Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results
2018 | 104 | 473-483
Article title

The effect of fatteners transport on pork quality

Title variants
Languages of publication
Transport of slaughter animals is one of the basic environmental factors exerting influence on their well-being and, consequently, on the quality of meat. Failure to provide suitable conditions for animals during transport brings many losses to both the producer and the consumer. The result of poor welfare, excessive stress of animals and numerous fractures and injuries during transport decreases both the quantity and quality of meat from transported animals. Most often, animals are transported by car. Means of transport designed for this purpose must meet numerous technical requirements and provide animals with adequate welfare. Semi-trailer sets (tractor + semi-trailer) or trailer sets (car with trailer) are most often used. The basic requirements during transport should be to provide the animals with adequate space, depending on their weight. Cars should be protected against adverse weather conditions, must have roofing, ventilation or heating. The transport should last no longer than 8 hours, after which rest of the animals should take place in designated places. Loading and unloading of animals is also important. It should be run by qualified personnel on appropriate ramps, protecting against injury and exiting animals outside. Improper transport leads to stress, as a result of which the quality of obtained meat deteriorates, and in critical situations, even the death of an animal may occur. This creates defective meat PSE or DFD, having a worse culinary value for the consumer. Once the animals reach their final destination, they should be unloaded, have permanent access to water and ensure rest before slaughter. Transport is a very important factor in the production of high quality meat. Properly carried out, with the preservation of proper welfare conditions to minimize the stress of animals, contributes to the acquisition of a good raw material from which many excellent meat products can be produced.
Physical description
  • Student Scientific Club of Agricultural Engineering, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Siedlce University of Natural Sciences and Humanities, Siedlce, Poland
  • [1] Correa J. A.: Effects of different moving devices at loading on stress response and meat quality in pig. J. Animal. Sci. 2010, 12, 4086-4093.
  • [2] Gregory M: Animal welfare At markets and during transport and slaughter. Meat Science 2008, 80, 2-11.
  • [3] Guardia M: Risk assesment of skin damage due to pre- slaughter conditions and RYR1 gene in pigs. Meat Science, 2009, 81, 745-751.
  • [4] Guardia M: Risk assessment of skin damage due to pre-slaughter conditions and RYR1 gene in pigs. Meat Science, 2006, 73, 343-356
  • [5] Lombooij E: Transport of pigs. In Livestock Handiling and Transport, Grandin, 2007. 228-243.
  • [6] Sainsbury D.W.B., 1983, Debate on the contribution of straw to welfare, Pig Veterinary Society Proceeding 1983, 1-13.
  • [7] Scheeren M: Effects of transport time and location within truck on skin bruises and meat quality of market weight pigs in two seasons. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 2014, 94.
  • [8] Andersen H. J, What is pork quality?, Quality of meat and fat in pigs as affected by genetics and nutrition, Wageningen, 2000, 15-27.
  • [9] Broom D.M. The scientific assessment of animal welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 1999, 20, 5-19.
  • [10] Abbott, T. A., Guise, H. J., Hunter, E. J., Penny, R. H. C., Baynes, P. J., Easby, C. Factors influencing pig deaths during transit: an analysis of drivers' reports. Animal Welfare, 1995, 4(1), 29-40.
  • [11] Lee Y. B., Choi, Y. I ,PSE pork; the causes and solutions – revive. Asian – Australian Journal of Animal Sciences, 1999, 12.244-252.
  • [12] Przybylski W., Monin G., Koćwin-Podsiadła M., Krzęcio E. Glycogen metabolizm in muscle and its effects on meat quality in pigs – a mini review. Pol. J. Food Nutr. Sci. 2006, 3(15), pp. 257-262.
  • [13] Bracke M.B.M. Multifactorial testing of enrichment criteria: pigs ‘demand’ hygiene and destructibility more than sound. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2007, 107: 218–232.
  • [14] Studnitz M., Jensen M.B., Pedersen L.J. Why do pigs root and in what will they root? A review on the exploratory behaviour of pigs in relation to environmental enrichment. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2007, 107 (3–4): 183–197.
  • [15] Tereszkiewicz, K. Choroszy, K. Assessment of slaughter exsanguination in fatteners with a different backfat thickness. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Zootechnica, 2014, 13(3).
  • [16] Li, C. T., Wick, M. Improvement of the physicochemical properties of pale soft and exudative (PSE) pork meat products with an extract from mechanically deboned turkey meat (MDTM). Meat Science, 2010, 58(2), 189-195.
  • [17] Barbut, S., Sosnicki, A. A., Lonergan, S. M., Knapp, T., Ciobanu, D. C., Gatcliffe, L. J., Wilson, E. W. Progress in reducing the pale, soft and exudative (PSE) problem in pork and poultry meat. Meat Science, 2008 79(1), 46-63.
  • [18] Fischer, K., Lindner, J. P., Baulain, U. Influence on intramuscular fat content of pork: effects of supplying fatteners insufficiently with amino acids on pig performance, carcass composition and meat quality. Fleischwirtschaft, 2010, 90(1), 96-102.
  • [19] Courboulay, V. Foubert, C. Testing different methods to evaluate pig welfare on farm. Animal Welfare, 2007, 16(2), 193-196.
  • [20] Wechsler, B. Rearing pigs in species-specific family groups. Animal Welfare, 1996 5(1), 25-35.
  • [21] Lund, V., & Algers, B. Research on animal health and welfare in organic farming—a literature review. Livestock Production Science, 2003, 80(1-2), 55-68.
  • [22] Franz, A., Deimel, I., Spiller, A. Concerns about animal welfare: a cluster analysis of German pig farmers. British Food Journal, 2012, 114(10), 1445-1462.
  • [23] Motzer, E. A., Carpenter, J. A., Reynolds, A. E., Lyon, C. E. Quality of restructured hams manufactured with PSE pork as affected by water binders. Journal of Food Science, 1998, 63(6), 1007-1011.
  • [24] Ahn, D. U., Nam, K. C., Du, M., Jo, C. Volatile production in irradiated normal, pale soft exudative (PSE) and dark firm dry (DFD) pork under different packaging and storage conditions. Meat Science, 2001, 57(4), 419-426.
  • [25] Van der Wal, P. G., Bolink, A. H., & Merkus, G. S. M. Differences in quality characteristics of normal, PSE and DFD pork. Meat Science, 1998, 24(1), 79-84.
  • [26] Zhu, L. G., Brewer, M. S. Metmyoglobin reducing capacity of fresh normal, PSE, and DFD pork during retail display. Journal of Food Science, 1998, 63(3), 390-393.
  • [27] Guàrdia, M. D., Estany, J., Balasch, S., Oliver, M. A., Gispert, M., Diestre, A. Risk assessment of DFD meat due to pre-slaughter conditions in pigs. Meat Science, 2005, 70(4), 709-716.
  • [28] Van der Wal, P. G., Engel, B., Hulsegge, B. Causes for variation in pork quality. Meat Science, 1998, 46(4), 319-327.
  • [29] Van der Wal, P. G., Engel, B., & Reimert, H. M. The effect of stress, applied immediately before stunning, on pork quality. Meat Science, 1999, 53(2), 101-106.
  • [30] O’Neill, D. J., Lynch, P. B., Troy, D. J., Buckley, D. J., Kerry, J. P. Influence of the time of year on the incidence of PSE and DFD in Irish pigmeat. Meat Science, 1999, 64(2), 105-111.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.