 100 | |
100 | 5 | 0.34 | 80 | |
Pulsed DC 3 Groups | DC volts (average) | n | Average current at 0.2 s from stun start (A) | Birds effectively stunned % |
DC 50 Hz with 30% duty cycle | 53 | 10 | 0.23 | 100 |
45 | 20 | 0.15 | 100 | |
38 | 1 | 0.24 | 0 | |
DC 50 Hz with 50% duty cycle | 100 | 10 | 0.47 | 100 |
88 | 20 | 0.42 | 100 | |
75 | 3 | 0.36 | 67 | |
DC 200 Hz with 30% duty cycle | 45 | 10 | 0.14 | 100 |
38 | 20 | 0.12 | 100 | |
30 | 2 | 0.07 | 50 | |
DC 200 Hz with 50% duty cycle | 75 | 10 | 0.21 | 100 |
63 | 20 | 0.21 | 100 | |
50 | 3 | 0.10 | 67 | |
SP 4 200 Hz | 24 | 10 | 0.02 | 100 |
22 | 20 | 0.02 | 100 | |
20 | 7 | 0.02 | 86 | |
18 | 2 | 0.01 | 50 | |
SP 50 Hz | 6 | 1 | 0.02 | 0 |
5.5 | 1 | 0.03 | 0 | |
5 | 1 | 0.02 | 0 | |
4.5 | 1 | 0.01 | 0 |
Number of Successful Stuns/Number of Turkeys | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Voltages (RMS 2) | 100 | 125 | 150 | 175 | 200 | 225 | 250 | 275 | 300 | |
Groups | ||||||||||
AC 1 50 Hz | 2/3 | 20/20 | 10/10 | |||||||
AC 200 Hz | 4/5 | 20/20 | 10/10 | |||||||
DC 3 50 Hz with 30% duty cycle | 0/1 | 20/20 | 10/10 | |||||||
DC 50 Hz with 50% duty cycle | 2/3 | 20/20 | 10/10 | |||||||
DC 200 Hz with 30%duty cycle | 1/2 | 20/20 | 10/10 | |||||||
DC 200 Hz with 50% duty cycle | 2/3 | 20/20 | 10/10 | |||||||
SP 4 200 Hz | 1/2 | 6/7 | 20/20 | 10/10 | ||||||
SP 50 Hz | 0/1 | 0/1 | 0/1 | 0/1 |
Group | V | Return of Rhythmic Breathing (s) | Return of Head Righting (s) | Animals Stunned | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
n | Mean ± SD | Mean ± SD | % | ||
AC 1 50 Hz | 150 | 10 | 29 ± 3.81 | 67 ± 16.79 | 100 |
125 | 20 | 26 ± 2.83 | 50 ± 21.00 | 100 | |
100 | 3 | 23 ± 3.21 | 33 ± 2.12 | 67 | |
AC 200 Hz | 150 | 10 | 26 ± 3.84 | 49 ± 15.97 | 100 |
125 | 20 | 26 ± 4.25 | 44 ± 12.70 | 100 | |
100 | 5 | 21 ± 3.87 | 41 ± 13.58 | 80 | |
DC 2 50 Hz with 30% duty cycle | 175 | 10 | 25 ± 3.59 | 42 ± 14.48 | 100 |
150 | 20 | 25 ± 2.66 | 39 ± 14.49 | 100 | |
125 | 1 | 15 | 0 | ||
DC 50 Hz with 50% duty cycle | 200 | 10 | 26 ± 3.56 | 41 ± 12.59 | 100 |
175 | 20 | 25 ± 3.36 | 49 ± 13.15 | 100 | |
150 | 3 | 25 ± 2.65 | 36 ± 1.53 | 67 | |
DC 200 Hz with 30% duty cycle | 150 | 10 | 25 ± 2.63 | 44 ± 13.04 | 100 |
125 | 20 | 26 ± 3.09 | 40 ± 10.93 | 100 | |
100 | 2 | 17 | 50 | ||
DC 200 Hz with 50% duty cycle | 150 | 10 | 24 ± 3.20 | 42 ± 10.99 | 100 |
125 | 20 | 24 ± 3.72 | 39 ± 9.55 | 100 | |
100 | 3 | 23 ± 7.78 | 66 | 67 | |
SP 3 200 Hz | 300 | 10 | 27 ± 3.63 | 38 ± 6.32 | 100 |
275 | 20 | 27 ± 2.62 | 38 ± 7.51 | 100 | |
250 | 7 | 27 ± 3.96 | 41 ± 9.62 | 86 | |
225 | 2 | 26 | 32 | 50 | |
SP 50 Hz | 300 | 1 | 25 | 35 | 0 |
275 | 1 | 0 | |||
250 | 1 | 0 | |||
225 | 1 | 0 |
n | Head-Only Stunning Parameters | EEG Characteristics | Dead Weight (kg) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Frequency (Hz) | RMS 1 Voltage (volts) | RMS Current (mA) | Stun Time (s) | Presence of Polyspike Activity (0/1) | Post Polyspike <10% Pre-Stun (0/1) (s) | ||
1 | 200 | 147.9 | 819 | 1 | 0 | 1 (>20) | 5.9 |
2 | 200 | 148.0 | 797 | 1 | 0 | 1 (>120) | 5.3 |
3 | 200 | 148.2 | 918 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4.5 |
4 | 200 | 148.6 | 1049 | 1 | 0 | 1 (0–120) | 7.4 |
5 | 200 | 148.2 | 737 | 1 | 0 | 1 (0–10) | 5.6 |
6 | 200 | 148.3 | 898 | 1 | 0 | 1 (30–120) | 6.0 |
7 | 200 | 148.4 | 904 | 1 | 0 | 1 (25–100) | 5.6 |
8 | 200 | 148.5 | 963 | 1 | 0 | 1 (2–20, 56–120) | 5.5 |
9 | 200 | 148.4 | 1007 | 1 | 0 | 1 (22–120) | 5.7 |
10 | 200 | 148.4 | 1070 | 1 | 0 | 1 (5–120) | 5.4 |
11 | 200 | 148.9 | 957 | 1 | 0 | 1 (2–100) | 7.3 |
12 | 200 | 148.3 | 688 | 1 | 0 | 1 (25–90) | 5.3 |
14 | 200 | 148.7 | 965 | 1 | 0 | 1 (1–120) | 5.4 |
15 | 200 | 148.3 | 388 | 1 | 0 | 1 (20–120) | 6.0 |
16 | 200 | 148.5 | 760 | 1 | 0 | 1 (40–120) | 7.0 |
n | Head-Only Stunning Parameters | Stun-Neck Cut (s) | EEG Characteristics | Dead Wt. (kg) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Frequency (Hz) | RMS 1 Voltage (Volts) | RMS Current (mA) | Stun Time (s) | Presence of Polyspike Activity (0/1) | Time to Onset of <10% Pre-Stun Total Power (s) | |||
1 | 200 | 149.2 | 1293 | 6.7 | 10 | 0 | >15 | 6.6 |
2 | 200 | 149.1 | 1394 | 6.7 | 11.5 | 0 | >40 | 4.3 |
3 | 200 | 149.2 | 1026 | 6.7 | 8.2 | 0 | >10 | 5.5 |
4 | 200 | 149.2 | 1096 | 6.7 | 9.1 | 0 | >15 | 5.6 |
5 | 200 | 149.3 | 1069 | 6.7 | 9.1 | 0 | >25 | 6.6 |
6 | 200 | 149.1 | 823 | 6.7 | 9.4 | 0 | >40 | |
7 | 200 | 149.4 | 1164 | 3.9 | 9.1 | 0 | >20 | 4.8 |
8 | 200 | 149.1 | 1027 | 6.7 | 9.4 | 0 | >15 | 4 |
9 | 200 | 149.2 | 809 | 3.4 | 11.5 | 0 | 0 | 5.5 |
10 | 200 | 149.1 | 1097 | 6.7 | 10.6 | 0 | >13 | 5.4 |
11 | 200 | 149.2 | 847 | 4.4 | 11.8 | 0 | >35 | 5.8 |
12 | 200 | 149.2 | 758 | 6.7 | 7.3 | 0 | >20 | 5.5 |
13 | 200 | 149 | 1040 | 4.5 | 10.3 | 0 | >15 | 6.1 |
14 | 200 | 149 | 1419 | 6.7 | 10.3 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
n | Head-Only Stunning Parameters | EEG Characteristics | Dead Wt.(kg) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Frequency (Hz) | RMS 1 Voltage (volts) | RMS Current (mA) | Stun Time (s) | Presence of Polyspike Activity (0/1) | Post Polyspike <10% Pre-Stun (0/1) (s) | ||
1 | 50 | 111.3 | 473 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 9.6 |
2 | 50 | 150.7 | 858 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 10.4 |
3 | 50 | 150.7 | 434 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 9.1 |
4 | 200 | 199.6 | 1313 | 1 | 0 | 1 (0–60) | 10.9 |
5 | 50 | 198.1 | 1209 | 1 | (0–12 s lost) | 1 (0–50) | 8.1 |
6 | 50 | 197.8 | 888 | 1 | 1 | 1 (13–28) | 9.6 |
7 | 50 | 201.3 | 967 | 1 | 0 | 1 (20–38) | 10.8 |
8 | 50 | 199.6 | 882 | 1 | 1 | 1 (18–35) | 9.7 |
9 | 50 | 199.1 | 900 | 1 | 1 | 1 (22–40) | 9.4 |
10 | 50 | 199 | 711 | 1 | 1 | 1 (10–16) | 9.4 |
11 | 50 | 199.9 | 863 | 1 | 1 | 1 (10–34) | 11.7 |
12 | 50 | 199.8 | 723 | 1 | 1 | 1 (14–38) | 9.3 |
13 | 50 | 249.7 | 1741 | 1 | 0 | 1 (3–120) | 12.8 |
14 | 50 | 249.7 | 1582 | 1 | 0 | 1 (2–120) | 11.2 |
Treatment Group | This Study (Volts RMS) | Wotton et al., 2020 [13] (Volts RMS) | |
---|---|---|---|
AC | 50 Hz | 125 | 150 |
AC | 200 | 125 | 150 |
DC | 50 Hz at 30% duty cycle | 150 | 175 |
DC | 50 Hz at 50% duty cycle | 175 | 150 |
DC | 200 Hz at 30% duty cycle | 125 | 150 |
DC | 200 Hz at 50% duty cycle | 125 | 150 |
400 µs DC | 50 Hz Voltage Spike | 250 | 225 |
400 μs DC | 200 Hz Voltage Spike | -* | 225 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wotton, S.; Grist, A.; O’Callaghan, M.; van Klink, E. Head-Only Stunning of Turkeys Part 2: Subjective and Objective Assessment of the Application of AC and DC Waveforms. Animals 2021, 11, 286. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020286
Wotton S, Grist A, O’Callaghan M, van Klink E. Head-Only Stunning of Turkeys Part 2: Subjective and Objective Assessment of the Application of AC and DC Waveforms. Animals. 2021; 11(2):286. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020286
Chicago/Turabian StyleWotton, Steve, Andrew Grist, Mike O’Callaghan, and Ed van Klink. 2021. "Head-Only Stunning of Turkeys Part 2: Subjective and Objective Assessment of the Application of AC and DC Waveforms" Animals 11, no. 2: 286. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020286
APA StyleWotton, S., Grist, A., O’Callaghan, M., & van Klink, E. (2021). Head-Only Stunning of Turkeys Part 2: Subjective and Objective Assessment of the Application of AC and DC Waveforms. Animals, 11(2), 286. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020286