Search

Efficient traceability is paramount for Australia's biosecurity system and market access. Electronic identification (eID) offers higher traceability performance than that achieved with visual and mob‐based identification used for the sheep and goats National Livestock Identification System (NLIS). The current study aims to gain an understanding of the barriers and motivations of using eID for NLIS sheep and goats in New South Wales (NSW) and to provide recommendations to support the transition to eID. A social research study using a mixed‐methods approach was used through semi‐structured interviews and a cross‐sectional epidemiological and behavioural study among sheep and goat producers. The COM‐B behaviour change model based on capabilities, opportunities and motivations was used as a framework for the study. A total of 269 participants informed this study: 25 interviews were conducted with government, industry and private stakeholders, and 184 and 58 sheep and goat producers participated in the cross‐sectional study, respectively. The study identified poor understanding of the purpose and importance of NLIS among producers, with over two‐thirds not supporting eID implementation. The main barriers identified to the eID implementation were practical, including costs, technology quality and increased workload. Attitudinal, behavioural and knowledge barriers, such as the perception of the current system providing efficient traceability and the perceived lack of benefits of eID were also identified. This study provides an in‐depth analysis of practices and perceptions of stakeholders and producers on sheep and goat traceability and recommendations to address barriers identified, based on education and appropriate behavioural and technical support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Frothy bloat, associated predominantly with grazing legume‐based pastures, is considered the second most costly disease in beef cattle in southern Australia, costing $84.4 M annually. It frequently results in the sudden death of cattle. In response to concerns from cattle producers, an online survey was conducted in southern Australia in late 2020 to determine the impact of bloat, identify risk factors and determine the efficacy of current preventive measures. For 217 responses, over two‐thirds (70%) of producers reported bloat occurring in the previous 12 months, with estimated morbidity and mortality rates of 3.7% and 5.0% respectively. Bloat was associated with clover or clover‐dominant paddocks (79%) and was not associated with grass or grass‐dominant pastures or low clover pastures (92%) nor grazing crops (27%). For bloat that occurred in the past 12 months, cattle were very commonly grazing on clover or clover‐dominant paddocks (90%) and occasionally lucerne‐dominated paddocks (7%). Two‐thirds of producers reported having preventive measures in place when losses occurred. Bayesian Network analysis confirmed that grazing clover‐based pastures for more than 7 days, yearling cattle and the months of July–September were the main risk factors for bloat occurrence, with pasture type (clover) being the most important. Conversely, no clear relationship between weather conditions and bloat occurrence was evident. This survey highlights the known risk of clover‐based pastures for causing bloat in cattle, and that losses occur in many cases despite preventive measures being used. This suggests that current methods for preventing bloat in cattle are suboptimal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A study was undertaken at 2 saleyard (1 domestic, DS, and 1 export, ES) and 2 abattoir (1 domestic, DA, and 1 export, EA) locations in New South Wales, Australia, to assess the compliance (presence) and readability of body tattoos used to identify individual pigs presented for sale or slaughter. Each location was visited on 3 trading or slaughter days, and tattoo presence and readability of porkers (25 to 60 kg of BW), baconers (60 to 90 kg of BW), backfatters (>90 kg of BW but not for breeding), and breeders were recorded. A total of 4,655 pigs were inspected, including 158 DS, 1,599 ES, 1,257 DA, and 1,641 EA. Tattoo performance at the saleyards was influenced by producer (P < 0.05). Average brand presence at the DS (93.0%) did not differ (P = 0.28) from ES (74.2%). Tattoo compliance ranged from 88.3 to 100% of pigs across pig classes (P > 0.05) at DS. At the ES, tattoo compliance among baconers, backfatters, and breeding stock ranged from 82.4 to 88.3% and was greater (P < 0.05) than that of porkers (70.3%). Average readability was 85.4% at ES and 77.6% at DS (P > 0.05). Tattoo compliance differed (P < 0.05) between abattoirs (98.7% at DA and 92.6% at EA). Readability was greater (P < 0.05) at the EA (80.1%) than at the DA (72.0%). Final performance, as readable brands among animals sold or slaughtered, of the official tattoo system was similar between locations and ranged from 63 to 74%. Our results suggest that current compliance and readability of tattoos would compromise traceback to the farm of origin in the event of an emergency animal disease outbreak. Education activities on legislation requirements and tattoo procedure would likely increase compliance and performance of the system. Key words: Australia, identification system, pig, tattoo, readability

A field study was conducted on a 2,300sow piggery in southwestern New South Wales, Australia, over a 17-wk period (from weaning at 4 wk of age) to assess the suitability for lifetime traceability of weaners of 4 identification devices: 1) full duplex ear tag (FDX, Allflex), 2) half duplex ear tag designed for cattle (HDX, Leadertronic), 3) conventional ear tag (Leader), and 4) ear tattoo (Ketchum ear tattoo 101). Visual readability, retention rate, electronic failures, and adverse side effects were assessed at 8 wk after application at both sites and before slaughter at 14 or 17 wk after application at site A and site B, respectively. A total of 394 weaner pigs were randomly assigned after weaning to 6 treatment groups and reared either in small groups in intensive, indoor, concrete-based pens (n -- 224; site A) or in a large group on deep litter (n = 170; site B). Visual readability was similar for all ear tag types before slaughter (P > 0.05); however, visual readability of the ear tattoo was lower (P < 0.05), with between 78.2 and 60.0% illegible due to ink fading. Few tags were lost in the 8-wk period after application; however, tag loss increased for each tag device after this period and varied with housing system. Conventional tag loss was greater among pigs housed at site A (29.0%) than in pigs housed at site B (4.9%) in the 6- to 9-wk period before slaughter. The overall readability of FDX and HDX tags did not differ (P > 0.05) between sites; however, overall readability of FDX tags at 98.4% was better (P < 0.05) than 71.8% for HDX tags. Tag costs ranged from $0.73 for the conventional ear tag to $2.42 for the HDX ear tag. The identification devices did not induce production-limiting adverse effects after they were applied. Under conditions of this study, FDX electronic ear tags were the most efficacious for lifetime identification of weaner pigs on-farm. Key words: ear tag, electronic identification, pig, traceability, weaner

A total of 351 Iberian pigs with equal numbers of both sexes from 2 commercial farms were used to study the ability of various identification devices to guarantee the traceability required for labeled meat products from Iberian pigs reared under extensive production conditions in Spain. The performance of tattoos, visual ear tags, electronic ear tags, and i.p.-injected transponders of half duplex and full duplex technologies were compared during a production cycle from nursery to slaughter at 15 mo of age (156 [+ or -] 3 kg of BW). No major health reactions to any of the identification methods were detected. Results showed that tattooing was not an adequate identification procedure due to reading difficulties as a consequence of dark skin, soiled appearance, and figure deformation. Ear tag losses and failures were affected by fencing type and increased in one of the farms (20.4 and 15.7% for losses and failures, respectively; P < 0.05) as a consequence of using barbed-wire fences. Ear tag losses decreased when fences changed to stone blocks at 365 d of age. Visual and electronic ear tag losses during transport and slaughter were low (3.7% for visual and 3.1% for electronic tag). Results of injectable transponders during the growing-fattening period were variable and were more readable for the half duplex than for the full duplex i.p. transponders (92.0 vs. 68.7% [+ or -] 1.5; P < 0.05). Handheld transceivers worked properly under extensive conditions, although the body size and skin characteristics of the Iberian breed might limit the performance of reading devices, and the use of transceivers with longer reading distances is recommended. The main problem observed with i.p. transponders was their low recovery rate at slaughter due to the lack of adherence of the transponders to the omentum. Key words: ear tag, electronic identification, extensive production, Iberian pig, intraperitoneal transponder, traceability

Traceability during slaughter was studied in 1,581 pigs identified by different devices. Treatments were visual ear tags (n = 1,300), electronic ear tags of different technologies (half-duplex, n = 636; full-duplex, n = 632), and intraperitoneally injected transponders of different technologies (half-duplex 32 mm, n = 645; full-duplex 34 mm, n = 642). Piglets were individually identified at weaning and intensively fed until 100 kg of BW. Pigs were slaughtered in 2 commercial slaughterhouses (including scalding, flaming, and peeling) at different throughputs (450 and 550 pigs/h). Readability during slaughtering was checked visually and using standardized handheld transceivers. No effect of slaughterhouse was detected (P [greater than or equal to] 0.05). Ear tag losses in the slaughtering line were similar for visual (3.7%) and half-duplex (3.5%) but were increased for full-duplex (11.5%; P [less than or equal to] 0.05). Moreover, electronic failures during slaughtering did not differ (P [greater than or equal to] 0.05) between ear tags (half-duplex, 1.1%; full-duplex, 0.6%). Intraperitoneally injected transponders were not affected by slaughtering (retention 100%, no failures), and 89.0% of the transponders were manually recovered from the abdominal viscera in the offal trays. The remaining transponders (11.0%) were lost on the floor, but none were found in the carcasses. No differences (P [greater than or equal to] 0.05) in recovery were observed between intraperitoneal transponders. Considering on-farm and slaughterhouse data, total traceability from farm to carcass release was greater (P [less than or equal to] 0.05) for intraperitoneally injected transponders (98.2%) than for ear tags. Between ear tags, the greatest traceability was obtained with visual tags (95.7%), which differed (P [less than or equal to] 0.05) from electronic tags (half-duplex, 91.4%; full-duplex, 84.5%; P < 0.05). Intraperitoneally injected transponders were an efficient and reliable identification system for tracing pigs from farm to the end of the slaughter line, allowing the transfer of pig identification to the carcass. Adherence of intraperitoneally injected transponders to the viscera should be improved to reduce risks of loss in the meat chain. A dual system based on intraperitoneally injected transponders and plastic ear tags would allow a redundant and automatic reading system that is efficient and reliable for data management and traceability in the swine industry. Key words: electronic identification, ear tag, injectable transponder, pig, traceability

Three types of ceramic mini-boluses, B1 [13.8 g; 10.5 x 51.0 mm (o.d. x length)], B2 (16.2 g; 12.2 x 42.2 mm), and B3 (20.1 g; 11.2 x 56.4 mm), were used to electronically identify as soon as possible after birth a total of 545 lambs of 3 breeds: Ripollesa (meat breed, n = 274), Manchega (dairy breed, n = 129), and Lacaune (dairy breed, n = 142). Boluses were administered by a trained operator using a balling gun or directly by hand. Lambs were also identified with 2 types of plastic ear tags in the left (temporary, 1.5 g) and the right (permanent, 4.1 g) ears. Lamb and identification device performances were checked during suckling (to wk 5 or 7) and fattening. At 24 kg of BW, lambs were slaughtered (n = 385) or kept for breeding (n = 144). No differences in performance were observed between the 2 dairy breeds, and their data were pooled. Minimum BW for bolus administration was lower in dairy than in meat lambs (P < 0.001). Across breeds, B1 and B3 did not differ in lamb age (27 d) and weight (9.2 kg) at administration, but B2 required older and heavier lambs (33 d and 11.1 kg; P < 0.01). Boluses did not affect lamb performance, but final readability at slaughter differed between B1 and B2 (97.7 and 95.2%, respectively) and B3 (100%), and between ear tags (temporary, 98.1; permanent, 100%). Bolus recovery was 100% in all cases, but the proportion of boluses found in the reticulum varied among bolus type (83.3 to 93.8%; P < 0.05). Three B1 (2%) were recovered from the abomasum. In a second experiment, effects of the intermediate mini-bolus (B2) on diet digestibility were evaluated. Digestibility of control and bolus-administered, Manchega ram lambs (14.9 kg of BW; n = 8) fed ad libitum with 2 pelleted concentrates and barley straw was assessed in digestibility crates. Feed intake and nutrient digestibility were measured in four 21-d periods, during which lambs received the 2 diets consecutively. No differences in intake, growth performance, or nutrient digestibility were observed between control and bolused lambs. In conclusion, the B3 mini-bolus proved to be an efficient device for identification of lambs before weaning (recommended age, >4 wk; recommended BW, >10 kg), allowing a reliable traceability of dairy and meat lambs until slaughter. Key words: digestibility, electronic identification, lamb, rumen bolus

Twelve types of electronic identification ruminal boluses of different dimensions were used to obtain a model for predicting their retention in the forestomachs of sheep. Boluses (n = 1,662) were made of ceramic materials, and their dimensions varied in o.d. (9 to 21 mm), length (37 to 68 mm), volume (2.5 to 21.0 mL), and specific gravity (0.85 to 3.91). Each bolus contained a half-duplex, standardized, glass-encapsulated transponder (32 x 3.8 mm). Boluses were administered to sheep (n = 1,497) of different ages by using the appropriate balling guns, and their retention under semiintensive conditions was recorded for at least 2 yr. When a bolus was lost, the sheep was rebolused with a heavier bolus. All sheep wore 2 plastic ear tags: one for the official control of health programs and the other for farm use. To determine the anatomical limit for a bolus passing through the gastrointestinal tract, the size of the reticulo-omasal orifice was measured in 46 adult sheep (male, n = 14; female, n = 32) that died by causes not related to bolus administration during the experiment. No signs of disease or growth alteration were detected in the bolused sheep. Total ear tag losses during the experiment period were 7.5% on average. Bolus retention (5 to 100%) varied according to bolus features and age of the sheep, but it showed a plateau after 18 mo. Inadequately dimensioned boluses were regurgitated or passed through the gastrointestinal tract and were excreted with the feces. The diameter of the reticulo-omasal orifice in adult sheep differed between male and female (23.1 and 21.8 mm, respectively; P < 0.01) and was greater than the o.d. of the retained boluses. Retention rate was predicted from bolus weight and volume by a logistic regression ([R.sup.2] = 0.997; P < 0.001). When retention data from the literature (59.0 to 100%) were included in the model, the adjustment was slightly lower ([R.sup.2] = 0.967). As a result, the minimum bolus weight estimated to reach a 99.5% retention rate in sheep varied between 16 and 45 g when volume varied between 3 and 22 mL, for boluses with a specific gravity between 2.0 and 5.2. In conclusion, bolus retention rate in sheep varied dramatically according to their features. For safe and efficient retention of electronic identification boluses in sheep, boluses of small volume and diameter (e.g., Key words: electronic identification, ruminal bolus, sheep, traceability, transponder

A total of 1,822 pigs from 2 farms (farm A, n = 1,032; farm B, n = 790) were used to evaluate pig traceability under on-farm conditions by using identification devices (n = 4,434) of different technologies. The devices were visual ear tags (n = 1,533; Model 1, n = 776; Model 2, n = 757), electronic ear tags (n = 1,446; half-duplex, n = 702; full-duplex, n = 744), and intraperitoneally injected transponders (n = 1,455; half-duplex, n = 732; full-duplex, n = 723). A group of 790 pigs wore 3 types of devices, and 1,032 wore 2 devices. Piglets were identified before (wk 1 to 3 of age; farm A) or after (wk 3 to 4 of age; farm B) weaning and intensively fattened until approximately 100 kg of BW. Readability of devices was checked at each farm operation by using standardized handheld transceivers. No negative effects of the identification devices on animal health (mortality rate, 8.4%) or performance were detected. On-farm losses averaged 1.6% for ear tags (visual, 0.8%; half-duplex, 1.9%; full-duplex, 2.7%; P > 0.05) and 1.8% for intraperitoneally injected transponders (half-duplex, 1.7%; full-duplex, 1.9%; P > 0.05). Moreover, 1.4% electronic failures occurred in the electronic ear tags (half-duplex, 2.2%; full-duplex, 0.6%; P < 0.05) but not in the intraperitoneally injected transponders. Final on-farm readability was greater (P < 0.05) for visual ear tags (99.2%) than for electronic ear tags (half-duplex, 95.9%; full-duplex, 96.7%; P > 0.05). Readability for intraperitoneally injected transponders was intermediate (half-duplex, 98.3%; full-duplex, 98.1%; P > 0.05). Electronic devices were in all cases easier and faster to read than the visual ear tags. Visual ear tags and intraperitoneally injected transponders were efficiently retained under conditions of commercial pig farms, which agrees with the minimum values recommended by the International Committee for Animal Recording (>98%). When readability and reading ease were also included as decision criteria, injectable transponders were preferred. Key words: ear tag, electronic identification, injectable transponder, pig, traceability

A total of 1,203 beef calves were used to evaluate 2 series of electronic identification boluses. Calves were intensively fattened and slaughtered at approximately 1 yr of age. Series 1 (n = 576 calves) consisted of 10 types of boluses with the same external dimensions (o.d. x length: 21 x 68 mm) but varying in weight (11 to 75 g) and specific gravity (0.63 to 3.36). Six boluses were made of ceramic (5 prototypes and 1 commercial bolus) and 4 were tubes made of plastic filled with concrete. Series 2 (n = 627 calves) consisted of 3 prototypes and 5 commercial boluses of different ceramic materials varying in external dimensions (o.d.: 15 to 21 mm; length: 39 to 78 mm), weight (20 to 73 g), and specific gravity (3.00 to 3.87). Boluses were administered to milk-fed calves (2 to 5 wk of age) by using adapted balling guns. To determine the anatomical limit for a bolus passing through the gastrointestinal tract, the size of the reticulo-omasal orifice was measured in 90 male and 62 female fattened calves at slaughter. Three calves in series 1 (0.3%) could not swallow the 21-mm (o.d.) bolus at the first attempt and received the bolus 1 wk later. No problems for early administration were found with thinner boluses (o.d. Key words: cattle, electronic identification, ruminal bolus, traceability, transponder

A total of 557 newborn piglets were used to compare eight identification devices, including one plastic ear tag as a control (C, n = 348) and two types of electronic ear tags (El, n = 106; and E2, n = 103), and five types of injectable transponders (n = 557): small 12-mm (D12, n = 116; and S12, n = 110), medium 23-mm (T23, n = 108), and large (32-mm, T32, n = 115; and 34-mm, S34, n = 108). Injections were made s.c. in the auricle base (n = 248) and intraperitoneally (n = 309) using a new technique. All piglets were identified with two devices, but using electronic ear tags in conjunction with injection in the auricle was avoided on the same pig. Readability of devices was checked during fattening (until 110 kg BW) and slaughtering. On-farm losses were lower for control than for electronic ear tags (C = 1.1%; E1 = 8.8%; and E2 = 44.9%; P < 0.01); the latter also suffered electronic failures (El = 5.5%; and E2 = 55.1%; P < 0.001). On-farm losses of transponders injected in the auricle base were greater in large ($34 = 72.5%; and T32 = 46.3%; P < 0.05) than in small transponders (S12 = 19.4%; and D12 = 17.1%), but T23 (29.8%) only differed from S34. Transponder size did not affect on-farm losses for intraperitoneal injections in which only one loss was recorded (0.4%). All ear tags had similar losses during transportation to the slaughterhouse (1.2%), but no losses were observed in injectables. Slaughtering losses did not differ between ear tags (C = 11.2%; and E1 = 6.4%), but apart from losses, 12.8% of E1 failed electronically. Injection site affected losses and breakages during slaughtering (auricle base = 6.4%; and intraperitoneal = 0%), but recovery time did not significantly differ (auricle base = 28.6 s; and intraperitoneal = 18.9 s). Transponders in the auricle base were recovered by sight (30.2%), palpation (27.4%), or by cutting (42.5%). Intraperitoneal transponders were mainly recovered loose in the abdominal cavity (81.4%), whereas 18.6% fell on the floor. As a result, traceability varied significantly (P < 0.05) between control (86.7%) and electronic ear tags (0 to 68.1%) and injectable transponders, with the auricle base (17.8 to 75.0%) having lower values than intraperitoneal (98 to 100%). Intraperitoneal injection was a very effective tool for piglet identification and traceability, ensuring the transfer of information from farm to slaughterhouse. To warrant the use of this technique in practice, transponder recovery requires further investigation. Key Words: Ear Tag, Electronic Identification, Swine, Traceability, Transponder