Comparison between two scoring methods to assess tail damage of docked pig carcasses during postmortem inspection in Ireland

BackgroundTail inspection in the abattoir is a tool to help determine the welfare status of pigs. However, methodologies vary widely. Moreover, meat inspection is moving from palpation and incision towards visual-only (VIS) examination. This study investigated whether a VIS examination was sufficient to detect tail damage compared to handling (HAND), which ensures examination of all aspects of the tail. MethodThe severity of tail skin damage (0 [undamaged] - 4 [partial/full loss of tail]) and presence/absence of bruises was scored using both methods after scalding/dehairing of 5498 pig carcasses. ResultsThere was a good relationship between methods when evaluating tail skin damage (sensitivity, 82.48%; specificity, 99.98%; accuracy, 98.98%; correlation & rho; = 0.84). The results were similar for the presence of bruises (sensitivity, 74.98%; specificity, 99.09%; accuracy, 89.94%; correlation & rho; = 0.79). However, the percentage of tails classified as undamaged was higher using VIS (69.9%) than HAND (63.55%) examination. Conversely, VIS detected fewer mild lesions (score 1 - 13.64%; score 2 - 11.73%) than HAND (score 1 - 15.21%; score 2 - 15.53%). A higher percentage of bruises was detected using HAND than VIS (37.96% vs. 29.03%). ConclusionsVisual evaluation is a valid alternative to handling evaluation of carcass tail damage and bruising.

Automated summary

This study compared the effectiveness of visual-only examination with handling examination for detecting tail damage and bruises in pig carcasses. The results showed that visual examination can effectively assess tail damage and bruises, but may miss some mild lesions and bruises compared to handling examination.