Transport losses in market weight pigs: II. U.S. incidence and economic impact

An industry survey representing approximately 310 million (M) market weight pigs was conducted with 20 U.S. slaughter facilities over the calendars years of 2012 to 2015 to determine the incidence, seasonal patterns, and estimated economic impact of dead and non-ambulatory pigs. Each plant entered d...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Translational animal science Ročník 4; číslo 2; s. 1103 - 1112
Hlavní autoři: Ritter, Matthew J, Yoder, Chad L, Jones, Corey L, Carr, Scott N, Calvo-Lorenzo, Michelle S
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: US Oxford University Press 01.04.2020
Témata:
ISSN:2573-2102, 2573-2102
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Abstract An industry survey representing approximately 310 million (M) market weight pigs was conducted with 20 U.S. slaughter facilities over the calendars years of 2012 to 2015 to determine the incidence, seasonal patterns, and estimated economic impact of dead and non-ambulatory pigs. Each plant entered daily totals in a secure online database for the following variables: 1) pigs slaughtered, 2) dead on arrival (DOA; dead on the truck), 3) euthanized on arrival (EOA; non-ambulatory pig with an injury that required euthanasia), 4) dead in pen (DIP; died after unloading), and 5) non-ambulatory (pig unable to move or keep up with the rest of the group from unloading to stunning). Total dead pigs were calculated as DOA + EOA + DIP, and total losses were calculated as non-ambulatory + total dead. The economic impact was estimated based on the 4-yr weighted averages from USDA annual reports for market swine slaughtered (108,470,550 pigs), live market weight (126.9 kg), and live market price ($1.44/kg). The 4-yr weighted averages for total dead, non-ambulatory, and total losses were 0.26%, 0.63%, and 0.88%, respectively. Total dead consisted of 0.15% DOA, 0.05% EOA, and 0.05% DIP. The months with the highest rates of total dead were July (0.29%), August (0.32%), and September (0.30%), while the lowest incidence rates occurred in February (0.22%), March (0.22%), and April (0.22%). The months with the highest rates of non-ambulatory pigs were observed during the months of October (0.70%), November (0.71%), and December (0.70%), whereas the lowest rates of non-ambulatory pigs were observed during the months of April (0.57%), May (0.53%), and June (0.54%). The following assumptions were used in the economic analysis: 1) dead pigs received no value and 2) non-ambulatory pigs were discounted 30%. Based on these assumptions, the annual cost to the industry for dead and non-ambulatory pigs was estimated to be $52 M ($0.48 per pig marketed) and $37 M ($0.35 per pig marketed), respectively. Therefore, total losses represent approximately $89 M in economic losses or $0.83 per pig marketed. This is the first industry-wide survey on the incidence of transport losses in market weight pigs at U.S. slaughter facilities, and this information is important for establishing an industry baseline and benchmark for transport losses that can be used for measuring industry improvements.
AbstractList An industry survey representing approximately 310 million (M) market weight pigs was conducted with 20 U.S. slaughter facilities over the calendars years of 2012 to 2015 to determine the incidence, seasonal patterns, and estimated economic impact of dead and non-ambulatory pigs. Each plant entered daily totals in a secure online database for the following variables: 1) pigs slaughtered, 2) dead on arrival (DOA; dead on the truck), 3) euthanized on arrival (EOA; non-ambulatory pig with an injury that required euthanasia), 4) dead in pen (DIP; died after unloading), and 5) non-ambulatory (pig unable to move or keep up with the rest of the group from unloading to stunning). Total dead pigs were calculated as DOA + EOA + DIP, and total losses were calculated as non-ambulatory + total dead. The economic impact was estimated based on the 4-yr weighted averages from USDA annual reports for market swine slaughtered (108,470,550 pigs), live market weight (126.9 kg), and live market price ($1.44/kg). The 4-yr weighted averages for total dead, non-ambulatory, and total losses were 0.26%, 0.63%, and 0.88%, respectively. Total dead consisted of 0.15% DOA, 0.05% EOA, and 0.05% DIP. The months with the highest rates of total dead were July (0.29%), August (0.32%), and September (0.30%), while the lowest incidence rates occurred in February (0.22%), March (0.22%), and April (0.22%). The months with the highest rates of non-ambulatory pigs were observed during the months of October (0.70%), November (0.71%), and December (0.70%), whereas the lowest rates of non-ambulatory pigs were observed during the months of April (0.57%), May (0.53%), and June (0.54%). The following assumptions were used in the economic analysis: 1) dead pigs received no value and 2) non-ambulatory pigs were discounted 30%. Based on these assumptions, the annual cost to the industry for dead and non-ambulatory pigs was estimated to be $52 M ($0.48 per pig marketed) and $37 M ($0.35 per pig marketed), respectively. Therefore, total losses represent approximately $89 M in economic losses or $0.83 per pig marketed. This is the first industry-wide survey on the incidence of transport losses in market weight pigs at U.S. slaughter facilities, and this information is important for establishing an industry baseline and benchmark for transport losses that can be used for measuring industry improvements.
An industry survey representing approximately 310 million (M) market weight pigs was conducted with 20 U.S. slaughter facilities over the calendars years of 2012 to 2015 to determine the incidence, seasonal patterns, and estimated economic impact of dead and non-ambulatory pigs. Each plant entered daily totals in a secure online database for the following variables: 1) pigs slaughtered, 2) dead on arrival (DOA; dead on the truck), 3) euthanized on arrival (EOA; non-ambulatory pig with an injury that required euthanasia), 4) dead in pen (DIP; died after unloading), and 5) non-ambulatory (pig unable to move or keep up with the rest of the group from unloading to stunning). Total dead pigs were calculated as DOA + EOA + DIP, and total losses were calculated as non-ambulatory + total dead. The economic impact was estimated based on the 4-yr weighted averages from USDA annual reports for market swine slaughtered (108,470,550 pigs), live market weight (126.9 kg), and live market price ( $1.44/kg). The 4-yr weighted averages for total dead, non-ambulatory, and total losses were 0.26%, 0.63%, and 0.88%, respectively. Total dead consisted of 0.15% DOA, 0.05% EOA, and 0.05% DIP. The months with the highest rates of total dead were July (0.29%), August (0.32%), and September (0.30%), while the lowest incidence rates occurred in February (0.22%), March (0.22%), and April (0.22%). The months with the highest rates of non-ambulatory pigs were observed during the months of October (0.70%), November (0.71%), and December (0.70%), whereas the lowest rates of non-ambulatory pigs were observed during the months of April (0.57%), May (0.53%), and June (0.54%). The following assumptions were used in the economic analysis: 1) dead pigs received no value and 2) non-ambulatory pigs were discounted 30%. Based on these assumptions, the annual cost to the industry for dead and non-ambulatory pigs was estimated to be $ 52 M ( $0.48 per pig marketed) and $ 37 M ( $0.35 per pig marketed), respectively. Therefore, total losses represent approximately $ 89 M in economic losses or $0.83 per pig marketed. This is the first industry-wide survey on the incidence of transport losses in market weight pigs at U.S. slaughter facilities, and this information is important for establishing an industry baseline and benchmark for transport losses that can be used for measuring industry improvements. Key words: fatigued, injured, mortality, non-ambulatory, swine, transport
An industry survey representing approximately 310 million (M) market weight pigs was conducted with 20 U.S. slaughter facilities over the calendars years of 2012 to 2015 to determine the incidence, seasonal patterns, and estimated economic impact of dead and non-ambulatory pigs. Each plant entered daily totals in a secure online database for the following variables: 1) pigs slaughtered, 2) dead on arrival (DOA; dead on the truck), 3) euthanized on arrival (EOA; non-ambulatory pig with an injury that required euthanasia), 4) dead in pen (DIP; died after unloading), and 5) non-ambulatory (pig unable to move or keep up with the rest of the group from unloading to stunning). Total dead pigs were calculated as DOA + EOA + DIP, and total losses were calculated as non-ambulatory + total dead. The economic impact was estimated based on the 4-yr weighted averages from USDA annual reports for market swine slaughtered (108,470,550 pigs), live market weight (126.9 kg), and live market price ($1.44/kg). The 4-yr weighted averages for total dead, non-ambulatory, and total losses were 0.26%, 0.63%, and 0.88%, respectively. Total dead consisted of 0.15% DOA, 0.05% EOA, and 0.05% DIP. The months with the highest rates of total dead were July (0.29%), August (0.32%), and September (0.30%), while the lowest incidence rates occurred in February (0.22%), March (0.22%), and April (0.22%). The months with the highest rates of non-ambulatory pigs were observed during the months of October (0.70%), November (0.71%), and December (0.70%), whereas the lowest rates of non-ambulatory pigs were observed during the months of April (0.57%), May (0.53%), and June (0.54%). The following assumptions were used in the economic analysis: 1) dead pigs received no value and 2) non-ambulatory pigs were discounted 30%. Based on these assumptions, the annual cost to the industry for dead and non-ambulatory pigs was estimated to be $52 M ($0.48 per pig marketed) and $37 M ($0.35 per pig marketed), respectively. Therefore, total losses represent approximately $89 M in economic losses or $0.83 per pig marketed. This is the first industry-wide survey on the incidence of transport losses in market weight pigs at U.S. slaughter facilities, and this information is important for establishing an industry baseline and benchmark for transport losses that can be used for measuring industry improvements.An industry survey representing approximately 310 million (M) market weight pigs was conducted with 20 U.S. slaughter facilities over the calendars years of 2012 to 2015 to determine the incidence, seasonal patterns, and estimated economic impact of dead and non-ambulatory pigs. Each plant entered daily totals in a secure online database for the following variables: 1) pigs slaughtered, 2) dead on arrival (DOA; dead on the truck), 3) euthanized on arrival (EOA; non-ambulatory pig with an injury that required euthanasia), 4) dead in pen (DIP; died after unloading), and 5) non-ambulatory (pig unable to move or keep up with the rest of the group from unloading to stunning). Total dead pigs were calculated as DOA + EOA + DIP, and total losses were calculated as non-ambulatory + total dead. The economic impact was estimated based on the 4-yr weighted averages from USDA annual reports for market swine slaughtered (108,470,550 pigs), live market weight (126.9 kg), and live market price ($1.44/kg). The 4-yr weighted averages for total dead, non-ambulatory, and total losses were 0.26%, 0.63%, and 0.88%, respectively. Total dead consisted of 0.15% DOA, 0.05% EOA, and 0.05% DIP. The months with the highest rates of total dead were July (0.29%), August (0.32%), and September (0.30%), while the lowest incidence rates occurred in February (0.22%), March (0.22%), and April (0.22%). The months with the highest rates of non-ambulatory pigs were observed during the months of October (0.70%), November (0.71%), and December (0.70%), whereas the lowest rates of non-ambulatory pigs were observed during the months of April (0.57%), May (0.53%), and June (0.54%). The following assumptions were used in the economic analysis: 1) dead pigs received no value and 2) non-ambulatory pigs were discounted 30%. Based on these assumptions, the annual cost to the industry for dead and non-ambulatory pigs was estimated to be $52 M ($0.48 per pig marketed) and $37 M ($0.35 per pig marketed), respectively. Therefore, total losses represent approximately $89 M in economic losses or $0.83 per pig marketed. This is the first industry-wide survey on the incidence of transport losses in market weight pigs at U.S. slaughter facilities, and this information is important for establishing an industry baseline and benchmark for transport losses that can be used for measuring industry improvements.
Audience Academic
Author Ritter, Matthew J
Yoder, Chad L
Jones, Corey L
Calvo-Lorenzo, Michelle S
Carr, Scott N
AuthorAffiliation Elanco Animal Health , Greenfield, IN
AuthorAffiliation_xml – name: Elanco Animal Health , Greenfield, IN
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Matthew J
  surname: Ritter
  fullname: Ritter, Matthew J
  organization: Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Chad L
  surname: Yoder
  fullname: Yoder, Chad L
  organization: Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Corey L
  surname: Jones
  fullname: Jones, Corey L
  organization: Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Scott N
  surname: Carr
  fullname: Carr, Scott N
  organization: Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN
– sequence: 5
  givenname: Michelle S
  surname: Calvo-Lorenzo
  fullname: Calvo-Lorenzo, Michelle S
  email: mcalvo-lorenzo@elanco.com
  organization: Elanco Animal Health, Greenfield, IN
BookMark eNp9kl1rHCEUhqWkNGmaq_4BoVAKZSd-zI7ai0II_VgIyUWTa3GcMxvTGZ2q0yb_vi67JR-E4oXied7Xc47nNdrzwQNCbympKFH8OJt0nG-NITV9gQ7YUvAFo4TtPTjvo6OUbgghVCnVUPIK7XMmyJJweYDOL6PxaQox4yGkBAk7j0cTf0LGf8CtrzOe3Dp9wqtVha-qH1WJW9eBt4CN7zDY4MPoLHbjZGx-g172ZkhwtNsP0dXXL5en3xdnF99WpydnC1vLOi9q4KID1XPZ1n3flEI44YZbzqygVkrbtaa1LVBgfa1YR2RJXNhOqdZKJYEfos9b32luR-gs-BzNoKfoSu53OhinH0e8u9br8FsLRpRoaDH4sDOI4dcMKevRJQvDYDyEOWlWM8EJpUIW9N0T9CbM0ZfyNKeCiiUrfb2n1mYA7Xwfyrt2Y6pPGk4awRrOClU9Q5XVQWli-drelftHAroV2Fi-J0Kvrcsmu7Apyw2aEr2ZA13mQO_moGg-PtH868vz9PstHebpv-BfYJ_Bxg
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0327469
crossref_primary_10_2903_j_efsa_2022_7445
crossref_primary_10_3390_agriculture14040555
crossref_primary_10_3390_metabo15010054
crossref_primary_10_1093_tas_txaf100
crossref_primary_10_1007_s10611_024_10176_4
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_prevetmed_2023_105931
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_prevetmed_2023_105961
crossref_primary_10_1093_jas_skab027
crossref_primary_10_3389_fvets_2025_1657185
crossref_primary_10_1038_s41598_022_13253_7
crossref_primary_10_3390_metabo14080424
crossref_primary_10_3389_fvets_2022_790570
crossref_primary_10_1186_s40813_022_00279_6
crossref_primary_10_3389_fanim_2022_1051572
Cites_doi 10.1136/vetrec.165.1.13
10.3389/fvets.2017.00067
10.2527/jas.2012-6114
10.3389/fvets.2019.00036
10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.010
10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-17-294
10.15232/S1080-7446(15)30735-X
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. 2020
COPYRIGHT 2020 Oxford University Press
The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science.
Copyright_xml – notice: The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. 2020
– notice: COPYRIGHT 2020 Oxford University Press
– notice: The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
– notice: The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science.
DBID TOX
AAYXX
CITATION
8FE
8FH
ABUWG
AFKRA
AZQEC
BBNVY
BENPR
BHPHI
CCPQU
DWQXO
GNUQQ
HCIFZ
LK8
M7P
PHGZM
PHGZT
PIMPY
PKEHL
PQEST
PQGLB
PQQKQ
PQUKI
PRINS
7X8
5PM
DOI 10.1093/tas/txaa041
DatabaseName Oxford Journals Open Access Collection
CrossRef
ProQuest SciTech Collection
ProQuest Natural Science Collection
ProQuest Central (Alumni)
ProQuest Central UK/Ireland
ProQuest Central Essentials Local Electronic Collection Information
ProQuest : Biological Science Collection journals [unlimited simultaneous users]
ProQuest Central
Natural Science Collection
ProQuest One Community College
ProQuest Central
ProQuest Central Student
SciTech Premium Collection
Biological Sciences
Biological Science Database
ProQuest Central Premium
ProQuest One Academic (New)
Publicly Available Content Database
ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)
ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences
ProQuest One Academic (retired)
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
ProQuest Central China
MEDLINE - Academic
PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
Publicly Available Content Database
ProQuest Central Student
ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)
ProQuest Biological Science Collection
ProQuest Central Essentials
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition
ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)
SciTech Premium Collection
ProQuest One Community College
ProQuest Natural Science Collection
Biological Science Database
ProQuest SciTech Collection
ProQuest Central China
ProQuest Central
ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
Natural Science Collection
ProQuest Central Korea
Biological Science Collection
ProQuest Central (New)
ProQuest One Academic
ProQuest One Academic (New)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList

CrossRef

Publicly Available Content Database

MEDLINE - Academic
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: TOX
  name: Oxford Academic : Oxford Journals Open Access Collection journals [open access]
  url: https://academic.oup.com/journals/
  sourceTypes: Publisher
– sequence: 2
  dbid: PIMPY
  name: Publicly Available Content Database
  url: http://search.proquest.com/publiccontent
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Agriculture
EISSN 2573-2102
EndPage 1112
ExternalDocumentID PMC7209761
A630672632
10_1093_tas_txaa041
10.1093/tas/txaa041
GeographicLocations United States
United States--US
GeographicLocations_xml – name: United States
– name: United States--US
GrantInformation_xml – fundername: ;
GroupedDBID 0R~
AAFWJ
AAPXW
AAVAP
ABEJV
ABGNP
ABPTD
ABXVV
ACGFS
AFPKN
AFULF
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AMNDL
BAYMD
BTTYL
EBS
ECGQY
EJD
EYRJQ
GROUPED_DOAJ
H13
IAO
ITC
KSI
ML0
M~E
O9-
OK1
ROX
RPM
TOX
AAYXX
AFFHD
AFKRA
BBNVY
BENPR
BHPHI
CCPQU
CITATION
HCIFZ
M7P
PHGZM
PHGZT
PIMPY
PQGLB
8FE
8FH
ABUWG
AZQEC
DWQXO
GNUQQ
LK8
PKEHL
PQEST
PQQKQ
PQUKI
PRINS
PUEGO
7X8
5PM
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c484t-4e37de9f38b4ff6093303a3c32c71c88cdbabcbe1e2f492d089617cd99bc898e3
IEDL.DBID M7P
ISICitedReferencesCount 17
ISICitedReferencesURI http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=000567403900059&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
ISSN 2573-2102
IngestDate Tue Nov 04 02:03:25 EST 2025
Thu Oct 02 11:08:41 EDT 2025
Sat Sep 20 13:21:53 EDT 2025
Tue Nov 11 10:18:48 EST 2025
Tue Nov 04 18:07:53 EST 2025
Tue Nov 18 22:31:24 EST 2025
Sat Nov 29 06:21:17 EST 2025
Mon Jan 27 07:34:58 EST 2025
IsDoiOpenAccess true
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 2
Keywords swine
mortality
injured
fatigued
transport
non-ambulatory
Language English
License This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c484t-4e37de9f38b4ff6093303a3c32c71c88cdbabcbe1e2f492d089617cd99bc898e3
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
OpenAccessLink https://www.proquest.com/docview/3171752999?pq-origsite=%requestingapplication%
PMID 32705038
PQID 3171752999
PQPubID 7121334
PageCount 10
ParticipantIDs pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7209761
proquest_miscellaneous_2427301178
proquest_journals_3171752999
gale_infotracmisc_A630672632
gale_infotracacademiconefile_A630672632
crossref_citationtrail_10_1093_tas_txaa041
crossref_primary_10_1093_tas_txaa041
oup_primary_10_1093_tas_txaa041
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2020-04-01
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2020-04-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 04
  year: 2020
  text: 2020-04-01
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace US
PublicationPlace_xml – name: US
– name: Oxford
PublicationTitle Translational animal science
PublicationYear 2020
Publisher Oxford University Press
Publisher_xml – name: Oxford University Press
References Holtkamp (2020072914371623600_CIT0009) 2015
Ellis (2020072914371623600_CIT0004) 2006
Rioja-Lang (2020072914371623600_CIT0017) 2019; 6
Deen (2020072914371623600_CIT0002) 2004
Schwartzkopf-Genswein (2020072914371623600_CIT0019) 2012; 92
NOAA (2020072914371623600_CIT0013) 2020
Topel (2020072914371623600_CIT0022) 1968; 49
USDA-NASS (2020072914371623600_CIT0023) 2018
NPB (2020072914371623600_CIT0014) 2017
Smith (2020072914371623600_CIT0020) 1937
NACMCF (2020072914371623600_CIT0012) 2018; 81
Johnson (2020072914371623600_CIT0010) 2013; 91
FSIS (2020072914371623600_CIT0007) 2015
FSIS (2020072914371623600_CIT0008) 2016
Maes (2020072914371623600_CIT0011) 2001; 9
Rademacher (2020072914371623600_CIT0016) 2005
Peterson (2020072914371623600_CIT0015) 2017; 4
Deen (2020072914371623600_CIT0001) 2011
Zurbrigg (2020072914371623600_CIT0024) 2017; 97
FSIS (2020072914371623600_CIT0006) 2014
FSIS (2020072914371623600_CIT0005) 2013
Ritter (2020072914371623600_CIT0018) 2009; 25
Sutherland (2020072914371623600_CIT0021) 2009; 165
Ellis (2020072914371623600_CIT0003) 2003
References_xml – start-page: 446
  volume-title: Pork production. Marketing; market classes and grades
  year: 1937
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0020
– year: 2017
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0014
– start-page: 186
  year: 2005
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0016
  article-title: Factors associated with the incidence of mortality during transport of market hogs
– year: 2020
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0013
– year: 2018
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0023
– year: 2015
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0009
  article-title: PEDv in the US: overview, history, lessons
– start-page: 387
  year: 2011
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0001
  article-title: Estimates of opportunity costs associated with mortality and inadequate growth rates in the US
– volume-title: Market swine condemned ante-mortem for deads in USDA inspected plants for the calendar year of 2015. FOIA Case #2016–113
  year: 2016
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0008
– volume-title: Market swine condemned ante-mortem for deads in USDA inspected plants for the calendar year of 2014. FOIA Case #2015–188
  year: 2015
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0007
– volume: 165
  start-page: 13
  year: 2009
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0021
  article-title: Effects of variations in the environment, length of journey and type of trailer on the mortality and morbidity of pigs being transported to slaughter
  publication-title: Vet. Rec
  doi: 10.1136/vetrec.165.1.13
– volume: 4
  start-page: 67
  year: 2017
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0015
  article-title: Use of temperature, humidity, and slaughter condemnation data to predict increases in transport losses in three classes of swine and resulting foregone revenue
  publication-title: Front. Vet. Sci
  doi: 10.3389/fvets.2017.00067
– volume: 49
  start-page: 40
  year: 1968
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0022
  article-title: Porcine stress syndrome
  publication-title: Mod. Vet. Pract
– volume: 91
  start-page: 2481
  year: 2013
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0010
  article-title: 2011 and 2012 Early Careers Achievement Awards: farm and pig factors touching welfare during the marketing process
  publication-title: J. Anim. Sci
  doi: 10.2527/jas.2012-6114
– volume: 9
  start-page: 267
  issue: 6
  year: 2001
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0011
  article-title: A retrospective study of mortality in grow-finish pigs in a multi-site production system
  publication-title: J. Swine Health Prod
– start-page: 1
  year: 2003
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0003
  article-title: Analysis of the current situation: what do downers cost the industry and what can we do about it?
– volume-title: Market swine condemned ante-mortem for deads in USDA inspected plants for the calendar year of 2013. FOIA Case #2014–200
  year: 2014
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0006
– year: 2004
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0002
  article-title: Lost income in grow/finish: the problem of lightweight, cull, and dead pigs
– volume: 97
  start-page: 339
  year: 2017
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0024
  article-title: Pig-level risk factors for in-transit losses in swine: a review
  publication-title: Can. J. Anim. Sci
– volume: 6
  start-page: 36
  year: 2019
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0017
  article-title: A review of swine transportation research on priority welfare issues: a Canadian perspective
  publication-title: Front. Vet. Sci
  doi: 10.3389/fvets.2019.00036
– volume: 92
  start-page: 227
  year: 2012
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0019
  article-title: Road transport of cattle, swine and poultry in North America and its impact on animal welfare, carcass and meat quality: a review
  publication-title: Meat Sci
  doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.010
– volume-title: Market swine condemned ante-mortem for deads in USDA inspected plants for the calendar year of 2012. FOIA Case #2013–100
  year: 2013
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0005
– start-page: 205
  year: 2006
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0004
  article-title: Impact of season on production: transport losses
– volume: 81
  start-page: 115
  issue: 1
  year: 2018
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0012
  article-title: Response to questions posed by the Department of Defense regarding microbiological criteria as indicators of process control or insanitary conditions. National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for Foods; U.S. Department of Agriculture; Food Safety and Inspection Service; Office of Public Health Science
  publication-title: J. Food Prot
  doi: 10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-17-294
– volume: 25
  start-page: 404
  year: 2009
  ident: 2020072914371623600_CIT0018
  article-title: Transport losses in market weight pigs: I. A review of definitions, incidence and economic impact
  publication-title: Prof. Anim. Sci
  doi: 10.15232/S1080-7446(15)30735-X
SSID ssj0001999610
Score 2.227613
Snippet An industry survey representing approximately 310 million (M) market weight pigs was conducted with 20 U.S. slaughter facilities over the calendars years of...
SourceID pubmedcentral
proquest
gale
crossref
oup
SourceType Open Access Repository
Aggregation Database
Enrichment Source
Index Database
Publisher
StartPage 1103
SubjectTerms Accidents
Animal Health and Well Being
Animal welfare
Annual reports
Casualties
Economic analysis
Economic aspects
Economic impact
Ethical aspects
Hogs
Livestock losses
Logistics
Management
Measurement
Pork industry
Slaughter
Surveys
Swine
Transportation
Unloading
Weight
Title Transport losses in market weight pigs: II. U.S. incidence and economic impact
URI https://www.proquest.com/docview/3171752999
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2427301178
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC7209761
Volume 4
WOSCitedRecordID wos000567403900059&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
journalDatabaseRights – providerCode: PRVAON
  databaseName: DOAJ : Directory of Open Access Journals [open access]
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2573-2102
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: false
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001999610
  issn: 2573-2102
  databaseCode: DOA
  dateStart: 20170101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://www.doaj.org/
  providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals
– providerCode: PRVHPJ
  databaseName: ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2573-2102
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: false
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001999610
  issn: 2573-2102
  databaseCode: M~E
  dateStart: 20170101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://road.issn.org
  providerName: ISSN International Centre
– providerCode: PRVASL
  databaseName: Oxford Academic : Oxford Journals Open Access Collection journals [open access]
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2573-2102
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: false
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001999610
  issn: 2573-2102
  databaseCode: TOX
  dateStart: 20170201
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://academic.oup.com/journals/
  providerName: Oxford University Press
– providerCode: PRVPQU
  databaseName: Biological Science Database
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2573-2102
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: false
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001999610
  issn: 2573-2102
  databaseCode: M7P
  dateStart: 20170101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: http://search.proquest.com/biologicalscijournals
  providerName: ProQuest
– providerCode: PRVPQU
  databaseName: ProQuest Central
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2573-2102
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: false
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001999610
  issn: 2573-2102
  databaseCode: BENPR
  dateStart: 20170101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: https://www.proquest.com/central
  providerName: ProQuest
– providerCode: PRVPQU
  databaseName: Publicly Available Content Database
  customDbUrl:
  eissn: 2573-2102
  dateEnd: 99991231
  omitProxy: false
  ssIdentifier: ssj0001999610
  issn: 2573-2102
  databaseCode: PIMPY
  dateStart: 20170101
  isFulltext: true
  titleUrlDefault: http://search.proquest.com/publiccontent
  providerName: ProQuest
link http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3db9MwED-xjQd44HsiUIqRJiEhpU1it7Z5QQVtohKUCDZUniLbcaDSSEuTAX8-PtftiIT2wmNiy7Z8vg-f734HcERLTs2IyzhR1ShmZaliqSWLJVNYAI5mla8Z-fkdn83EfC7z4HBrQljlViZ6QV0uDfrIh07POU3nhKd8tfoRY9UofF0NJTT24ABREqgP3csvfSxozadJSMtzd_dhq5ph-1uphKUdRRTEcSfHDU3NbqDkX5rn5Pb_rvkO3Ao2J5lsDslduGbre3Bz8nUdcDfsfZjtQM7J-RLfgcmiJt99RjT55b2nZOXGfUmm0wE5G3waEPTR-3qkRNUlsSG_mWyyLh_A2cnx6Zu3cSi1EBsmWBszS3lpZUWFZlU19m4OqqihmeGpEcKUWmmjbWqzismsTITbWG5KKbURUlh6CPv1srYPgSR65GxgvLm4m56zJ7Uel0xnZqRUmlSURfBiu--FCTjkWA7jvNi8h9PCEakIRIrgaNd5tYHf-He350jAApnSjWVUyC1wK0J4q2IyxpsRQtNH0Ov0dMxkOs1P3RG4eqreltZFYPemuCR0BM92zTg2hrDVdnnRFM4W8tKUiwh451jtpkOo725LvfjmIb95lji7MX109eSP4UaG7gAfWNSD_XZ9YZ_AdfOzXTTrPuzxuejDwevjWf6x750Pfc8v7l8-fZ9_cV-nH-Z_AIDvIak
linkProvider ProQuest
linkToHtml http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMw1V3bbtMwGP41BhJwwRkRKMxIQ0hIaRPbbWIkhCpgWrVSTWJDu_N8ClQaaWkyBi_FM2I7TkcktLtdcG3LjuPP__kAsE10RtQwY3EiimFMtRYxk4zGjArXAI7gwveM_DzNZrP86Ijtb8DvNhfGhVW2NNETar1QzkY-sHzOcjpLPNnb5ffYdY1y3tW2hUYDiz3z68yqbNWbyXt7vy8w3vlw8G43Dl0FYkVzWsfUkEwbVpBc0qIYeY2eCKIIVlmq8lxpKaSSJjW4oAzrJGeWyyvNmFQ5yw2x616Bq1aMwLkPFdw_t-k47SFNQhqgXXlQi2pQ_xQioWmH8QXy38mpc6JtNzDzL063c_t_-0d34FaQqdG4eQR3YcOU9-Dm-Msq1BUx92G2LuKOThbOz43mJfrmM77RmbcOo6U9x2s0mfTRYf9THzkfhO-3ikSpkQn526jJKn0Ah5dyoIewWS5K8whQIodWxneamdVkrbws5UhTidVQiDQpCI3gVXvPXIU6667dxwlv_P2EW1DwAIoItteTl015kX9Pe-kAwx3RsWspEXIn7Be58l18PHKanyu9H0GvM9MSC9UZ3rKQu3irXostHshZxc-BFcHz9bBb24XolWZxWnEr63lukeURZB0Yr7dzpcy7I-X8qy9pnuHEysXp44s334Lruwcfp3w6me09gRvYmT58EFUPNuvVqXkK19SPel6tnvl3ieD4skH-BzEXegU
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Transport+losses+in+market+weight+pigs%3A+II.+U.S.+incidence+and+economic+impact&rft.jtitle=Translational+animal+science&rft.au=Ritter%2C+Matthew+J&rft.au=Yoder%2C+Chad+L&rft.au=Jones%2C+Corey+L&rft.au=Carr%2C+Scott+N&rft.date=2020-04-01&rft.pub=Oxford+University+Press&rft.eissn=2573-2102&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=2&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093%2Ftas%2Ftxaa041
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=2573-2102&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=2573-2102&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=2573-2102&client=summon