ArticleJournal of animal science2026
Short communication-characterizing heart rate of beef cattle during stunning and exsanguination at slaughter.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the changes in heart rate (HR) during stunning and exsanguination in slaughter-weight cattle stunned one (Experiment 1) or two (Experiment 2; one initial and one security stun) times with a penetrating captive bolt gun. Data were collected between April 2025 and April 2026. In Experiment 1, 21 steers (n = 21; BW = 662 ± 65 kg) were used, and in Experiment 2, 5 steers and 4 heifers (n = 9; BW = 666 ± 72 kg) were used. All cattle were fitted with a HR monitor while restrained in a hydraulic squeeze chute and were transported to the university processing facility for slaughter. In both experiments, cattle were stunned (time 0 s) and rendered insensible with a pneumatic penetrating captive bolt stunner. Experiment 1 utilized one stun, and Experiment 2 implemented a secondary security stun (with a handheld captive bolt stunner) approximately 20 s after the first stun. HR was recorded from 60 s prior to stunning until 10-15 min post-stunning. Data were aggregated into 1-s intervals. Prior to stunning (-60 s - 0 s), HRs in both Experiments were elevated compared to typical resting HR in cattle, with an average of 141 beats per minute (bpm) in Experiment 1 and 120 bpm in Experiment 2. Immediately following captive bolt administration, HR increased rapidly, reaching an average peak of 165 bpm within approximately 12 s in both Experiments. After that, HR decreased, reaching a low near exsanguination and then peaked a second time (134 bpm at approximately 4 min post-stun and 120 bpm at approximately 2.7 min post-stun in Experiments 1 and 2, respectively). HR steadily declined as animals approached clinical death, reaching a plateau of 30-40 bpm at approximately 9 min post-stun, the bpm likely representing residual electrical impulse activity of the heart. Overall, the results provide a clear indication of HR in cattle under slaughter conditions and are relevant to discussions around the timing of cardiac death in cattle.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.