Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Halal slaughtering, welfare, and empathy in farm animals: a review

  • Reviews
  • Published:
Tropical Animal Health and Production Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pre-slaughter and slaughter stressors are considered major concerns in animal welfare. Halal slaughtering method is considered one of the slaughtering stressors in livestock. This method seems to cause fear followed by stress in animals mainly due to inhuman handling. In this review, empathy and animal welfare are discussed in light of Islamic sharia and has further linked with animal’s physiology and behavioral responses during slaughtering. Islam as a religion forbids slaughtering an animal in front of another animal as through optic, olfactory, and cochlear senses animals can perceive the stress state of conspecifics. This suggests and strengthens the hypothesis that animals being slaughtered in front of each other may produce stress in them. This argument further leads to a claim that animals can experience empathy of each other through olfaction of semiochemicals (stress pheromones) emitted from animals slaughtered in the stressful condition that can be detected by other animals in abattoirs. Hence, research is needed to find out these specific stress pheromones and legislation needs to be adopted in slaughterhouses to isolate the areas of butchery from slaughtering lines to ensure proper guidelines of Halal slaughtering in slaughterhouses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albrigth JL and Arave CW 1997 The behavior of cattle. CAB International, Walingford, 306.

  • Ali ASA, Lawson MA, Tauson A, Jensen JF, Chwalibog A 2007 Influence of electrical stunning voltages on bleed out and carcass quality of broiler chickens. Arch Geflügelk ;71:35–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Qaradawi, Yusuf 1994 The lawful and the prohibited in Islam. Trans: Ahmad Zaki, Hammad. Indianapolis, IN, USA: American Trust Publications.

  • Alvarado CZ, Richards MP, O’ Keefe SF, Wang H. 2007 The effect of blood removal on oxidation and shelf of broiler breast meat. Poult Sci. 86:156–161. [PubMed]

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey DW, Gross JE, Laca EA, Rittenhouse LR, Coughenour MB and Swift DM 1996. Mechanisms that result in large herbivore grazing distribution patterns. J. Range Manage. 49, 386–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumont R 1996 Palatabilité et comportement alimentaire chez les ruminants. INRA Prod. Anim. 9(5), 349–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boissy A, Terlouw C, and Le Neindre P 1998 Presence of cues from stressed conspecifics increases reactivity to aversive events in cattle: evidence for the existence of alarm substances in urine. Physiol. Behav. 63(4), 489–495.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boissy A and Bouissou MF 1995 Assessment of individual differences in behavioral reactions of heifers exposed to various fear-eliciting situations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 46, 17–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boivin X, Nowak R, Le Neindre P, Tournadre H and Le Neindre P 1997 Discrimination between shepherds by lambs reared under artificial conditions. J. Anim. Sci. 75, 2892–2898.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bouissou MF, Boissy A, Le Neindre P, and Veissier I 2001 Social behaviour in cattle. In : Keeling, L., Gonyou, H. (Eds.), Social Behaviour in Farm Animals, pp. 406.

  • Broom DM and Fraser AF 2007 Domestic Animal Behaviour and Welfare. 4 ed. CAB International, UK.

  • Chapouthier, Georges, and Nouët, Jean-Claude 1998 The universal declaration of animal rights. Comments and intentions. 39 rue, Claude-Bernard, France: Ligue Française des Droits de ľAnimal.

  • Cheal M 1975 Social olfaction: a review of ontogeny of olfactory influences on Vertebrate behavior. Behav. Biol. 15, 1–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, P.M., J.N. Sofos and A.L. Branen, 2005. Antimicrobials in Food, 3rd Edn., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. pp: 12–17, 29, 68, 116, 151, 460–469.ISBN: 0-8247-4037-8.

  • Dodzi MS and Muchenje V 2011 Avoidance-related behavioral variables and their relationship to milk yield in pasture-based dairy cows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 133, 11–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dohi H Yamada A and Entsu S 1991 Cattle feeding deterrents emitted from cattle feces. J. Chem. Ecol. 17(6), 1197–1203.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Doores, S., 2005. Organic acids. In: Antimicrobials in Food, 3rd Edn., Davidson, P.M., J.N. Sofos and A.L. Branen (Ed.). CRC Press, FL, pp: 91–142.ISBN: 0-8247-4037-8.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Everse J, Hsia N. 1997 The toxicities of native and modified hemoglobins. Free Radic Biol Med. 22:1075–1099.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fanselow M 1985 Stressed rat odor effect in unstressed rats. Behav. Neurosci. 99, 589.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grandin T 2003 Distress in Animals: Is it Fear, Pain or Physical Stress? Colorado State University

  • Grandin T (2005) Maintenance of good animal welfare standards in beef slaughter plants by use of auditing programs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 226(3):370–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grandin T and Vogel K 2008 Restaurant Animal Welfare and Humane Slaughter Audits in Federally Inspected Beef and Pork Slaughter Plants in the U.S. and Canada. Colorado State University Available from: http://www.grandin.com/survey/survey

  • Grandin T 1999 Behavioral Principles of Handling Livestock update. Professional Animal Scientist, Dec. 1989. pp. 1–11.

  • Gregory NG 2004 Physiology and Behaviour of Animal suffering. Blackwell Science, Oxford, pp 12-31.

  • Gregory NG 2005 Recent concerns about stunning and slaughter. Meat Sci. 70, 481–491.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin DR 1981 The question of animal awareness. New York: Rockefeller University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grignard L, Boivin X, Boissy A, Le Neindre P 2001 Do beef cattle react consistently to different handling situations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 71, 263–276

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hall SJG 2002 Behaviour of Cattle. In The Ethology of Domestic Animals. JENSEN, P., Ed.,131–143.

  • Hemsworth PH, Barnett JL and Coleman GJ 1993 The human-animal relationship in agriculture and its consequences for the animal. Anim. Welf. 2, 33–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kondo S and Hurnik JF 1988 Behavioural and physiological responses to spatial novelty in dairy cows. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 68, 339–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner PT. 2009 Evaluation of haemoglobin and myoglobin in Poultry slaughtered by stunning and Kosher slaughter. Folia Vet. ;53:25–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackay Sim A and Laing DG 1981 Rats’ responses to blood and body odours of stressed and non-stressed conspecifics. Physiol. Behav. 27, 503–510.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mansard, C, Bouissou, M.F., 1980 Effect of olfactory bulbs removal on the establisment of the dominance-submission relationship in domestic cattle. Biol. Behav. 5, 169–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manteuffel G, Puppe B and Schön PC 2004 Vocalization of farm animals as a measure of welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 88, 163–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan KN and CT Tromborg 2007 Sources of stress in captivity. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 102 (2007) 262–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ndou SP, Muchenje V and Chimonyo M 2011 Assessment and implications of animal welfare in beef production systems in developing countries. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 10, 1049–1064.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips CJC 1993 Cattle behaviour. Farming Press, Ipswich, pp 58.

  • Piller CAK Stookey JM and Watts JM 1999 Effects of mirror-exposure on heart rate and movement of isolated heifers. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 63, 93–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rushen J, De Passillé AMB and Munksgaard L 1999 Fear of people by cows and effects on milk yield, behavior, and heart rate at milking. J. Dairy Sci. 82(4), 720–727.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sandem AI, Braastad BO and Bøe KE 2004 Eye white may indicate emotional state on a frustation-contentedness axis in dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 79, 1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schloeth R 1961 Das soziallleben des Camargue-rindes. Z. Tierpsychol. 18, 574–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Signore JP, Levy F, Nowak R, Orgeur P, Schaal B 1997 Le rôle de l’odorat dansles relations interindividuelles des animaux d’élevage. INRA Prod. Anim. 10(5), 339–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slotnick B, Schellinck H, Brown R 2005. Olfaction. In: Whishaw, I.Q., Kolb, B. (Eds.), The Behavior of the Laboratory Rat. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 90–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soyer A, Ozalp B, Dalmıs U, Bilgin V. 2010 Effects of freezing temperature and duration of frozen storage on lipid and protein oxidation in chicken meat. Food Chem. 120:1025–1030.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • The Holy Qur’an, Surah Al- An’am (6): Verse 38

Download references

Funding

The study was supported by the National Science and Technology Support Projects (No. 2015BAD03B04), the National Modern Agricultural Industry Special Program (No. CARS-37), and the Shaanxi Technological Innovation Engineering Program (No. 2014KTZB02-02-01).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Rajwali Khan and Hongfang Guo contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Animal Science and Technology, North West A&F University, Yangling, 712100, Shaanxi, People’s Republic of China

    Rajwali Khan, Hongfang Guo, Sayed Haidar Abbas Raza & Zan Linsen

  2. The University of Agriculture, Peshawar, Pakistan

    Abdur Rahman

  3. Sindh Agriculture University, Tando Jam, Pakistan

    Muhammad Ayaz

  4. National Beef Cattle Improvement Center of Northwest A&F University, Yangling, 712100, Shaanxi, China

    Zan Linsen

Authors
  1. Rajwali Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hongfang Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sayed Haidar Abbas Raza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Abdur Rahman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Muhammad Ayaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Zan Linsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zan Linsen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khan, R., Guo, H., Raza, S.H.A. et al. Halal slaughtering, welfare, and empathy in farm animals: a review. Trop Anim Health Prod 50, 1733–1738 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-018-1644-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-018-1644-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation