![]() ![]() The material used for device manufacturing, the activation frequency for electronic devices and the biocompatibility are some characteristics assessed by ICAR (2007).Įlectronicruminalbolusescomplywiththerequirements established by ICAR (2007) and, therefore, are considered safe and effective means of identification of cattle and sheep (Caja et al., 1999 Ghirardi et al., 2006). The International Committee on Animal Recording (ICAR) is responsible for establishing rules and standards for animal identification. Systems of identification with electronic ruminal boluses are considered inviolable and promote an efficient tracing of animals and farmers, allowing for better control of animal transportation among different regions and countries (Fallon, 2001). On the other hand, the use of electronic systems for animal identification may facilitate the traceability process. In addition, difficulty in readability of ear tags is observed, and this is considered identification failure (Machado and Nantes, 2004 Pinna et al., 2006 Ghirardi et al., 2007). Ear tags are visual devices widely used but show high device loss rates. For this reason, a partnership between the Brazilian and Spanish governments was established to allow the implementation of this technology on sheep and goat production (Nóbrega, 2011).Ĭonventional identification systems of small ruminants like plastic ear tags, necklaces and tattoos are not reliable due to possibility of violation and loss of devices (Pinna et al., 2006). Nevertheless, before the implementation of electronic identification system, research and professional training are necessary. Under these circumstances, a meeting between Brazilian researchers (EMBRAPA, EMEPA and SEBRAE) and agents of Spanish government occurred in 2011 with the purpose of implementing this technology on Brazilian herds. Hence, the traceability of sheep and goat production is flawed, and the electronic identification is practically absent on herds. In Brazil, the use of electronic devices to identify small ruminants is not required and there is no specific legislation for this type of identification. electronic rumen boluses) should be used (Carné et al., 2009a Saa et al., 2009). plastic ear tags) and a second identification device with radio frequency (e.g. Aiming to improve the identification systems and allow traceability, the EU published the Regulation CE 21/2004 (recently amended by SANCO/1427/2008) which establishes a double-identification system for small ruminants in the member states with populations greater than 600,000 animals. foot and mouth disease and classical swine fever). Recently, animal traceability has been intensively discussed (McGrann and Wiseman, 2001) in the European Union (EU) due to the increased spread potential of infectious diseases (e.g. ![]() Key Words: ear tags, electronic ruminal bolus, retention rate, time for application IIDepartamento de Fitotecnia, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, PR, Brasil IDepartamento de Zootecnia, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, PR, Brasil Luciana Helena Kowalski I Alda Lúcia Gomes Monteiro I Fernando Hentz II Odilei Rogerio Prado I Carlos Henrique Kulik I Sergio Rodrigo Fernandes I Cláudio José Araújo da Silva I Research financed by Saint Gobain/Courstek®. Production systems, environment, and ear tags with large dimensions may affect the retention rates of these visual identification devices.Įar tags electronic ruminal bolus retention rate time for applicationĮlectronic and visual identification devices for adult goats reared in semi-intensive system 1 1 Small ear tags and ruminal boluses used in this study are recommended for adult goats. The readability was 100% for all studied devices. The other devices showed retention rate of 100%. One big ear tag was lost, which decreased the retention rate of this device to 95.5%. The time spent for administration/application of the devices showed mean of 21 s and was similar between the evaluated devices. Evaluations were performed one day and one week after application, then, monthly, for six months. ![]() Problems during and after the application of devices, as well as device losses were recorded. Time spent for administration/application, readability and retention rate of devices were assessed. The identification devices were applied on all animals. Twenty-two crossbred Boer female goats with mean age of 4 years and mean body weight (BW) of 52.6 kg were used. They were (1) the ruminal bolus, electronic identification device composed of non-toxic ceramic and weighing 74.4 g (2) small ear tag on left ear, visual identification device with dimensions of 50 × 15mm and (3) big ear tag on right ear, also a visual identification device with dimensions of 42 × 48 mm. This study intended to evaluate three identification devices for adult goats reared in semi-intensive system. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |