...
首页> 外文期刊>Animal >Biosecurity risks associated with current identification practices of producers trading live pigs at livestock sales.
【24h】

Biosecurity risks associated with current identification practices of producers trading live pigs at livestock sales.

机译:与生产者在牲畜销售中交易生猪的当前识别做法相关的生物安全风险。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Approximately 5% of pigs produced in Australia is believed to be traded at livestock sales. Interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with producers (106 and 30 producers, respectively), who traded pigs at livestock sales. The purpose of the study was to gather information on how producers identified their pigs in order to evaluate how these practices may impact the ability to trace pig movements in the event of an emergency animal disease outbreak or food safety hazard. Results were analyzed according to herd size (0 to 150 sows, 150+ sows) and location (peri-urban, regional) as prior studies suggested a higher biosecurity risk among smaller farms and due to perceptions that peri-urban farms pose additional risk. Most producers (91.5%) had less than 150 sows and a high proportion (70.8%) resided in regional areas compared with only 29.2% residing in peri-urban areas. A higher proportion of large-scale producers identified their pigs than small-scale producers. A third of small-scale producers reported not identifying breeding stock and most did not identify progeny. The most common forms of on-farm identification used were ear tags for breeding stock and ear notches for progeny. Producers identified breeding stock to assist with mating management and genetic improvement. Ear notches were used to determine the litter of origin of progeny. All large-scale producers owned a registered swine brand and used the official body tattoo for post-farm-gate identification. However, approximately 15% of small-scale producers did not own a registered swine brand, and an additional 8% did not identify their pigs post-farm-gate. Producers were satisfied with tattoos as a methodology for post-farm-gate identification of pigs and considered other methodologies cost-prohibitive. However, variations in the maintenance of the branding equipment, the type of ink used and the time of tattoo application in relation to the animal sale were highlighted during focus group discussions. These results suggest that there is a need for education and extension activities, especially among small-scale pig producers, regarding the benefits of identifying animals on-farm. In addition, increased awareness of the traceability legislation that exists in Australia to meet the National Performance Standards for Livestock Traceability in this country is required.
机译:据信,在澳大利亚生产的猪中约有5%是在牲畜销售中交易的。与生产者进行了访谈和焦点小组讨论(分别为106和30个生产者),这些生产者在牲畜销售处买卖猪。该研究的目的是收集有关生产者如何识别猪的信息,以评估在紧急动物疾病暴发或食品安全隐患时,这些做法如何影响追踪猪运动的能力。根据先前的研究显示,较小农场的生物安全风险较高,并且由于人们认为郊区农场会带来额外的风险,因此根据牛群大小(0至150头母猪,150 +头母猪)和位置(城市周边,区域性)对结果进行了分析。大多数生产者(91.5%)的母猪少于150头,很大一部分(70.8%)居住在区域区域,而只有29.2%的人居住在郊区。大型生产者发现自己的猪的比例高于小型生产者。三分之一的小规模生产者报告没有确定种畜,大多数没有确定后代。农场上使用的最常见形式是用于种畜的耳标和用于子代的耳槽。生产者确定了繁殖种群,以帮助进行交配管理和遗传改良。耳朵缺口用于确定后代的产仔。所有大型生产商都拥有一个注册的猪品牌,并使用官方的身体纹身来识别农场后的大门。但是,约有15%的小规模生产者没有注册的猪品牌,另外8%的人没有在农场大门后识别其猪。生产者对纹身作为在猪场后进行猪场识别的方法感到满意,并认为其他方法成本高昂。但是,在焦点小组讨论中,着重强调了与动物销售相关的商标设备维护,所用墨水类型和纹身应用时间的变化。这些结果表明,需要进行教育和推广活动,尤其是在小型生猪生产者中,以在农场上识别动物的好处。此外,需要提高人们对澳大利亚已有的可追溯性立法的认识,以达到该国牲畜可追溯性国家绩效标准。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号