Behaviors in the Slaughter Corridor, Carcass, and Meat Quality Traits of Anatolian, Italian, and Italian × Anatolian Crossbreds (F) Water Buffaloes

Overview

Journal Anim Sci J

Publisher Wiley

Specialty Veterinary Medicine

Date 2025 Feb 25

PMID 39999770

Authors

Seyfi Ozdemir

P Dilara Kecici

Hulya Yalcintan

Bulent Ekiz

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

This study aimed to assess the slaughter corridor behavior, carcass characteristics, and meat quality of Anatolian, Italian, and Italian × Anatolian (F) crossbred water buffaloes. The research involved Anatolian (n = 8), Italian (n = 10), and Italian × Anatolian crossbred (n = 8) water buffaloes, all of which had been used for milk production on a commercial farm before being culled and slaughtered. While water buffalo pass through the slaughter corridor, both the behaviors of the animals and the handling actions of the stockpersons were video recorded. Genotype had no significant influence on the scores for animal behaviors (AWBEH) and stockperson actions (AWACT). There were significant differences in carcass weight among the genotypes (p < 0.001), with the genotypes ranked from smallest to largest in carcass weight as follows: Anatolian, crossbred (F), and Italian water buffaloes. Additionally, the EUROP fatness score was higher in carcasses from the Italian genotype compared to the Anatolian water buffaloes. Mean pH was lower in Italian water buffaloes than Anatolian ones. On the other hand, fat and meat color variables were not influenced by animal genotype. In conclusion, crossbreeding between Italian and Anatolian water buffaloes may increase carcass weight in crossbred (F) genotype without altering meat quality or temperament.

References

Cockram M, Corley K . Effect of pre-slaughter handling on the behaviour and blood composition of beef cattle. Br Vet J. 1991; 147(5):444-54. DOI: 10.1016/0007-1935(91)90087-4. View

Azmi A, Mat Amin F, Ahmad H, Mohd Nor N, Meng G, Saad M . Effects of Bypass Fat on Buffalo Carcass Characteristics, Meat Nutrient Contents and Profitability. Animals (Basel). 2021; 11(11). PMC: 8614549. DOI: 10.3390/ani11113042. View

Ferguson D, Warner R . Have we underestimated the impact of pre-slaughter stress on meat quality in ruminants?. Meat Sci. 2011; 80(1):12-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.05.004. View

Miranda-de la Lama G, Leyva I, Barreras-Serrano A, Perez-Linares C, Sanchez-Lopez E, Maria G . Assessment of cattle welfare at a commercial slaughter plant in the northwest of Mexico. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2011; 44(3):497-504. DOI: 10.1007/s11250-011-9925-y. View

Grandin T . Auditing animal welfare at slaughter plants. Meat Sci. 2010; 86(1):56-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.04.022. View

Vergara H, Gallego L . Effect of type of suckling and length of lactation period on carcass and meat quality in intensive lamb production systems. Meat Sci. 2011; 53(3):211-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0309-1740(99)00059-5. View

Aksoy Y, Sahin A, Ulutas Z, Ugurlutepe E . The effect of different slaughter weights on some meat quality traits of musculus longissimus dorsi thoracis of male Anatolian buffaloes. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2021; 53(1):137. DOI: 10.1007/s11250-021-02571-z. View

Ozdemir S, Ekiz B . Effects of certain risk factors on presence and severity of carcass bruising in cattle: A study in Turkey. Meat Sci. 2023; 202:109199. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2023.109199. View

Bourguet C, Deiss V, Tannugi C, Terlouw E . Behavioural and physiological reactions of cattle in a commercial abattoir: relationships with organisational aspects of the abattoir and animal characteristics. Meat Sci. 2011; 88(1):158-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.12.017. View

10.

Nielsen S, Alvarez J, Bicout D, Calistri P, Depner K, Drewe J . Welfare of cattle at slaughter. EFSA J. 2020; 18(11):e06275. PMC: 7607414. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2020.6275. View

11.

Hopkins D, Fogarty N . Diverse lamb genotypes-2. Meat pH, colour and tenderness. Meat Sci. 2011; 49(4):477-88. DOI: 10.1016/s0309-1740(98)00051-5. View

12.

Masucci F, De Rosa G, Barone C, Napolitano F, Grasso F, Uzun P . Effect of group size and maize silage dietary levels on behaviour, health, carcass and meat quality of Mediterranean buffaloes. Animal. 2015; 10(3):531-8. DOI: 10.1017/S1751731115002359. View

13.

Akdag F, Celik R . Effect of gender on slaughter and carcass traits in Anatolian water buffalo. Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr. 2006; 113(9):345-8. View

14.

Hoffman L, Muller M, Cloete S, Schmidt D . Comparison of six crossbred lamb types: sensory, physical and nutritional meat quality characteristics. Meat Sci. 2011; 65(4):1265-74. DOI: 10.1016/S0309-1740(03)00034-2. View

15.

Johansen J, Aastveit A, Egelandsdal B, Kvaal K, Roe M . Validation of the EUROP system for lamb classification in Norway; repeatability and accuracy of visual assessment and prediction of lamb carcass composition. Meat Sci. 2011; 74(3):497-509. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2006.04.017. View

16.

Ekiz B, Yilmaz A, Ozcan M, Kocak O . Effect of production system on carcass measurements and meat quality of Kivircik lambs. Meat Sci. 2011; 90(2):465-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2011.09.008. View

17.

Sanudo C, Sanchez A, Alfonso M . Small ruminant production systems and factors affecting lamb meat quality. Meat Sci. 2011; 49S1:S29-64. View

18.

Mepham B . Animal Welfare and Meat Science N.G.Gregory, 1998, Wallingford: CABI Publishing. Meat Sci. 2011; 56(1):101. DOI: 10.1016/s0309-1740(00)00009-7. View

19.

Sanchez-Hidalgo M, Rosenfeld C, Gallo C . Associations between Pre-Slaughter and Post-Slaughter Indicators of Animal Welfare in Cull Cows. Animals (Basel). 2019; 9(9). PMC: 6770700. DOI: 10.3390/ani9090642. View

20.

Turan A, Yalcintan H, Orman A, Ekiz B . Effects of gender and slaughter age on meat quality of Anatolian water buffaloes. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2021; 53(4):415. DOI: 10.1007/s11250-021-02835-8. View