Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:15:19.230Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Aversion to the inhalation of nitrogen and carbon dioxide mixtures compared to high concentrations of carbon dioxide for stunning rabbits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

P Llonch ,
P Rodríguez ,
A Velarde ,
V Abreu de Lima  and
A Dalmau
P Llonch
Affiliation:
IRTA, Animal Welfare Subprogram. Finca Camps i Armet S/N, 17121 Monells, Girona, Spain
P Rodríguez
Affiliation:
IRTA, Animal Welfare Subprogram. Finca Camps i Armet S/N, 17121 Monells, Girona, Spain
A Velarde
Affiliation:
IRTA, Animal Welfare Subprogram. Finca Camps i Armet S/N, 17121 Monells, Girona, Spain
V Abreu de Lima
Affiliation:
IRTA, Animal Welfare Subprogram. Finca Camps i Armet S/N, 17121 Monells, Girona, Spain
A Dalmau*
Affiliation:
IRTA, Animal Welfare Subprogram. Finca Camps i Armet S/N, 17121 Monells, Girona, Spain
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Stunning by inhalation of nitrogen (N2) and carbon dioxide (CO2) mixtures reduces aversion compared to high concentrations of CO2 in pigs and poultry. The objective of the study was to assess the aversion to 90% of CO2 (90C) and an alternative gas mixture of 80% N2 and 20% CO2 (80N20C) in commercial rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Sixty animals, divided into two groups, were used. During the first day, the rabbits of both groups were lowered in pairs into the pit with atmospheric air and their behaviour was recorded as control. During the second day, one group was exposed, again in pairs, to 90C and the other to 80N20C for 1 min. Exploratory behaviour and general activity were assessed 2 min before the exposure, during the exposure and for 2 min subsequently. During the exposure, signs of respiratory distress, loss of balance, muscle twitching and recovery of balance were also assessed. In the control sessions (atmospheric air), animals did not show respiratory distress or muscle twitching and were less active while the crate was descending than when gas treatments were applied. The percentage of animals with respiratory distress was higher in 90C (97%) than 80N20C (40%). Muscle twitching occurred earlier in 80N20C (97%; 23.9 s) than in 90C (17%; 37.4 s). A second phase of muscle twitching occurred only in 90C at 93.0 s. Mean latency of lost of balance and recovery were lower in 80N20C (24.2 and 98.6 s, respectively) than in 90C (28.2 and 110.2 s, respectively). It is concluded that rabbits showed less signs of respiratory distress to inhalation of 80N20C than 90C but more signs of aversion than when they were exposed to atmospheric air.

Keywords

animal welfareaversioncarbon dioxidenitrogenrabbitsstunning
Type
Papers
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 21 , Issue S2: Proceedings of the HSA Centenary International Symposium ‘Recent Advances in the Welfare of Livestock at Slaughter’ Historic Dockyard, Portsmouth, UK, 2011 , June 2012 , pp. 123 - 129
Copyright
© 2012 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Ambrose, N, Wadham, J and Morton, D 2000 Refinement of Euthanasia. Progress in the Reduction, Refinement and Replacement of Animal Experimentation. Elsevier: Amsterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Britt, DP 1986 The humaneness of carbon dioxide as an agent of euthanasia for laboratory rodents. Euthanasia of Unwanted, Injured or Diseased Animals for Educational or Scientific Purposes. Universities Federation for Animal Welfare: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Coenen, AM, Drinkenburg, WHIM, Hoenderken, R and van Luijtelaar, ELJM 1995 Carbon dioxide euthanasia in rats: oxygen supplementation minimizes signs of agitation and asphyxia. Laboratory Animals 29: 262–268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/002367795781088289CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conlee, KM, Stephens, ML, Rowan, AN and King, LA 2005 Carbon dioxide for eutanasia: concerns regarding pain and distress, with special reference to mice and rats. Laboratory Animals 39: 137–161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/0023677053739747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Council Regulation (EC) 2009 No 1099/2009. The Protection of Animals at the Time of Killing. European Community Official Journal L303: 1–30Google Scholar
Dalmau, A, Fàbrega, E and Velarde, A 2009 Fear assessment in pigs exposed to a novel object test. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 117: 173–180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2008.12.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalmau, A, Llonch, P, Rodríguez, P, Ruíz-de-la-Torre, JL, Manteca, X and Velarde, A 2010a Stunning pigs with different gas mixtures. Part 1: gas stability. Animal Welfare 19: 315–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalmau, A, Rodríguez, P, Llonch, P and Velarde, A 2010b Stunning pigs with different gas mixtures. Part 2: aversion in pigs. Animal Welfare 19: 324–333Google Scholar
Danneman, PJ, Stein, S and Walshaw, SO 1997 Humane and practical implications of using carbon dioxide mixed with oxygen for anaesthesia or euthanasia of rats. Laboratory Animal Science 47: 376–385Google ScholarPubMed
EFSA 2004 Welfare aspects of animal stunning and killing method. Scientific Report of the Scientific Panel of Animal Health and Welfare on a request from the Commission. Question. Adopted on the 15th of June 2004. Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.eu.int/science/ahaw/ahaw_opinions/495/opinion_ahaw_02_ej45_stunning_report_v2_en1.pdfCrossRefGoogle Scholar
EFSA 2005 The impact of the current housing and husbandry systems on the health and welfare of farmed domestic rabbits. EFSA 267: 1–31. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/science/ahaw/ahaw_opinions/1174.htmlGoogle Scholar
Eurogroup for Animals 2010 Analysis of animal welfare issues in the European Union. Areas of Concern. http://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/pdf/EurogroupForAnimals-AreasOfConcern2010.pdfGoogle Scholar
Ewell, AH, Cullen, JM and Woodruff, ML 1981 Tonic immobility as a predator defence in the rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Behavioural and Neural Biology 31: 483–489. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0163-1047(81)91585-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAOSTAT 2009 http://faostat. fao.org/site/569/Desktop Default.aspx?PageID=569#ancorGoogle Scholar
Forslid, A 1987 Transient neocortical, hippocampal and amygdaloid EEG silence induced by one minute inhalation of high concentration CO2 in swine. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 130: 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-1716.1987.tb08104.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forslid, A 1992 Muscle spasms during pre-slaughter carbon dioxide anesthesia in swine. Fleischwirtschaft 72: 167–168Google Scholar
Gerritzen, M, Lambooij, B, Reimert, H, Stegeman, A and Spruijt, B 2007 A note on behaviour of poultry exposed to increasing carbon dioxide concentrations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 108: 179–185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.11.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guyton, AC and Hall, JE 2000 Medical Physiology, Tenth Edition. WB Saunders Co: Philadelphia, USAGoogle Scholar
Hertrampf, B and von Mickwitz, G 1979 Übersichtsreferat: Betäubung von Schlachttieren Teil I: CO2-Betäubung. Deutsche Tierärztlichewachenschrift 86: 504–510. [Title translation: Overview: stunning of 396 animals for slaughter, part 1: CO2 anaesthesia]Google Scholar
Lawson, DM, Sharp, JL and Azar, TA 2003 A comparison of carbon dioxide, argon and nitrogen for euthanasia of mice. Contemporany Topics in Laboratory Animal Science 42: 82Google Scholar
Leach, M, Bowell, VA, Allan, TF and Morton, DB 2002 Degrees of aversion shown by rats and mice to different concentrations of inhalational anaesthetics. Veterinary Record 150: 808–815. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr. 150.26.808CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Llonch, P, Dalmau, A, Rodríguez, P, Manteca, X and Velarde, A 2012 Aversion to nitrogen and carbon dioxide mixtures for stunning pigs. Animal Welfare 21: 33–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Princz, Z, Zotte, AD, Radnoi, I, Biro-Nemeth, E, Matics, Z, Gerenser, Z, Nagy, I and Szendro, Z 2008 Behaviour of growing rabbits under various housing conditions. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 111: 342–356. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2007.06.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raj, ABM 1998 Welfare during stunning and slaughter of poultry. Poultry Science 77: 1815–1819CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raj, ABM 1999 Behaviour of pigs exposed to mixtures of gases and the time required to stun and kill them: welfare implications. Veterinary Record 144: 165–168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.144.7.165CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raj, ABM and Gregory, NG 1995 Welfare implications of the gas stunning of pigs 1. Determination of aversion to the initial inhalation of carbon dioxide or argon. Animal Welfare 4: 273–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raj, ABM and Gregory, NG 1996 Welfare implications of gas stunning of pigs 2. Stress of induction of anaesthesia. Animal Welfare 5: 71–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raj, ABM, Johnson, SP, Wotton, SB and McKinstry, JL 1997 Welfare implications of gas stunning pigs: 3. The time to loss of somatosensory evoked potentials and spontaneous electroencephalogram of pigs during exposure to gases. Veterinary Journal 153: 329–340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1090-0233(97)80067-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raj, ABM, Wotton, SB and Gregory, NG 1992 Changes in the somatosensory evoked potentials and spontaneous electroencephalogram of hens during stunning with a carbon dioxide and argon mixture. British Veterinary Journal 148: 147–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez, P, Dalmau, A, Ruiz-de-la-Torre J, L, Manteca, X, Jensen, EW, Rodríguez, B, Litvan, H and Velarde, A 2008 Assessment of unconsciousness during carbon dioxide stunning in pigs. Animal Welfare 17: 341–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepers, F, Koene, P and Beerda, B 2009 Welfare assessment in pet rabbits. Animal Welfare 18: 477–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, W and Harrap, SB 1997 Behavioural and cardiovascular responses of rats to euthanasia using carbon dioxide gas. Laboratory Animals 31: 337–346. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/002367797780596130CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Velarde, A, Cruz, J, Gispert, M, Carrión, D, Ruiz-de-la-Torre, JL, Diestre, A and Manteca, X 2007 Aversion to carbon dioxide stunning in pigs: effect of the carbon dioxide concentration and the halothane genotype. Animal Welfare 16: 513–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velarde, A, Gispert, M, Faucitano, L, Manteca, X and Diestre, A 2000 Effect of stunning method on the incidence of PSE meat and haemorrhagies in pork carcasses. Meat Science 55: 309–314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(99)00158-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whishaw, IQ, Previsich, N and Flannigan, KP 1978 Tonic immobility in feral and domestic dutch rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), mountain cottontail (Sylvilagus nuttali) and whitetail jackrabbit (Lepus townsendi) as a function of posture. Behaviour Biology 24: 88–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar