4.7 Review

Opportunities for Regulatory Authorities to Assess Animal-Based Measures at the Slaughterhouse Using Sensor Technology and Artificial Intelligence: A Review

期刊

ANIMALS
卷 13, 期 19, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ani13193028

关键词

animal welfare; meat inspection; camera surveillance; sensors; abattoir; machine learning; precision livestock farming; innovation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Animal-based measures (ABMs) are the preferred way to assess animal welfare, but manual scoring is time-consuming. Using sensor technology and AI for automatic scoring can provide a solution. This study provides an overview of ABMs recorded at the slaughterhouse for poultry, pigs, and cattle, and examines their applications and relevant legislation. Although there are opportunities to use sensor technology to support meat inspection and improve understanding of animal welfare risks, the lack of external validation for commercially available systems is a concern.
Animal-based measures (ABMs) are the preferred way to assess animal welfare. However, manual scoring of ABMs is very time-consuming during the meat inspection. Automatic scoring by using sensor technology and artificial intelligence (AI) may bring a solution. Based on review papers an overview was made of ABMs recorded at the slaughterhouse for poultry, pigs and cattle and applications of sensor technology to measure the identified ABMs. Also, relevant legislation and work instructions of the Dutch Regulatory Authority (RA) were scanned on applied ABMs. Applications of sensor technology in a research setting, on farm or at the slaughterhouse were reported for 10 of the 37 ABMs identified for poultry, 4 of 32 for cattle and 13 of 41 for pigs. Several applications are related to aspects of meat inspection. However, by European law meat inspection must be performed by an official veterinarian, although there are exceptions for the post mortem inspection of poultry. The examples in this study show that there are opportunities for using sensor technology by the RA to support the inspection and to give more insight into animal welfare risks. The lack of external validation for multiple commercially available systems is a point of attention.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据