Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-s9k8s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-06T01:31:39.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of age and method of gas delivery on carbon dioxide euthanasia of pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

MA Sutherland ,
PJ Bryer  and
BL Backus
MA Sutherland*
Affiliation:
AgResearch Ltd, Ruakura Research Centre, Hamilton 3214, New Zealand
PJ Bryer
Affiliation:
Midcoast STEAM Microschool, Rockland, ME 04841, USA Department of Animal and Food Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA
BL Backus
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Food Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA
*
* 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.

The objectives of this research were to evaluate the effect of age and delivering method during carbon dioxide (CO2) euthanasia on the welfare of pigs (Sus scrofa). In Experiment 1, pigs aged 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 weeks (GRAD; n = 5 pigs per age) were placed in a chamber gradually filled with CO2 released at a flow rate of 20% chamber volume per min. In Experiment 2, three week old pigs were placed in a chamber pre-filled with 100% CO2 (PRE; n = 5). In both experiments, plasma cortisol concentrations were measured before and after exposure to CO2. Behaviours indicative of stress and insensibility were recorded continuously during gas exposure; panting, open-mouth breathing, righting response, escape attempts, loss of posture, muscular excitation and respiratory arrest. Cortisol concentrations were elevated in pigs after CO2 euthanasia, regardless of age or gas delivery method. The behavioural response to CO2 was not affected by pig age. Latency to display panting, righting response, escape attempts, loss of posture, muscular excitation and respiratory arrest were shorter for PRE than GRAD pigs, but, duration of escape attempts and the cortisol response to euthanasia were similar between PRE and GRAD pigs. However, pigs placed in a chamber pre-filled with CO2 spent a greater proportion of time prior to loss of posture displaying escape attempts. Regardless of age or induction method, exposure to CO2 causes behavioural changes indicative of stress prior to loss of consciousness, therefore there is a need to continue to evaluate alternative methods of euthanasia.

Keywords

ageanimal welfarebehaviourcarbon dioxideeuthanasiapigs
Type
Articles
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 26 , Issue 3 , August 2017 , pp. 293 - 299
Copyright
© 2017 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

American Veterinary Medical Association 2013 AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals: 2013 Edition. https://www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Documents/euthanasia.pdfGoogle Scholar
Beausoleil, NJ and Mellor, DJ 2015 Introducing breathlessness as a significant animal welfare issue. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 63: 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2014.940410CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Casey-Trott, TM, Millman, ST, Turner, PV, Nykamp, SG and Widowski, TM 2013 Effectiveness of a nonpentrating captive bolt for euthanasia of piglets less than 3 d of age. Journal of Animal Science 91: 5477–5484. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casey-Trott, TM, Millman, ST, Turner, PV, Nykamp, SG, Lawlis, PC and Widowski, TM 2014 Effectiveness of a non-pen-etrating captive bolt for euthanasia of 3-9 kg pigs. Journal of Animal Science 92: 5166–5174. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-7980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coenen, AM, Drinkenburg, WH, 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. https://doi.org/10.1258/002367795781088289CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dodman, NH 1977 Observations on use of Wernberg dip-lift carbon dioxide apparatus for pre-slaughter anesthesia of pigs. British Veterinary Journal 133: 71–80CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) 2004 Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare on a request from the Commission related to welfare aspects of the main sys-tems of stunning and killing the main commercial species of ani-mals. The EFSA Journal 45: 1–29Google Scholar
Forkman, B, Boissy, A, Meunier-Salaün, M-C, Canali, E and Jones, RB 2007 A critical review of fear tests used on cattle, pigs, sheep, poultry and horses. Physiology and Behavior 92: 340–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.03.016CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hawkins, P, Playle, L, Gooledge, H, Leach, M, Banzett, R, Coenen, A, Cooper, J, Danneman, P, Flecknell, P and Kirkden, R 2006 Newcastle consensus meeting on carbon dioxide euthana-sia of laboratory animals. Animal Technology and Welfare 5: 125–134Google Scholar
Hewett, TA, Kovacs, MS, Artwohl, JE and Bennett, BT 1993 A comparison of euthanasia methods in rats, using carbon diox-ide in prefilled and fixed flow-rate filled chambers. Laboratory Animal Science 43: 579–582Google ScholarPubMed
Niel, L, Stewart, SA and Weary, DM 2008 Effect of flow rate on aversion to gradual-fill carbon dioxide exposure in rats. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 109: 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2007.02.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niel, L and Weary, DM 2006 Behavioural responses of rats to gradual-fill carbon dioxide euthanasia and reduced oxygen con-centrations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 100: 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2005.12.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchett, K, Corrow, D, Stockwell, J and Smith, A 2005 Euthanasia of neonatal mice with carbon dioxide. Comparative Medicine 55: 275–281Google ScholarPubMed
Pritchett-Corning, KR 2009 Euthanasia of neonatal rats with carbon dioxide. Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science 48: 23–27Google ScholarPubMed
Raj, ABM and Gregory, NG 1996 Welfare implications of the gas stun-ning of pigs: 2. Stress of induction of anaesthesia. Animal Welfare 5: 71–78Google Scholar
Rault, J-L, Kells, NJ, Johnson, CB, Dennis, R, Sutherland, MA and Lay, DC Jr 2015 Nitrous oxide as a humane method for piglet euthanasia: behavior and electroencephalography (EEG). Physiology and Behaviour 151: 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.06.026CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rault, J-L, McMunn, KA, Marchant-Forde, JN and Lay, DC Jr 2013 Gas alternatives to carbon dioxide for euthanasia: A piglet perspective. Journal of Animal Science 91: 1874–1883. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2012-5761CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodríguez, P, Dalmau, A, Ruiz-de-la-Torre, JL, Mantexa, X, Jensen, EW, Rodríguez, B, Livan, H and Velarde, A 2008 Assessment of unconsciousness during carbon dioxide stunning in pigs. Animal Welfare 17: 341–349Google Scholar
Sadler, LJ, Hagen, CD, Wang, C, Widowski, TM, Johnson, AK and Millman, ST 2014a Effects of flow rate and gas mixture on the welfare of weaned and neonate pigs during gas euthanasia. Journal of Animal Science 92: 793–805. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6598CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sadler, LJ, Karriker, LA, Schwartz, KJ, Johnson, AK, Widowski, TM, Wang, C, Sutherland, MA and Millman, ST 2014b Are severely depressed suckling pigs resistant to gas euthanasia? Animal Welfare 23: 145–155. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.23.2.145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, W and Harrap, SB 1997 Behavioural and cardiovascular responses of rats to euthanasia using carbon dioxide gas. Laboratory Animals 31: 337–346. https://doi.org/10.1258/002367797780596130CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Velarde, A, Cruz, J, Gispert, M, Carrión, , Ruiz de la Torre, JL, Diestre, A and Manteca, X 2007 Aversion to carbon diox-ide stunning in pigs: effect of carbon dioxide concentration and halothane genotype. Animal Welfare 16: 513–522Google Scholar
Winkler, GC and Cheville, NF 1984 The neonatal porcine lung: Ultrastructural morphology and postnatal development of the terminal airways and alveolar region. The Anatomical Record 210:303–313. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.1092100205CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed