TY - JOUR
T1 - A systematic review of equid welfare at slaughter
AU - Fletcher, K.A.
AU - Limon, G
AU - Whatford, L.J.
AU - Grist, Andrew
AU - Knowles, Toby G
AU - Gibson, Troy
N1 - Funding Information:
This work is part of a PhD project funded by World Horse Welfare. The authors would also like to acknowledge the assistance of the library staff at the Royal Veterinary College in tracing some articles.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2022/6/14
Y1 - 2022/6/14
N2 - Guidance surrounding equine slaughter varies globally and lacks published evidence, limiting practical application,
causing industry confusion and potentially compromised welfare at all stages of the slaughter process,
both ante- and post-mortem. Existing research in this field was systematically reviewed, with gaps in the literature
assessed. Four databases were searched: PubMed, CAB Abstracts, Science Direct and Google Scholar, using
a combination of different search terms. Predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied with studies
required to be novel research, on the welfare of equids or comparable species, relevant to the research question.
Full articles were assessed for reliability, repeatability, potential bias and study design.
In total, 2194 articles were screened, and an additional 35 articles were identified via peer-networks and after
a snowball search of reference lists. After screening, 105 studies were identified for inclusion in the review. Of
these, 101 (96%) were peer-reviewed journal articles and 4 (4%) were grey literature. Thirty-two (30%) looked
at equid slaughter specifically with conflicting findings regarding slaughter efficacy. Similar to other species,
there was overall agreement on horses showing stress-related behaviour prior to slaughter. Most studies (n = 76,
72%) were conducted in High-Income Countries and not countries where equid slaughter is estimated to be most
prolific. There was no published research on the efficiency of stunning or slaughter of donkeys or mules. In
conclusion, this systematic review found a shortage of published research assessing equid welfare at slaughter,
particularly donkeys and mules in low-income countries, highlighting the need to urgently develop an evidence
base for improving guidance in this area
AB - Guidance surrounding equine slaughter varies globally and lacks published evidence, limiting practical application,
causing industry confusion and potentially compromised welfare at all stages of the slaughter process,
both ante- and post-mortem. Existing research in this field was systematically reviewed, with gaps in the literature
assessed. Four databases were searched: PubMed, CAB Abstracts, Science Direct and Google Scholar, using
a combination of different search terms. Predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied with studies
required to be novel research, on the welfare of equids or comparable species, relevant to the research question.
Full articles were assessed for reliability, repeatability, potential bias and study design.
In total, 2194 articles were screened, and an additional 35 articles were identified via peer-networks and after
a snowball search of reference lists. After screening, 105 studies were identified for inclusion in the review. Of
these, 101 (96%) were peer-reviewed journal articles and 4 (4%) were grey literature. Thirty-two (30%) looked
at equid slaughter specifically with conflicting findings regarding slaughter efficacy. Similar to other species,
there was overall agreement on horses showing stress-related behaviour prior to slaughter. Most studies (n = 76,
72%) were conducted in High-Income Countries and not countries where equid slaughter is estimated to be most
prolific. There was no published research on the efficiency of stunning or slaughter of donkeys or mules. In
conclusion, this systematic review found a shortage of published research assessing equid welfare at slaughter,
particularly donkeys and mules in low-income countries, highlighting the need to urgently develop an evidence
base for improving guidance in this area
KW - animal welfare
KW - Equine
KW - slaughter
KW - Stunning
KW - Systematic review
U2 - 10.1016/j.livsci.2022.104988
DO - 10.1016/j.livsci.2022.104988
M3 - Article (Academic Journal)
SN - 1871-1413
VL - 263
JO - Livestock Science
JF - Livestock Science
IS - 104988
M1 - 104988
ER -