4.7 Article

Preslaughter diet management in sheep and goats: effects on physiological responses and microbial loads on skin and carcass

Journal

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/2049-1891-5-42

Keywords

E. coli contamination diet; Goats; Physiology; Sheep

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sixteen crossbred buck goats (Kiko x Spanish; BW = 32.8 kg) and wether sheep (Dorset x Suffolk; BW = 39.9 kg) were used to determine the effect of preslaughter diet and feed deprivation time (FDT) on physiological responses and microbial loads on skin and carcasses. Experimental animals were fed either a concentrate (CD) or a hay diet (HD) for 4 d and then deprived of feed for either 12-h or 24-h before slaughter. Blood samples were collected for plasma cortisol and blood metabolite analyses. Longisimus muscle (LM) pH was measured. Skin and carcass swabs were obtained to assess microbial loads. Plasma creatine kinase activity (863.9 and 571.7 +/- 95.21 IU) and non-esterified fatty acid concentrations (1,056.1 and 589.8 +/- 105.01 mEq/L) were different (P < 0.05) between sheep and goats. Species and diet treatments had significant effects on the ultimate pH of LM. Pre-holding total coliform (TCC) and aerobic plate counts (APC) of skin were significantly different between species. Goats had lower (P < 0.05) TCC (2.1 vs. 3.0 log(10) CFU/cm(2)) and APC (8.2 vs. 8.5 log(10) CFU/cm(2)) counts in the skin compared to sheep. Preslaughter skin E. coli counts and TCC were different (P < 0.05) between species. Goats had lower (P < 0.05) counts of E. coli (2.2 vs. 2.9 log(10) CFU/cm(2)) and TCC (2.3 vs. 3.0 log(10) CFU/cm(2)) in the skin compared with those in sheep. Diet, species, and FDT had no effect (P > 0.05) on E. coli and TCC in carcass swab samples. The APC of carcass swab samples were only affected (P < 0.05) by the FDT. The results indicated that preslaughter dietary management had no significant changes on hormone and blood metabolite concentrations and sheep might be more prone for fecal contamination than goats in the holding pens at abattoir.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available