Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32620008›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2020

Evaluation of physical euthanasia for neonatal piglets on-farm.

Filipe Antonio Dalla Costa, Troy J Gibson, Steffan Edward Octávio Oliveira, Neville George Gregory, Arlei Coldebella, Luigi Faucitano, Charli Beatriz Ludtke, Liziè Peréirã Buss, Osmar Antonio Dalla Costa

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Pathophysiology of penetrating captive-bolt stunning of horses.Animal welfare (South Mimms, England) · 2025
    Article
  5. The use of high expansion foam for stunning and killing pigs and poultry.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Application of Electroencephalography in Preslaughter Management: A Review.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Filipe Antonio Dalla CostaPrograma de Pós-graduação em Zootecnia, Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinárias, UNESP - São Paulo State University, Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil.
Troy J GibsonRoyal Veterinary College, Hatfield, UK.
Steffan Edward Octávio OliveiraPrograma de Pós-graduação em Zootecnia, Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinárias, UNESP - São Paulo State University, Jaboticabal, SP, Brazil.
Neville George GregoryRoyal Veterinary College, Hatfield, UK.
Arlei ColdebellaEmbrapa Suínos e Aves, Concórdia, Brazil.
Luigi FaucitanoAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.
Charli Beatriz LudtkeAssociação Brasileira dos Criadores de Suínos, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Liziè Peréirã BussDepartamento de Sistemas de Produção e Sustentabilidade, Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento - MAPA, Brasília, DF, Brazil.
Osmar Antonio Dalla CostaEmbrapa Suínos e Aves, Concórdia, Brazil.
Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation · BRConcordia University Wisconsin · USRoyal Veterinary College · GBAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada · CAMinistry of Agriculture, Livestock, and Food Supply · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Twenty-seven neonate piglets (range from 0.35 to 1.17 kg) were evaluated for the effectiveness of blunt force trauma as a method of on-farm cull. Brainstem function, brain injury, and hemorrhage scores (increasing from 0 to 3) were assessed after striking the head against a concrete floor. Electroencephalograms (EEG) from a subset of 15 piglets were recorded before and after blunt force trauma for electrophysiological assessments. Blunt force trauma was performed by a single experienced farmer in a commercial farm by holding the piglet by its both hind legs and striking the head against the concrete floor. All piglets remained recumbent and did not show brainstem reflexes. Only one piglet did not presented tonic/clonic physical activity. The mean time to the onset of persistent isoelectric EEG was 64.3 ± 7.3 s (range 18 to 115). Total power, theta, alpha, and beta power decreased to approximately 45%, 30%, 20%, and 15% from pretreatment power, respectively, by 15-s post-impact. There were no periods of normal-like EEG after the culling. Bruises in the neck and shoulder were found in 67% and 70% of piglets, respectively. All piglets presented skull fractures with 20% having the nasal bone(s) fractured. Brain damage was found in all piglets, mainly in the frontal lobe(s). The occipital lobe(s) presented the greatest frequency of severe damage. The analysis of the radiographs also found a high frequency of fractures in this region. Hemorrhage was most frequent in the frontal, parietal, occipital lobes, and midbrain. When performed correctly with the appropriate weight class, blunt force trauma can be used as an effective method for the on-farm killing of nursing piglets resulting in death. However, this method should not be promoted over more reliable and repeatable cull methods such as captive bolt gun. As with blunt force trauma, there is a significant potential for animal welfare harm associated with inappropriate practice, lack of accuracy, issues with repeatability, and operator fatigue.

Indexed as

Animals, NewbornAnimal WelfareSwineAnimalsBody WeightEuthanasia, AnimalFarmsHeadWounds, Nonpenetratinganimal welfarebrain injurycullingelectroencephalogramkillingpiglet

Identifiers

PMID32620008
PMCPMC7455299
OpenAlexW3038643520

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.