Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Poultry Science logoLink to Poultry Science
. 2014 Jan 21;93(2):448–455. doi: 10.3382/ps.2013-03444

Evaluation of a commercially available organic acid product on body weight loss, carcass yield, and meat quality during preslaughter feed withdrawal in broiler chickens: A poultry welfare and economic perspective1

A Menconi *, V A Kuttappan *, X Hernandez-Velasco †, T Urbano ‡, F Matté ‡, S Layton §, G Kallapura *, J Latorre *, B E Morales #, O Prado ‖, J L Vicente , J Barton , R L Andreatti Filho **, M Lovato ††, B M Hargis *, G Tellez *,2
PMCID: PMC4990882  PMID: 24570468

Abstract

The effect of a commercial organic acid (OA) product on BW loss (BWL) during feed withdrawal and transportation, carcass yield, and meat quality was evaluated in broiler chickens. Two experiments were conducted in Brazil. Commercial houses were paired as control groups receiving regular water and treated groups receiving OA in the water. Treated birds had a reduction in BWL of 37 g in experiment 1 and 32.2 g in experiment 2. In experiment 2, no differences were observed in carcass yield between groups. Estimation of the cost benefit suggested a 1:16 ratio by using the OA. In experiment 3, conducted in Mexico, significant differences on water consumption, BWL, and meat quality characteristics were observed in chickens that were treated with the OA (P < 0.05). These data suggest this OA product may improve animal welfare and economic concerns in the poultry industry by reducing BWL and improving meat quality attributes.

Keywords: organic acid, chicken, welfare, transportation, meat quality

INTRODUCTION

Global potential for poultry acidifiers, for both feed and water, are on the rise due to higher demand for top quality poultry, which is also true for most of the other animal production operations including swine and cattle (Berkhout, 2009). A global strategic business report on feed acidifiers revealed that the growth potential in the feed acidifiers market is expected to remain robust and expected to rise, mostly attributed to the increasing demand for safe and high-quality pork and poultry meat. Growing awareness and increasing adoption of the use of acidifiers in emerging countries, coupled with escalating demand in the developing world, has expanded the market for these acidifiers (Companies and Markets, 2012).

Europe continues to be the largest regional market with high demand for feed acidifiers in specific, primarily attributed to its large pig and poultry populations, supported largely by legislation that bans the use of antibiotics in feed. Organic acid (OA) based feed acidifiers have gained significance due to their high nutritional value and antimicrobial benefits. Major countries dominating the production scene for feed acidifiers include the United States, China, Brazil, Mexico, and Japan, and demand is on the rise in developing regions such as Latin America, Asia-Pacific, and the Middle East (Companies and Markets, 2012).

Most of the research and subsequent applications has been involving feed acidifiers as a preventive or treatment tool for disease management or to improve bird performance. The inclusion of various OA or their salts to diets is shown to improve the growth performance by enhancing the nutrient digestibility and affecting the microbial populations in different parts of the digestive tract (Tung and Pettigrew, 2011). The use of OA or other acidifiers in water management for poultry operations is a subject of much conversation between growers, veterinarians, and live production personnel. Further, research involving the establishment of preferred pH for poultry, its effects on water consumption and eventually poultry welfare, has been limited. Using an OA-based drinking water at critical periods of poultry growth is said to establish and maintain intestinal development by the stability of the intestinal microflora, eventually improving live production performance and cost.

Acidifying drinking water for poultry for the first 7 d of life, when the birds are first placed into the house, is considered critical, because the crop and intestinal microbial morphology would still be under development. Maintenance of low crop pH by the lactic acid bacteria (LAB) in newly hatched poults and chicks is critical. The acidified drinking water provides a second layer of protection to the LAB and helps to establish them as a part of the crop's normal ecology. Once the crop's LAB population has been established, the bird will be able to maintain a low crop pH on its own as long as feed is available.

Feed withdrawal (FW) for various reasons or when chickens and turkeys are not eating for any reason, leads to an imbalance in the natural population of LAB, leading to an increase in pH, favoring pathogens such as Salmonella to multiply in the crop. Preslaughter FW is a method commonly employed to reduce carcass contamination (Corrier et al., 1999; Byrd et al., 2001; Northcutt et al., 2003; Yi et al., 2005). However, carcass shrinkage (carcass dehydration) begins immediately after FW (Benibo and Farr, 1985; Veerkamp, 1986), resulting in recommendations that slaughter take place within 4 to 8 h after FW to minimize losses. Nevertheless, under commercial conditions, this time may be hard to achieve. Consequently, scheduling managers need to consider FW effects on both gut fullness and shrinkage.

In addition to FW, chickens must endure stress during catching, crating transport, and shackling (Gregory, 1994; Petracci et al., 2006). All these factors as well as the total time from FW to slaughter have important implications in welfare of the birds, economics for the poultry industry, and meat quality for consumers (Gregory, 1996; Kannan et al., 1997; den Hertog-Meischke et al., 1997). In poultry and other species, transport-related economic losses are due to mortality, carcass shrinkage, and carcass condemnation (Veerkamp, 1986).

Previously, our laboratory conducted a study in broiler chickens showing that a commercially available water treatment product (Optimizer) significantly reduced carcass condemnation at the processing plant and mortality during transportation, with consistent improvement of average BW at the farm and at the processing plant in broiler chickens (Wolfenden et al., 2007a). In a similar study, the treatment with Optimizer in the drinking water of commercial turkeys during FW showed a significant reduction in the rate of weight loss during transportation and holding at the processing plant in the treated turkeys and improved average BW in treated turkeys during 19 h with an average of 90-g difference (Pixley et al., 2010). Both studies measured BW loss (BWL) during holding at the processing plant and the ability to mitigate that loss by treatment with OA before catching. It seems likely that dehydration progressively results in negative welfare for the animal, and the rate of BW change has the potential to be used as a metric in evaluating welfare status of commercial poultry (Warriss et al., 1993; Savenije et al., 2002; Rosenvold and Andersen, 2003; Pixley et al., 2010). Our research has shown the potential to reduce the rate of BWL by administering OA in the drinking water during FW and transportation to the processing plant. In the present study, Optimizer was used in different commercial broiler companies in Brazil and Mexico to evaluate BWL during FW as well as during transportation to the processing plant. Carcass yield and meat quality during preslaughter FW was also assessed, and the implications of poultry welfare and economic results are discussed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

OA

An OA product (Optimizer, Pacific Vet Group-USA Inc., Fayetteville, AR) was used in the drinking water during FW according to manufacturer's directions (4 L of Optimizer/1,000 L of water). This commercial OA product is a combination of 5 different OA (lactic, acetic, tannic, propionic, and caprylic acids) that contains proprietary flavoring agents. This OA product has been shown to reduce Salmonella colonization in crop and cecal tonsils without affecting water consumption in chickens (Jarquin et al., 2007; Vicente et al., 2007; Wolfenden et al., 2007b).

Experimental Design

Experiment 1. Effect of the OA Product on BWL During Preslaughter FW and Transportation Under Commercial Conditions in Different States of Brazil.

In experiment 1, 5 trials were conducted in 5 different commercial poultry farms located in 3 different states of Brazil (Table 1). Furthermore, the individual trials were done during the year 2012, with birds having different age and subjected to various FW, transportation, and total fasting periods. In all these trials, houses were designated as control groups receiving regular water and as treated groups receiving OA in the water at a concentration of 4 L/1,000 L of water (vol/vol) according to the manufacturer's directions. In trial 3, 8 commercial chicken houses of market age broiler chickens were paired. In all other trials, 2 commercial chicken houses were paired. A total of 35 birds per house treatment were neck tagged and individually weighed before the FW period and at the time of arrival to the processing facility (after the transportation). The difference between the above 2 BW was taken to determine the BWL under preslaughter commercial conditions. Later, a cost benefit analysis was performed based on the BWL to estimate the economic benefit in administering OA in broiler chickens.

Table 1.

Experimental designs for experiments 1 and 2 in Brazil

Time (h)
Item State Date Age (d) FW period Transportation period Total fasting
Experiment 1
 Trial 1 Minas Gerais March 2012 46 8 1 9
 Trial 2 Minas Gerais April 2012 43 8 1 9
 Trial 3 Paraná March 2012 42 6 5 11
 Trial 4 Paraná May 2012 45 6 5 11
 Trial 5 Paraná March 2012 42 7 3 10
 Trial 6 Mato Grosso do Sul January 2012 44 3 10 13
Experiment 2
 Single trial Paraná November 2012 47 8 2 10
Open in a new tab

Experiment 2. Effect of the OA Product on Carcass Yield in Broiler Chickens in Brazil.

This experiment was performed in November 2012 in a poultry farm located in the state of Paraná. Sixteen commercial chicken houses of market age broiler chickens (47 d of age) were paired. In this experiment, 8 houses were designated as control groups receiving regular water and 8 houses as treated groups receiving OA in the water at a concentration of 4 L/1,000 L of water (vol/vol), according to the manufacturer's directions. At each farm, 40 tagged market age broilers per house treatment were individually weighed after FW period and at the time of arrival to the processing facility. Feed withdrawal time was 8 h, and transportation was 2 h, which was a total fasting time of 10 h. Carcass yield was also calculated for the same 40 tagged birds.

Experiment 3. Effect of OA on Water Consumption, BWL, and Meat Quality Measurements During 8 h Preslaughter FW in Broiler Chickens from Mexico.

A total of 240 forty-day-old female Cobb 500 broilers were obtained from a commercial farm (Colima, Mexico) and moved to isolation facilities at CVM, University of Colima, Mexico. Broilers were neck tagged and randomly assigned to 8 pens, 4 controls and 4 treated, each pen measuring 3 m2 with 30 birds per pen and provided finisher feeder and water ad libitum. Broilers were kept in a temperature-controlled room at 30°C. At 42 d of age, all chickens were weighed and treatment was initiated to 4 pens by adding the OA in the drinking water. Control groups receiving regular water and treated groups receiving OA in the water adjusted to a concentration of 4 L/1,000 L of water (vol/vol) according to the manufacturer's directions. When treatment was initiated, feed was removed from the control and treatment pens and water consumption was monitored in all pens. After 8 h of treatment, all broilers were weighed and final water consumption recorded. Three birds from each pen were humanely killed by cervical dislocation. Breast muscles (pectoralis major) were removed immediately and stored individually in plastic bags at 4°C for 24 h for further analysis of meat quality measurements.

Meat Quality Measurements

At 24 h postmortem, the breast meat pH was determined on individual fillets according to the method as described by Qiao et al. (2002). The pH was determined using a model pH/ISE meter, calibrated at pH 4.0 and 7.0, and was conducted on the medial bone side as follows: a cut approximately 0.5 cm in length and depth was made in the meat, and a drop of deionized water was placed in the cut to improve contact with the pH probe. The probe was rinsed with deionized water and was dried with a filter between samples, and was cleaned with alcohol after every lot of 3 fillets.

The complete International Commission on Illumination system color profile of lightness (L*), redness (a*), and yellowness (b*) was measured on the cranial and medial surface (bone side) using a reflectance colorimeter (Minolta Chroma Meter CR-10, Minolta, Osaka, Japan), in an area free of obvious color defects (bruises, blood spots, or surface discolorations) at room temperature (25 ± 2°C), immediately after samples were tagged. Measurements were made on the medial surface to avoid breast fillet surface discolorations due to possible over scalding in the plant. Color values were calibrated using a Minolta calibration plate (L* = 60.5, a* = −3.2, and b* = +6.7).

Water-holding capacity (WHC) of the breast meat samples were measured according to the method as described by Lu et al. (2006), with some modifications. A 0.3-g sample of breast muscle was pressed onto an oven-dried Whatman 125 mm filter paper at 13,789,500 Pa (2,000 psi) for 1 min. The WHC values were calculated as the ratio of the area of expressed water to the area of the pressed meat sample, measured with a planimeter. Therefore, a lower ratio indicates a greater WHC.

Thawing loss (TL) was measured according to Mortensen et al. (2006). Immediately before freezing, samples were weighed. The frozen samples were thawed over a period of 24 h at 4°C and weighed again. The TL was determined as the percentage of BWL after thawing.

Drip loss (DL) was conducted according to Berri et al. (2008). The muscle samples were weighed and immediately placed in a plastic bag, hung from a hook, and stored at 4°C for 48 h. After hanging, the sample was wiped with absorbent paper and weighed again. The difference in weight corresponded to the DL and was expressed as the percentage of the initial muscle weight.

For cook loss (CL), the individually weighed fillets were placed on stainless steel trays and cooked for 30 min at 98°C in steam. Upon removal from the oven, the fillets were covered with plastic film and allowed to equilibrate to room temperature (25°C). Individual fillets were then reweighed to determine CL.

Data Analysis

Body weight, carcass yield, and meat quality data collected were subjected to one-way ANOVA using the GLM procedure of SAS, with significance reported at P < 0.05, means were further separated using Duncan's multiple range test (2002, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC).

Formulas and Estimated Values

graphic file with name M1.gif
graphic file with name M2.gif
graphic file with name M3.gif
graphic file with name M4.gif
graphic file with name M5.gif
graphic file with name M6.gif

RESULTS

The results of the effect of the OA on BWL during preslaughter FW and transportation under commercial conditions in different states of Brazil from experiment 1 are summarized in Table 2. In trials 1, 2, and 5, a significant reduction in BWL was observed in the chickens treated with OA compared with control birds (P < 0.05), and numerical reduction in trials 3 and 4. Overall average from all 5 trials, treated birds had a reduction in BWL of 37 g compared with control nontreated chickens. Similar results have been reported previously (Wolfenden et al., 2007a; Pixley et al., 2010).

Table 2.

Effect of the organic acid product (OA) on BW loss during preslaughter feed withdrawal and transportation under commercial conditions in different states of Brazil from experiment 11

Trial Treatment Initial BW (g) BW after transportation (g) BW change (g)
Trial 1 Control 2,761 ± 43a 2,578 ± 50a −183 ± 23b
OA 2,796 ± 57a 2,682 ± 57a −114 ± 12a
 BW difference 69
Trial 2 Control 2,674 ± 39b 2,533 ± 37b −141 ± 12b
OA 2,797 ± 31a 2,702 ± 31a −95 ± 6a
 BW difference 46
Trial 3 Control 3,069 ± 68a 2,995 ± 74a −74 ± 37a
OA 3,044 ± 65a 2,992 ± 54a −52 ± 12a
 BW difference 22
Trial 4 Control 3,202 ± 64a 3,158 ± 65a −44 ± 82a
OA 3,183 ± 63a 3,159 ± 62a −24 ± 79a
 BW difference 20
Trial 5 Control 2,793 ± 70a 2,724 ± 64a −69 ± 7b
OA 2,757 ± 57a 2,736 ± 60a −21 ± 5a
 BW difference 48
Average BW difference 37
Open in a new tab

a,bDifferent superscripts within rows of each trial indicate significant differences (P < 0.05), n = 35 birds.

1BW data are expressed as means ± SE.

The results of the effect of the OA product on carcass yield in broiler chickens in Brazil from experiment 2 are summarized in Table 3. In this experiment, a numerical reduction of 32.2 g of BWL was observed in treated chickens compared with control nontreated chickens. Remarkably, no differences were observed in carcass weight and carcass yield between treated and control chickens. Carcass yield (%) in control chickens was 76 versus 75.9% in OA-treated chickens.

Table 3.

Effect of the organic acid (OA) product on BW and carcass yield in broiler chickens in Brazil from experiment 21

Item Control OA
Initial BW (g) 3,040 ± 31a 2,990 ± 33a
BW after transportation (g) 3,004 ± 31a 2,986 ± 32a
BW loss (g) 36.8 ± 37a 4.8 ± 32a
Difference (g) 32.2
Carcass weight (g) 2,967 ± 37a 2,981 ± 38a
Carcass yield (%) 76.0 75.9
Difference (%) 0.1
Open in a new tab

aP > 0.05, n = 40 birds.

1BW data are expressed as mean ± SE.

The economic analysis from experiments 1 and 2 on chickens treated with the OA product is shown in Table 4. From this analysis, the reduction in BWL when converted to a cost:benefit ratio suggested that for every $1 US spent with this OA product, producers were able to recover on average $16 US.

Table 4.

Cost:benefit ratio of organic acid (OA) product from experiments 1 and 2

Trial and state Cost:benefit ratio1 ($, US)
Experiment 1
 Trial 1, Minas Gerais 1:15
 Trial 2, Minas Gerais 1:12
 Trial 3, Paraná 1:14
 Trial 4, Paraná 1:17
 Trial 5, Mato Grosso do Sul 1:17
Experiment 2
 Trial 1, Paraná 1:20
Overall average 1:16
Open in a new tab

1Estimated according to the numbers of broiler chickens/house treated with OA.

Table 5 summarizes the effect of OA on BWL in broiler chickens during 10 h preslaughter FW, from experiment 3. As it has been shown previously (Jarquin et al., 2007; Vicente et al., 2007), unlike treatment with lactic or formic acid (Byrd et al., 2001), the OA treatment used in the present study showed a significant increase in water consumption that was associated with a significant minor BWL after 10 h of FW compared with nontreated birds. Table 6 summarizes the results of OA on raw breast meat color, chemical composition, pH, moisture, and water-holding characteristics in broiler chickens after 10 h of FW from broilers in experiment 3. A significant increase in lightness, redness, DL, and CL with a significant reduction on meat pH, moisture, and WHC was observed in nontreated chickens compared with OA-treated chickens.

Table 5.

Effect of organic acids on BW loss in broiler chickens during 10 h preslaughter feed withdrawal in Mexico from experiment 31

Item Control Optimizer
Water consumption (mL/bird) 38 ± 3b 54 ± 5a
Initial BW (g) 2,830 ± 50a 2,798 ± 43a
BW after 10 h of feed withdrawal (g) 2,657 ± 35b 2,672 ± 54a
BW loss (g) 176 ± 45a 128 ± 57b
Difference (g) 48 37
Open in a new tab

a,bTreatments values within rows with no common superscript differ significantly (P < 0.05).

1Data are expressed as mean ± SE. Each group with 4 replicates of n = 30 each replicate.

Table 6.

Effect of the organic acids on raw breast meat color, pH, moisture, and water-holding characteristics in broiler chickens during preslaughter feed withdrawal in Mexico from experiment 31

Breast meat characteristic Water-holding characteristic (%)
Treatment Lightness (L*) Redness (a*) Yellowness (b*) pH Moisture Water-holding capacity Thawing loss Drip loss Cook loss
Control 40.4 ± 0.7a 5.6 ± 0.1a 10.3 ± 0.9a 5.4 ± 0.2a 69.6 ± 0.7b 65.4 ± 0.3b 5.4 ± 0.5a 6.8 ± 0.2a 36.1 ± 0.7a
Organic acids 37.4 ± 0.1b 4.7 ± 0.3b 11.4 ± 0.5a 6.0 ± 0.1b 72.0 ± 0.3a 68.2 ± 0.5a 5.0 ± 0.6a 4.1 ± 0.5b 33.4 ± 0.9b
Open in a new tab

a,bTreatment values within columns with no common superscript differ significantly (P < 0.05), n = 12 birds.

1Data expressed as means ± SE.

DISCUSSION

Prior to slaughter, broiler chickens are exposed to many handlings and conditions such as FW, catching, crating, transport, and shackling that have a profound impact in their welfare (Ali et al., 1999; Akşit et al., 2006; Petracci et al., 2006; Vanderhasselt et al., 2013). Under those stressful circumstances, energy reserves of the birds can be severely affected, modifying their metabolic state at slaughter, which has a negative effect in the final meat quality for the consumers (Gregory, 1996; Kannan et al., 1997; Ali et al., 1999; Petracci et al., 2001).

Feed withdrawal is a common practice that is intended to reduce fecal contamination of carcasses; however, during transport and lairage birds also experience water withdrawal (Corrier et al., 1999; Northcutt et al., 2003). All things considered (FW, crating time, transport, and lairage) could add a minimal of 9 h of feed deprivation, although infrequently, much longer times have been reported (Warriss et al., 1990), which will lead to significant carcass shrinkage (Veerkamp, 1986). Nevertheless, lack of feed and water has been reported to reduce glycogen levels in liver following as little as 3 h of FW (Warriss et al., 1988), which has also correlated with a significant decrease in postmortem liver pH (Warriss et al., 1993).

In the present study, the use of the OA product showed a significant or numerical reduction in BWL during FW period and transportation (Tables 2, 3, and 5). The combination of the OA used in the Optimizer could have helped to improve the weight loss (Jarquin et al., 2007), even though the use of individual OA alone did not produce such an effect (Byrd et al., 2001). This implies that Optimizer had a benefit from the bird welfare point of view that it did not cause much dehydration, in addition to its documented Salmonella-recovery reductions in market age broilers when administered during the preslaughter FW period (Jarquin et al., 2007; Wolfenden et al., 2007a).

The significant increase in lightness and redness, increase drip and cooking loss as well as significant reduction on meat pH, moisture, and WHC observed in control nontreated chickens compared with OA-treated chickens (Table 6), suggest that the increased water consumption observed in previous studies (Jarquin et al., 2007; Vicente et al., 2007; Wolfenden et al., 2007a) and confirmed in this study (Table 5) may improve the physiological hydration state of the birds. From the results of carcass yield in experiment 2, where percentage carcass yield had a slight difference of 0.1% between treated and control group (yet a numerical difference in BWL of 32.2 g) and meat quality results observed in experiment 3 (Tables 3 and 6), we can infer that, perhaps, the increase water consumption induced by this OA product is retained in the muscle and is not released in feces/urine or when blood and viscera are removed. This observation was supported in the present study by a consistent significant or numerical improvement in BWL (Tables 2, 3, and 5).

Several investigators have shown that the distribution and mobility of water in muscle (myowater) and meat have a profound influence on essential meat quality (Benibo and Farr, 1985; Castellini et al., 2002; Bertram et al., 2003; Pearce et al., 2011). During the conversion of the living muscle to meat and during aging, the myowater content, location, and mobility will change as a function of numerous mutual interacting factors of both ante and postmortem biochemistry (Ali et al., 1999; Bertram et al., 2003; Bond et al., 2004; Akşit et al., 2006). After death, oxygen supply is stopped, and energy has to be generated under anaerobic conditions resulting in accumulation of lactic acid, which decrease the pH of the muscle and affect the color of the meat and WHC due to protein breakdown (Warriss and Brown, 1987). When this anaerobic energy supply fails, rigor mortis appears (Maribo et al., 1998), which is directly correlated with the glycogen reserves of the birds and the metabolic state of the muscle before slaughter. The cessation of postmortem energy production in chickens has been reported to happen within 6 h of FW (Grey et al., 1974).

The WHC of chicken meat products is related to final carcass yield which affect economics and eating quality such as juiciness and tenderness (Zamorano and Gambaruto, 1997; Dai et al., 2009). Several ante mortem and postmortem factors have been reported to affect the conversion of living muscle to meat as well as the location and content of the myowater (Pearce et al., 2011). Therefore, any loss of water reduces the weight of the product, which contributes to financial loss through loss of salable product. Most of the water in the muscle fibers is present in the myofibrils, which represent about 80% of the muscle volume (Cheng and Sun, 2008). When the muscles are cut, a red fluid, called drip, exudes from the cut surfaces. This solution consists primarily of myoglobin and glycolytic enzymes (Cavitt and Sams, 2003). Excessive DL not only affects the final yield of the carcass, it also affects the protein concentration of the meat and represent a safety concern because this fluid is an excellent nutrient broth for spoiling and pathogenic bacteria (den Hertog-Meischke et al., 1997; Castellini et al., 2002; Pedersen et al., 2003; Northcutt et al., 2003). This is the first report that demonstrate that this OA induced increased water consumption and reduction of BWL during FW, catching, crating, transport, and shackling of poultry, which are associated with a positive improvement of meat quality attributes, such as color of the meat, pH, moisture, and overall water holding characteristics (higher WHC and lower DL and CL). Furthermore, the reduction in BWL when converted to a cost:benefit ratio suggested that for every US dollar spent on this OA product, producers may be able to recover on average $16 US.

Footnotes

1

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), which permits noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

REFERENCES

  1. Akşit M., Yalçin S., Özkan S., Metin K., Özdemir D. Effects of temperature during rearing and crating on stress parameters and meat quality of broilers. Poult. Sci. 2006;85:1867–1874. doi: 10.1093/ps/85.11.1867. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ali A. S., Harrison A. P., Jensen J. F. Effects of some ante-mortem stressors on peri-mortem and postmortem biochemical changes and tenderness in broiler breast muscle: A review. World's Poult. Sci. J. 1999;55:403–414. [Google Scholar]
  3. Benibo B., Farr A. The effects of feed and water withdrawal and holding shed treatments on broiler yield parameters. Poult. Sci. 1985;64:920–924. [Google Scholar]
  4. Berkhout N. Poultry feed acidifiers—Global trends. WorldPoultry. 2009. Accessed Jun. 2013. http://www.worldpoultry.net/Home/General/2009/12/Report-Poultry-feed-acidifiers---global-trends-WP004610W/
  5. Berri C., Besnard J., Relandeau C. Increasing dietary lysine increases final pH and decreases drip loss of broiler breast meat. Poult. Sci. 2008;87:480–484. doi: 10.3382/ps.2007-00226. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bertram H. C., Andersen H. J., Karlsson A. H., Horn P., Hedegaard J., Nørgaard L., Engelsen S. B. Prediction of technological quality (cooking loss and Napole yield) of pork based on fresh meat characteristics. Meat Sci. 2003;65:707–712. doi: 10.1016/S0309-1740(02)00272-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bond J., Can L., Warner R. The effect of exercise stress, adrenaline injection and electrical stimulation on changes in quality attributes and proteins in Semimembranosus muscle of lamb. Meat Sci. 2004;68:469–477. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2004.05.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Byrd J., Hargis B., Caldwell D., Bailey R., Herron K., McReynolds J., Brewer R. L., Anderson R. C., Bischoff K. M., Callaway T. R., Kubena L. F. Effect of lactic acid administration in the drinking water during preslaughter feed withdrawal on Salmonella and Campylobacter contamination of broilers. Poult. Sci. 2001;80:278–283. doi: 10.1093/ps/80.3.278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Castellini C., Mugnai C., Dal Bosco A. Effect of organic production system on broiler carcass and meat quality. Meat Sci. 2002;60:219–225. doi: 10.1016/s0309-1740(01)00124-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Cavitt L. C., Sams A. Evaluation of physical dimension changes as nondestructive measurements for monitoring rigor mortis development in broiler muscles. Poult. Sci. 2003;82:1198–1204. doi: 10.1093/ps/82.7.1198. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Cheng Q., Sun D. W. Factors affecting the water holding capacity of red meat products: A review of recent research advances. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2008;48:137–159. doi: 10.1080/10408390601177647. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Companies and Markets. Feed Acidifiers: A Global Strategic Business Report. Ban on animal feed antibiotics throws spotlight on feed acidifiers. London, United Kingdom. 2012. Accessed Jun. 2013. http://www.companiesandmarkets.com/Market/Chemicals/Market-Research/Feed-Acidifiers-A-Global-Strategic-Business-Report/RPT933926.
  13. Corrier D., Byrd J., Hargis B., Hume M., Bailey R., Stanker L. Presence of Salmonella in the crop and ceca of broiler chickens before and after preslaughter feed withdrawal. Poult. Sci. 1999;78:45–49. doi: 10.1093/ps/78.1.45. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Dai S., Wang L., Wen A., Wang L., Jin G. Dietary glutamine supplementation improves growth performance, meat quality and colour stability of broilers under heat stress. Br. Poult. Sci. 2009;50:333–340. doi: 10.1080/00071660902806947. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. den Hertog-Meischke M., Van Laack R., Smulders F. The water-holding capacity of fresh meat. Vet. Q. 1997;19:175–181. doi: 10.1080/01652176.1997.9694767. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Gregory N. Preslaughter handling, stunning and slaughter. Meat Sci. 1994;36:45–56. doi: 10.1016/0309-1740(94)90032-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Gregory N. Welfare and hygiene during preslaughter handling. Meat Sci. 1996;43S1:35–46. doi: 10.1016/0309-1740(96)00053-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Grey T. C., Jones J. M., Robinson D. S. The influence of death struggle on the rate of glycolysis in chicken breast muscle. J. Sci. Food Agric. 1974;25:57–66. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.2740250107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Jarquin R., Nava G., Wolfenden A., Donoghue A., Hanning I., Higgins S., Hargis B. The evaluation of organic acids and probiotic cultures to reduce Salmonella enteriditis horizontal transmission and crop infection in broiler chickens. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2007;6:182–186. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kannan G., Heath J., Wabeck C., Souza M., Howe J., Mench J. Effects of crating and transport on stress and meat quality characteristics in broilers. Poult. Sci. 1997;76:523–529. doi: 10.1093/ps/76.3.523. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Lu L., Ji C., Luo X. G., Liu B., Yu S. X. The effect of supplemental manganese in broiler diets on abdominal fat deposition and meat quality. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2006;129:49–59. [Google Scholar]
  22. Maribo H., Olsen E. V., Barton-Gade P., Møller A. J., Karlsson A. Effect of early post-mortem cooling on temperature, pH fall and meat quality in pigs. Meat Sci. 1998;50:115–129. doi: 10.1016/S0309-1740(98)00022-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Mortensen M., Andersen H. J., Engelsen S. B., Bertram H. C. Effect of freezing temperature, thawing and cooking rate on water distribution in two pork qualities. Meat Sci. 2006;72:34–42. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2005.05.027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Northcutt J., Berrang M., Dickens J., Fletcher D., Cox N. Effect of broiler age, feed withdrawal, and transportation on levels of coliforms, Campylobacter, Escherichia coli and Salmonella on carcasses before and after immersion chilling. Poult. Sci. 2003;82:169–173. doi: 10.1093/ps/82.1.169. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Pearce K. L., Rosenvold K., Andersen H. J., Hopkins D. L. Water distribution and mobility in meat during the conversion of muscle to meat and ageing and the impacts on fresh meat quality attributes—A review. Meat Sci. 2011;89:111–124. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2011.04.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Pedersen D. K., Morel S., Andersen H. J., Balling Engelsen S. Early prediction of water-holding capacity in meat by multivariate vibrational spectroscopy. Meat Sci. 2003;65:581–592. doi: 10.1016/S0309-1740(02)00251-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Petracci M., Bianchi M., Cavani C., Gaspari P., Lavazza A. Preslaughter mortality in broiler chickens, turkeys, and spent hens under commercial slaughtering. Poult. Sci. 2006;85:1660–1664. doi: 10.1093/ps/85.9.1660. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Petracci M., Fletcher D., Northcutt J. The effect of holding temperature on live shrink, processing yield, and breast meat quality of broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 2001;80:670–675. doi: 10.1093/ps/80.5.670. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Pixley C., Barton J., Vicente J., Wolfenden A., Hargis B., Tellez G. Evaluation of a commercially available organic acid product during feed withdrawal and its relation to carcass shrink in commercial turkeys. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2010;9:508–510. [Google Scholar]
  30. Qiao M., Fletcher D., Smith D., Northcutt J. Effects of raw broiler breast meat color variation on marination and cooked meat quality. Poult. Sci. 2002;81:276–280. doi: 10.1093/ps/81.2.276. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Rosenvold K., Andersen H. J. Factors of significance for pork quality—A review. Meat Sci. 2003;64:219–237. doi: 10.1016/S0309-1740(02)00186-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Savenije B., Lambooij E., Gerritzen M., Venema K., Korf J. Effects of feed deprivation and transport on preslaughter blood metabolites, early postmortem muscle metabolites, and meat quality. Poult. Sci. 2002;81:699–708. doi: 10.1093/ps/81.5.699. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Tung C. M., Pettigrew J. E. Critical review of acidifiers. Practical Ideas to Address High Feed and Production Costs. National Pork Board, Des Moines, IA. 2011. Accessed Jun. 2013. http://www.pork.org/ResearchDetail/541/CriticalReviewofAcid.aspx.
  34. Vanderhasselt R., Buijs S., Sprenger M., Goethals K., Willemsen H., Duchateau L., Tuyttens F. Dehydration indicators for broiler chickens at slaughter. Poult. Sci. 2013;92:612–619. doi: 10.3382/ps.2012-02715. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Veerkamp C. Fasting and yield of broilers. Poult. Sci. 1986;65:1299–1304. [Google Scholar]
  36. Vicente J., Higgins S., Bielke L., Tellez G., Donoghue D. Effect of probiotic culture candidates on Salmonella prevalence in commercial turkey houses. J. Appl. Poult. Res. 2007;16:471–476. [Google Scholar]
  37. Warriss P., Bevis E., Brown S. Time spent by broiler chickens in transit to processing plants. Vet. Rec. 1990;127:617–619. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Warriss P., Brown S. The relationships between initial pH, reflectance and exudation in pig muscle. Meat Sci. 1987;20:65–74. doi: 10.1016/0309-1740(87)90051-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Warriss P., Kestin S., Brown S., Bevis E. Depletion of glycogen reserves in fasting broiler chickens. Br. Poult. Sci. 1988;29:149–154. doi: 10.1080/00071668808417036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Warriss P., Kestin S., Brown S., Knowles T., Wilkins L., Edwards J., Nicol C. The depletion of glycogen stores and indices of dehydration in transported broilers. Br. Vet. J. 1993;149:391–398. doi: 10.1016/S0007-1935(05)80078-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Wolfenden A., Pixley C., Vicente J. L., Aviña L., Hargis B. M., Tellez G. Effect of organic acids during feed withdrawal on mortality, shrinkage and carcass condemnation during transportation to the processing plant. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2007a;6:497–500. [Google Scholar]
  42. Wolfenden A., Vicente J., Higgins J., Andreatti Filho R., Higgins S., Hargis B. M., Tellez G. Effect of organic acids and probiotics on Salmonella enteritidis infection in broiler chickens. Int. J. Poult. Sci. 2007b;6:403–405. [Google Scholar]
  43. Yi G., Allee G., Knight C., Dibner J. Impact of glutamine and oasis hatchling supplement on growth performance, small intestinal morphology, and immune response of broilers vaccinated and challenged with Eimeria maxima. Poult. Sci. 2005;84:283–293. doi: 10.1093/ps/84.2.283. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Zamorano J., Gambaruto M. Contribution to improving the meat water holding capacity test by the filter paper press method. A comparison of three methods for measuring areas. Meat Sci. 1997;46:129–137. doi: 10.1016/s0309-1740(97)00011-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Poultry Science are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES