Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Mar 20:10:929160.
doi: 10.3389/fvets.2023.929160. eCollection 2023.

Characterization of in-barn heat processed swine mortalities

Brett C Ramirez  1 , Ryan Jeon  1 , Dave R Stender  2 , Kris D Kohl  2 , Chris J Rademacher  3 , Justin T Brown  3 , Dwight Mogler  4
Affiliations

Characterization of in-barn heat processed swine mortalities

Brett C Ramirez et al. Front Vet Sci. .

Abstract

In-barn heat processing of mass swine mortalities to inactivate pathogens could facilitate more carcass disposal options and reduce the risk of pathogen spread in the event of a foreign animal disease (FAD) outbreak. A 12.2 × 12.2 × 2.4 m (W × L × H) heat processing room was created using a temporary wall inside a de-commissioned commercial gestation barn in northwest Iowa. Eighteen swine carcasses (six per group) divided into three weight groups (mean ± SD initial carcass weights: 31.8 ± 3.3, 102.7 ± 8.1, and 226.3 ± 27.6 kg) were randomly assigned a location inside the room. Three carcasses per weight group were placed directly on concrete slats and on a raised platform. One carcass per weight group and placement (n=6) was instrumented with five temperature sensors, inserted into the brain, pleura, peritoneal, ham, and bone marrow of the femur, and a sensor was attached directly to the skin surface. Environmental conditions (ambient and room) and carcass temperatures were collected at 15-min intervals. Carcasses were subjected to an average room temperature of 57.3 ± 1.2°C for 14 days. The average (±SD) reduction from initial weight for the carcasses on slats was 45.0 ± 4.70% (feeder), 33.0 ± 8.30% (market), and 34.0 ± 15.80% (sow), and for the carcasses on a raised platform, it was 39.0 ± 6.80% (feeder), 49.0 ± 11.30% (market), and 45.0 ± 6.70% (sow). There was a significant interaction between carcass placement (slats and raised) and carcass weight loss for the market weight group. When average carcass surface temperature was at 40.6, 43.3, and 46.1°C (data grouped for analysis), the average internal carcass temperature for most measurement locations was significantly different across carcass weight groups and between the carcasses on a raised platform and those on slats. This preliminary analysis of carcass weight loss, leachate production, and temperature variation in carcasses of different sizes can be used for planning and evaluating mass swine mortality management strategies.

Keywords: carcass; disposal; foreign animal disease; management; response; temperature.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Layout of test room indicating sensor locations, heater, and carcass placement. Six pigs representing three weight ranges were placed directly on the slats (solid outline) and six pigs were placed on a metal platform raised above the slats to collect leachate.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Summary of ambient and room conditions during the 14-day period.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Average daily conditions for ambient (outdoor), room, slat, and headspace temperature (T).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Daily propane usage superimposed over ambient temperature (T) to maintain the room temperature.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Example (carcass weight group: feeder; carcass ID #4) temperature data throughout the 14-day study at a constant air temperature of 50°C for the five internal carcass measurement locations and the external surface.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Carriquiry M, Elobeid A, Swenson D, Hayes DJ. Impacts of African swine Fever in Iowa and the United States. Center for Agricultural and Rural Development. (2020). - PubMed
    1. Curtis SE. Environmental Management in Animal Agriculture. Ames: Iowa State University Press; (1983).
    1. Espinosa MF, Sancho AN, Mendoza LM, Mota CR, Verbyla ME. Systematic review and meta-analysis of time-temperature pathogen inactivation. Int J Hyg Environ Health. (2020) 230:113595. 10.1016/j.ijheh.2020.113595 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tablante NL, Malone GW. “Controlling avian influenza through in-house composting of depopulated flocks: Sharing Delmarva's experience,” In: Proceedings of 2006 National Symposium on Carcass Disposal (2006).
    1. USDA APHIS,. Foreign Animal Disease Preparedness Response Plan (FAD PReP)/National Animal Health Emergency Management System (NAHEMS) Guidelines: Disposal. (2012). Available online at: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/emergency_management/downloads/... (accessed January 15, 2022).

LinkOut - more resources