scholarly journals From unloading to trimming: studying bruising in individual slaughter cattle

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen C Kline ◽  
Zachary D Weller ◽  
Temple Grandin ◽  
Ryan J Algino ◽  
Lily N Edwards-Callaway
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Sample Size ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Traumatic Events ◽  
Visual Assessment ◽  
Slaughter Cattle ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
Trim Loss ◽  
Analyze Data

Abstract Livestock bruising is both an animal welfare concern and a detriment to the economic value of carcasses. Understanding the causes of bruising is challenging due to the numerous factors that have been shown to be related to bruise prevalence. While most cattle bruising studies collect and analyze data on truckload lots of cattle, this study followed a large number (n = 585) of individual animals from unloading through postmortem processing at five different slaughter plants. Both visual bruise presence and location was recorded postmortem prior to carcass trimming. By linking postmortem data to animal sex, breed, trailer compartment, and traumatic events at unloading, a rich analysis of a number of factors related to bruise prevalence was developed. Results showed varying levels of agreement with other published bruising studies, underscoring the complexity of assessing the factors that affect bruising. Bruising prevalence varied across different sex class types (P < 0.001); 36.5% of steers [95% confidence interval (CI): 31.7, 41.6; n = 378], 52.8% of cows (45.6, 60.0; 193), and 64.3% of bulls (no CI calculated due to sample size; 14) were bruised. There was a difference in bruise prevalence by trailer compartment (P = 0.035) in potbelly trailers, indicating that cattle transported in the top deck were less likely to be bruised (95% CI: 26.6, 40.4; n = 63) compared to cattle that were transported in the bottom deck (95% CI: 39.6, 54.2; n = 89). Results indicated that visual assessment of bruising underestimated carcass bruise trimming. While 42.6% of the carcasses were visibly bruised, 57.9% of carcasses were trimmed due to bruising, suggesting that visual assessment is not able to capture all of the carcass loss associated with bruising. Furthermore, bruises that appeared small visually were often indicators of larger, subsurface bruising, creating an “iceberg effect” of trim loss due to bruising.

scholarly journals Slaughter of Pregnant Cattle at an Austrian Abattoir: Prevalence and Gestational Age

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 2474
Author(s):  
Ignaz Zitterer ◽  
Peter Paulsen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Sample Size ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Gestational Age ◽  
Sex Steroids ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dual Purpose ◽  
Evaluation Scheme ◽  
Female Cattle

The slaughter of pregnant cattle raises ethical–moral questions with regard to animal welfare, but also concerns of consumers because of higher levels of sex steroids in the meat from pregnant cattle. Since no data on the slaughter of pregnant cattle in Austria were available, we examined uteri of slaughtered female cattle in one Austrian mid-size abattoir. Sample size was calculated for an assumed prevalence of 2.5% (±1%; 95% confidence interval) of cows or heifers slaughtered in the last trimester of pregnancy and amounted to 870 cows and 744 heifers. 1633 female cattle of domestic origin were examined, most of them of dual-purpose type. Pregnancy was detected in 30/759 heifers and in 74/874 cows (an overall prevalence of 6.4%). The number of cattle in the last trimester of pregnancy was 16 to 26, depending on the evaluation scheme. We found no significant differences in percentages of pregnant cattle sent to slaughter for beef, dual-purpose and dairy breeds, although the latter group demonstrated the lowest percentage. Our results are comparable with those from previously conducted studies in other member states of the European Union. Measures to avoid sending pregnant cattle to slaughter should be implemented at farm-level.

scholarly journals The Probability That a Measurement Falls within a Range of Standard Deviations from an Estimate of the Mean

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis M. Houston
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Sample Size ◽  
General Equation ◽  
Sample Sizes ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Standard Deviations ◽  
Intermediate Value ◽  
Theoretical Results

We derive a general equation for the probability that a measurement falls within a range of n standard deviations from an estimate of the mean. So, we provide a format that is compatible with a confidence interval centered about the mean that is naturally independent of the sample size. The equation is derived by interpolating theoretical results for extreme sample sizes. The intermediate value of the equation is confirmed with a computational test.

Statistical Principles for Clinical Trials

1998 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
R Kay
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Sample Size ◽  
Sample Size Calculation ◽  
P Value ◽  
Clinical Value ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Correct Calculation ◽  
Intent To Treat ◽  
Comparative Trials

If a trial is to be well designed, and the conclusions drawn from it valid, a thorough understanding of the benefits and pitfalls of basic statistical principles is required. When setting up a trial, appropriate sample-size calculation is vital. If initial calculations are inaccurate, trial results will be unreliable. The principle of intent-to-treat in comparative trials is examined. Randomization as a method of selecting patients to treatment is essential to ensure that the treatment groups are equalized in terms of avoiding biased allocation in the mix of patients within groups. Once trial results are available the correct calculation and interpretation of the P-value is important. Its limitations are examined, and the use of the confidence interval to help draw valid conclusions regarding the clinical value of treatments is explored.

scholarly journals Animal welfare in experimental orthopedic surgery of dogs: an analysis of the Brazilian view

2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosângela Rumi Sugauara ◽  
Elisângela Yumi Sugauara ◽  
Luciana Kazue Otutumi ◽  
Ricardo de Melo Germano ◽  
Elaine Yae Yamashita Sugauara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sample Size ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Orthopedic Surgery ◽  
Ethics Committee ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Experimental Animals ◽  
Final Destination

ABSTRACT: The aim of this paper was to conduct a bibliometry search about Brazilian scientific publications that describe experimental orthopedic surgeries in dogs. It was analyzed 14 publications, and there was wide variation in the number of experimental animals, showing that there is no consensus on the appropriate number for science experiment with dogs. Most articles had been reviewed by an ethics committee (13/14, 92.85%) and only two articles (2/14; 14.28%) did not report the use of analgesic protocol. Among analgesics, morphine was the most widely used, noted in seven studies (7/14; 42.85%). In six of the articles (6/14; 42.85%), the final destination of animals was not informed, but in four experiments (4/14; 28.57%) the dogs were euthanized. In four studies (4/14; 28.57%) the animals were sent for adoption. In conclusion, the ethics in animal research in Brazil has advanced, but is necessary proper planning in sample size.

scholarly journals Assessment of Turkish consumer attitudes using an Animal Welfare Attitude Scale (AWAS)

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
İbrahim KILIÇ ◽  
Zehra Bozkurt
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Consumer Attitudes ◽  
Attitude Scale ◽  
Consumer Attitude ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Affective Dimensions ◽  
One Way Anova ◽  
Reliable Scale ◽  
Analyze Data

The aim of this study was to examine Turkish consumer attitudes towards animal welfare in terms of cognitive, affective and behavioral dimensions, using a bespoke Animal Welfare Attitude Scale (AWAS). An overall consumer attitude was also determined. The Delphi technique was used to establish an item pool to develop a questionnaire for the construction of the AWAS. This questionnaire was later used for data collection. A total of 2295 consumers were surveyed in 14 cities, in the 7 regions of Turkey. Descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), reliability analysis, Ward's hierarchical clustering method and One-way ANOVA were used to validate the questionnaire, and to analyze data. Results of the EFA allowed for allocation of 42 items collected under 3 dimensions (cognitive, affective and behavioral), that explained 72% of the total variance of the model. This factor structure was subsequently confirmed by a CFA performed on a different sample of 425 consumers. The Cronbach's Alpha coefficient for AWAS was calculated at 0.829. These results confirmed that the developed AWAS had a valid and reliable scale. The questionnaire showed that consumers' attitudes towards animal welfare were more negative at the behavioral dimension, than either at the cognitive or affective dimensions. Consumers in Turkey were ultimately divided into three groups according to their overall attitudes towards animal welfare as impassive, moderate or sensitive. One-third of Turkish consumers placed in the sensitive group, thus emphasizing a potential niche for animal-friendly food marketing in Turkey.

Precision of sensitivity estimations in diagnostic test evaluations. Power functions for comparisons of sensitivities of two tests.

1985 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 574-580 ◽  
Author(s):  
K Linnet
Keyword(s):  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Sample Size ◽  
Diagnostic Test ◽  
Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Sample Sizes ◽  
Power Functions ◽  
Gaussian Distributions ◽  
Sensitivity Estimate

Abstract The precision of estimates of the sensitivity of diagnostic tests is evaluated. "Sensitivity" is defined as the fraction of diseased subjects with test values exceeding the 0.975-fractile of the distribution of control values. An estimate of the sensitivity is subject to sample variation because of variation of both control observations and patient observations. If gaussian distributions are assumed, the 0.95-confidence interval for a sensitivity estimate is up to +/- 0.15 for a sample of 100 controls and 100 patients. For the same sample size, minimum differences of 0.08 to 0.32 of sensitivities of two tests are established as significant with a power of 0.90. For some published diagnostic test evaluations the median sample sizes for controls and patients were 63 and 33, respectively. I show that, to obtain a reasonable precision of sensitivity estimates and a reasonable power when two tests are being compared, the number of samples should in general be considerably larger.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document