Heat stress mitigation strategies used by midwestern cattle feeders

Rusche, Warren C; Blom, E. J.; DiConstanzo, Alfredo; Erickson, Galen E.; Gentry, W. W.; Smith, Zachary K; VanDerWal, Allison; Winders, Tommy M.; Cassady, J. P.

doi:10.15232/aas.2021-02187

Cited by 5 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There have been several heat waves in the United States that have caused extensive death loss in feedlots, ultimately having significant negative impacts on animal welfare and producer profitability ( Busby and Loy, 1997 ; Hahn and Mader, 1997 ; Brown-Brandl et al, 2006 ). Of feedlots in the Midwest that participated in a heat mitigation usage and perceptions survey, all respondents indicated that they had experienced loss in performance and mortality from heat stress events with 87% of feedlots describing their losses as “minor”, and 13% describing their losses as “moderate” ( Rusche et al, 2021 ). Busby and Loy (1997) identified that shade assisted in reducing death loss in feedlot cattle during an extreme heat event reporting a significant decrease in death loss of cattle that were provided shade (0.2%) compared to those that were not provided shade (4.8%).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is speculated that shade structures are not commonly used in slaughter plants due to the cost of implementation, they can be difficult to work around, and the fact that cattle are not there for very long. However, shade structures can be advantageous over other heat mitigation strategies such as sprinklers or fans because shade does not require a series of daily decision making regarding whether to turn on the sprinklers or fans and for how long, therefore simplifying heat management ( Rusche et al, 2021 ). It should be noted that some facilities may have automated systems that are activated at certain temperatures which would be advantageous from a management perspective.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is speculated that sprinklers and misters are more commonly used by plants because they are easier to implement at older facilities compared to shade structures, however, with an industry focus on sustainability and reduction of resource use, water conversation efforts may change strategies implemented in the future. Respondents were not asked about challenges with heat mitigation, therefore no disadvantages were given, however, one study surveying heat mitigation strategy perceptions of respondents from feedlots indicated that most struggled with issues of additional mud from water application that partially outweighed the perceived benefits ( Rusche et al, 2021 ). It would be interesting to investigate challenges associated with the use of sprinklers at slaughter plants.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are multiple heat mitigation strategies utilized in cattle production settings including providing shade structures, sprinklers, misters, or fans. The majority of research investigating heat mitigation strategies and their impacts on beef cattle performance, health, and behavior has focused primarily on feedlot cattle ( Boren et al, 1961 ; Mader et al, 1999 ; Mitlöhner et al, 2001 ; Mitlöhner et al, 2002 ; Gaughan et al, 2010 ; Blaine and Nsahlai, 2011 ; Lees et al, 2020 ; Rusche et al, 2021 ). Cattle are highly motivated to seek shade on hot days, and have even been shown to compete for shade and choose shade over laying down ( Schütz et al, 2008 ; Hagenmaier et al, 2016 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the reported benefits of shade for cattle (reviewed by: Edwards-Callaway et al, 2021 ), industry data, albeit limited, indicates minimal usage of shade provisions in feedlots across the United States ( NAHMS, 2013 ; Samuelson et al, 2016 ; Simroth et al, 2017 ; Rusche et al, 2021 ). To the authors’ knowledge there is little to no published information quantifying shade usage in other parts of the beef cattle supply chain, particularly the slaughter sector.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Characterizing heat mitigation strategies utilized by beef processors in the United States

Davis

Engle

Cadaret

et al. 2021

Translational Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During lairage at slaughter plants, cattle can be exposed to extreme heat conditions from pen densities and holding pen microclimates. While research outlining heat mitigation strategies used in other sectors of the beef supply chain is available, there is no published data on the use of heat mitigation strategies at slaughter plants. The objective of this study was to characterize short-term heat mitigation strategies used by commercial beef slaughter plants in the United States. Twenty-one beef slaughter plants, representing an estimated 60% of beef slaughter in the United States, were included in the study. All plants indicated use of at least one heat mitigation strategy, and five of them used more than one type. Sprinklers/misters were the most commonly used heat mitigation type (n=17, 81%), and fans were the least common type (n=4, 19%). Shade usage was present in several plants (n=7, 33%), ranging from barn style roofs to shade cloths. Respondents indicated that they believed heat mitigation strategies provide benefits both to cattle well-being and meat quality outcomes. Future research should focus on the effectiveness of these techniques in improving animal well-being and quality outcomes in the slaughter plant environment and protocols for optimum implementation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Characterizing heat mitigation strategies utilized by beef processors in the United States

Davis

Engle

Cadaret

et al. 2021

Translational Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Impact of shade in beef feedyards on performance, ear temperature, and heat stress measures

Winders

Melton

Boyd

et al. 2023

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 2-yr study (year 1: March to September 2017; year 2: February to August 2018) was conducted using crossbred steers (year 1: n = 1677; initial body weight [BW] = 372 kg, SD = 47; year 2: n = 1713; initial BW = 379 kg, SD = 10) in a commercial feedyard study in Eastern NE to determine the effects of shade on cattle performance, ear temperature, and cattle activity. Two treatments were evaluated using a randomized complete block design (n = 5 blocks based on arrival). Treatments were assigned randomly to pens and consisted of five pens without shade (NO SHADE) and five pens with shade (SHADE). Ear temperatures were collected throughout the trials using biometric sensing ear tags on a subset of cattle. Panting scores were collected using a 5 point scale determined visually based on the level of panting occurring on the same subset of steers a minimum of twice weekly from June 8 to August 21 in year 1 and May 29 to July 24 in year 2 by one trained individual each year. In year 1, no differences (P ≥ 0.24) were observed for growth performance or carcass characteristics. Dry matter intake (DMI) and average daily gain (ADG) were greater (P ≤ 0.04) for SHADE cattle in year 2. Over the entire feeding period in year 1, greater (P < 0.01) ear temperature was observed for NO SHADE cattle, but cattle movement was not different (P = 0.38) between treatments. When evaluating the entire feeding period in year 2, cattle movement and ear temperature were not different (P ≥ 0.80) between treatments. Cattle in the SHADE treatment had lower (P ≤ 0.04) panting scores in years 1 and 2. These data suggest that providing shade can lessen the negative influence of heat events on DMI and was an effective way to reduce heat stress in feedlot operations, but only impacted ADG if heat events were close to the cattle slaughter date.

show abstract

Investigating the impact of pre-slaughter management factors on indicators of fed beef cattle welfare – a scoping review

Davis¹,

Sullivan²,

Bretón³

et al. 2022

Front. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe impact of pre-slaughter management practices on fed beef cattle welfare is a multifaceted and well researched subject matter. Factors such as transportation, handling, lairage time and several animal characteristics can directly impact the cattle’s behavior, mobility, blood lactate and cortisol levels, likelihood of injury and ultimately overall cattle welfare. Animal welfare continues to grow as a critical component of slaughter in the fed beef industry, yet a formal review of related research does not exist.MethodsA scoping review was performed in order to (1) catalog pre-slaughter management factors that impact fed beef cattle welfare at the time of slaughter, (2) identify indicators used to evaluate the impact of pre-slaughter management on fed beef cattle welfare at slaughter, and (3) gain further understanding of the relationship between pre-slaughter management factors and fed beef cattle welfare outcome indicators at slaughter. Three data bases were ultimately searched: PubMed, CAB Abstracts, and Web of Science. The concepts used in the database searches were the population of interest (i.e., fed beef cattle), the location in the supply chain, preslaughter management factors, and welfare outcomes.ResultsA total of 69 studies were included in final analysis for this review, including studies from six geographic regions around the globe. Studies involving alternative slaughter methods (e.g., religious stunning or mobile slaughter) were not included in the formal analysis of this review, but still merited an in-depth discussion within this paper. After reviewing the studies, a total of 37 pre-slaughter factors and 69 indicators of welfare were measured throughout. Pre-slaughter management factors were then categorized by: animal characteristics; environmental characteristics; handling; lairage; transportation; and water/feed. Outcomeindicators of welfare were categorized into: behaviors; health, injury and disease; physiological; and stunning and insensibility.DiscussionPre-slaughter factors relating to transportation and handling, and welfare outcomes measured by behaviors and physiology were of the most researched throughout the studies.The results of this review offer a catalogue of commonly researched factors and indicators of welfare measured during the pre-slaughter phase, as well ast he relationships between them. This review also offers further substantial evidence that a multitude of events in the pre-slaughter phase affect fed beef cattle welfare and a collection of highly applicable welfare indicators to expedite further research on the effects of pre-slaughter factors and the application of improved practices.

show abstract

Heat stress mitigation strategies used by midwestern cattle feeders

Cited by 5 publications

References 3 publications

Characterizing heat mitigation strategies utilized by beef processors in the United States

Characterizing heat mitigation strategies utilized by beef processors in the United States

Impact of shade in beef feedyards on performance, ear temperature, and heat stress measures

Investigating the impact of pre-slaughter management factors on indicators of fed beef cattle welfare – a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About