Straw applications in growing pigs: Effects on behavior, straw use and growth

Review: The tale of the Finnish pig tail - how to manage non-docked pigs?

Tail biting is a serious behavioural problem in modern pig production, causing impaired animal welfare and economic losses. In most countries, the detrimental effects of tail biting are counteracted by docking pigs tails. Finland is one of the few countries where tail docking in pigs is totally forbidden. The aim of this paper was to look in detail at features of pig production in Finland in order to try to understand how Finnish producers manage to rear non-docked pigs. The way pigs are housed and managed in Finland is influenced by both European and national legislation, but also by governmental subsidies, industry recommendations and voluntary initiatives. Several features of Finnish pig production might indeed have a preventive role regarding the tail biting risk: these include, among others, a comparably larger space allowance, partly slatted flooring, use of manipulable materials, a good animal health status and meal feeding from long troughs. In addition, Finnish producers are motivated to rear non-docked pigs, which is possibly one of the most important prerequisites for success. The experiences from Finland show that even though tail biting is still a challenge on some farms, in general, it is possible to rear non-docked pigs in intensive production. Potential positive side-effects of enhancing management and housing to facilitate the rearing of non-docked pigs include a good growth rate, a reduced need for antimicrobials and better animal welfare levels.

A High Enrichment Replenishment Rate Reduces Damaging Behaviors and Increases Growth Rate in Undocked Pigs Kept in Fully Slatted Pens

One of the difficulties in complying with the prohibition of routine tail docking is a lack of effective alternative solutions to prevent tail biting, especially in fully slatted systems. This study compared three slat-compatible enrichment replenishment strategies for pigs. Forty-eight mixed-sex pens (six males and six females/pen) of undocked pigs were followed from birth to slaughter. Pre-weaning, half the pigs were provided with enrichment materials (a cardboard cup, rubber toy, hessian cloth and bamboo), in addition to a rope for the sows, in all farrowing crates. Post-weaning, all pens were enriched with eight identical items, including an elevated rack supplied with fresh-cut grass, and objects of wooden, bamboo, rubber, and fabric materials presented in various ways. However, three different replenishment frequencies were applied: "Low" (replenished on Monday/Wednesday/Friday), "Medium" (replenished once daily), and "High" (replenished ad libitum). Individual pigs were weighed on days 0, 49, 91, and 113 post-weaning. Direct behavior observations were conducted twice weekly at pen level (10 min/day/pen), and tail and ear lesion scores of individual pigs were also recorded every other week. These measurements were taken during the post-weaning period. The cost of all enrichment materials used was calculated. Pre-weaning enrichment only contributed to a lower ear lesion score (P = 0.04). No difference in lesion scores was found between post-weaning treatments. "Low" replenishment rate pigs performed more damaging behaviors (tail/ear biting, belly-nosing, mounting, other biting, and aggressive behaviors combined) than "High" and "Medium" pigs (P < 0.01). The average daily gain in the finishing stage was higher in "High" than "Low" pigs (P < 0.05). Although sporadic tail biting occurred, only 0.69% of the pigs had their tails bitten severely enough that they became shorter than half of a normal undocked tail. The average enrichment cost for the post-weaning period was <€2 per pig. In conclusion, the high enrichment replenishment rate increased growth and reduced damaging behaviors compared to the low replenishment rate pigs. Overall, these findings show that the provision and regular replenishment of multiple, slat-compatible, enrichment sources can reduce tail damage to manageable levels without the need for tail docking.

Environmental enrichment strategies for nursery piglets and efficacy for maintaining interest

Context Animals in situations of stress and constant fear exhibit unwanted behaviours for production. Pigs that are afraid of humans tend to associate any management as stressful. The use of environment enrichment for pigs may help to alleviate anxiety and fear, and hence reduce unwanted behaviours during handling. However, provision of appropriate enrichment presents challenges such as the rapid loss of interest in objects by animals. Aims The present study evaluated the effects of different environmental enrichment strategies on the behaviour of pigs at the nursery stage, maintenance of animal interest in the enrichment objects, and their reflexes when faced with emotionally negative situations. Methods Piglets (n = 425) were assigned in a completely randomised design with five treatments and five replicates per treatment (17 animal per replicate). The treatments employed were: control, no enriching objects in the environment; WB, wooden box with popcorn and wood shavings; PT, objects made of plastic tubing; WB and PT concurrently; and WB or PT on alternate days. Behavioural observations were made over 10 days for 8 h each day, divided into four periods of 2 h. Piglets from enriched (n = 10) and non-enriched (n = 10) environments were subjected to three fear tests (human approach, novel object and novel arena). Key results No significant (P &gt; 0.05) effect was found for the type of enrichment provided or strategy adopted (concurrent vs alternating) on the time piglets interacted with the enrichment objects. Animals kept in an environment with no stimulus had higher frequency (P &lt; 0.05) of undesirable behaviours than those with enrichment, regardless of enrichment type or strategy adopted. Piglets reared without enrichment, when isolated in a new environment, had higher frequency of behaviours such as defecating, urinating and attempting escape, as well as more and longer vocalisation events (P &lt; 0.05). Piglets reared in an enriched environment had higher frequency and duration of interaction with a new object, as well as shorter latency time for the first contact with the object (P &lt; 0.05). Conclusions The use of enrichment objects in the rearing environment of piglets at the nursery stage reduced undesirable behaviours, suggesting reduced fear and anxiety, and may therefore improve their psychological wellbeing. Implications Use of enrichment objects during rearing may have implications for alleviation of chronic stress, which leads to constant release of cortisol, an immune suppressor hormone that reduces the health status of the batch and hence production indices.

Providing Effective Environmental Enrichment to Pigs: How Far Have We Come?

Science has defined the characteristics of effective environmental enrichment for pigs. We provide an overview of progress towards the provision of pig enrichment in the three largest global pork producing regions. In the USA, enrichment has not yet featured on the policy agenda, nor appeared on farms, except when required by certain farm assurance schemes. China has very limited legal animal welfare provisions and public awareness of animal welfare is very low. Food safety concerns severely restrict the use of substrates (as enrichment) on farms. Providing enrichment to pigs is a legal requirement in the EU. In practice, enrichment is not present, or simple (point-source) objects are provided which have no enduring value. Other common issues are the provision of non-effective or hazardous objects, inadequate presentation, location, quantity and size or inadequate maintenance of enrichment. Improvements can be made by applying principles from the field of experimental analysis of behaviour to evaluate the effectiveness of enrichment; providing welfare knowledge transfer, including training and advisory services; highlighting the economic benefits of effective enrichment and focusing on return on investment; increasing pressure from the financial sector; using novel drivers of change, such as public business benchmarking. The poor implementation of scientific knowledge on farms suggests that the pig industry has not fully embraced the benefits of effective enrichment and is still a long way off achieving an enriched pig population.

Rearing Undocked Pigs on Fully Slatted Floors Using Multiple Types and Variations of Enrichment

In fully slatted systems, tail biting is difficult to manage when pigs' tails are not docked because loose enrichment material can obstruct slurry systems. This pilot study sought to determine: a) whether intact-tailed pigs can be reared with a manageable level of tail biting by using multiple slat-compatible enrichment; b) whether a variation of enrichment has an effect; and c) whether pigs show a preference in enrichment use. Ninety-six undocked pigs were given the same enrichment items from one week after birth until weaning. At weaning, four different combinations of 8 enrichment items were utilized based on predefined characteristics. These were randomly assigned to 8 pens (n = 12 pigs/pen). Four pens had the same combination (SAME) from assignment and four pens switched combinations every two weeks (SWITCH). Individual lesion scores, interactions with the enrichment, and harmful behaviours were recorded. The average tail score during the experiment was low (0.93 ± 0.02). Only one pig in a SAME pen had a severely bitten tail (partly amputated). The overall level of interaction with enrichment did not decline over time. Pigs interacted with a rack of loose material most frequently (p < 0.001). The study showed promising results for rearing undocked pigs on fully slatted floors using slat-compatible enrichment.

Expert opinion on metal chains and other indestructible objects as proper enrichment for intensively-farmed pigs

EC Directive 2001/93 requires that all pigs have access to proper investigation and manipulation materials. Intensively farmed pigs in Europe are frequently provided with a short metal chain with or without an indestructible object attached to the chain. To date authorities are regarding this as proper enrichment, perhaps with (in)direct reference to the RICHPIG model as a justification. However, it has become increasingly clear that the chains do not provide proper enrichment, and that adding an indestructible object to the end of the chain may even reduce rather than improve pig welfare. To test this hypothesis an expert survey was conducted containing 26 more or less compound questions. On a scale from 0 to 10 experts specified their level of agreement with the hypothesis, the prevalence and welfare scores of nine indestructible enrichment materials. In total 36 experts, mostly pig-welfare scientists, responded (response rate: 39%). Indestructible objects are less prevalent in countries that provide straw (like Sweden and the UK) and outside the EU (US). They are more prevalent in the Netherlands, Belgium, France and Finland, while the prevalence seems to be low in Spain. Balls, wood and pipes were provided most frequently: hard wood especially in the UK (as specified in farm assurance); indestructible balls and pipes in Germany and the Netherlands. The experts’ score for agreement with the hypothesis was only 4.6 on average (scale 0–10; n = 25). Enrichment materials, ranked from high to low welfare score, were grouped in 5 significance levels as indicated by different superscripts based on Wilcoxon signed rank tests: Branched chains (5.1^a), Chain on the floor (4.4^b), Hard wood (3.7^bc), Pipe (3.5^c), Bare chain (3.3^c), Short chain (3.1^d), Small ball (2.8^d), Big ball (2.5^d), and Chain hanging too high (1.3^e). Branched chains scored significantly better than all other indestructible materials and its welfare score (5.1 on average) was close to the pre-defined level of acceptability (5.5 on a scale from 0, worst, to 10, best). The welfare benefits of adding balls, pipes or hard wood to the metal chain were marginal, and well below what the experts considered acceptable enrichment. The branched-chains design, by contrast, appears to be the most viable alternative. It involves providing a longer chain, i.e. with the free end reaching to floor level, adding ‘branches’, i.e. several short chains ending at the nose height of the pigs, and providing more chains per pen (i.e. 1 branched chain per 5 pigs). Branched chains should be implemented widely and in the short term as a first step towards, and benchmark for, providing proper enrichment to intensively-farmed pigs.

A two-level pen for fattening pigs: Effects on behavior, performance, and postslaughter measurements

Concurrent with a tendency toward higher slaughter weights of fattening pigs, minimum requirements for space allowance are increasing. Allowing pigs more space in existing standard pens, however, leads to a decrease in the number of pigs per pen, which jeopardizes the economic viability of the pig farm. A possible solution includes creating a two-level pen by constructing a second level in an existing pen, to enable an increase in space allowance per pig with the same number of pigs. We investigated the effect of such a pen on the behavior, performance, and postslaughter results of fattening pigs during the entire fattening period (30 to 110 kg). A total of 444 pigs were distributed over standard control pens (0.74 m/pig) and two-level pens (0.99 m/pig). Feed was provided only in a trough at the ground level of the pen. The results show that the increased space allowance and choice of levels in two-level pens influenced the pigs' behavior in a positive way, as they performed less manipulation of pen mates ( < 0.0001). Moreover, pigs lay down more ( = 0.0007) and showed less head knocking ( = 0.005) in two-level pens, suggesting that they were calmer. In line with the behavioral results, pigs in two-level pens had fewer lesions on tails ( = 0.006), ears ( = 0.008), and shoulders ( = 0.01). Growth performance was not affected ( > 0.05), but postslaughter measurements revealed fewer livers with white spots in pigs from two-level pens. This result might be related to lower disease pressure in pens with lower stocking densities. In conclusion, a two-level pen seemed to have positive effects on the behavior of pigs (in terms of pen mate manipulation) and the increase in space allowance seemed to make the pigs calmer. The use of the second level by heavier pigs should, however, be further studied to investigate whether this extra space could be fully counted for the minimal space requirements.

Provision of straw by a foraging tower -effect on tail biting in weaners and fattening pigs

BACKGROUND

Straw is one of the most effective rooting materials to reduce tail biting in pigs. A so-called foraging-tower (FT) provides only small quantities of straw compatible with liquid manure systems. The focus of the present study was on the effect of providing straw by FT in order to prevent tail biting in tail docked pigs. Four consecutive batches of 160 pigs, randomly divided into a straw (SG) and a control group (CG) were followed up from weaning to slaughter.

RESULTS

Tail wounds (Score ≥ 2) were detected in 104 out of 12,032 single observations (SG n = 48; CG n = 56) in 9 pens (SG n = 4/32; CG n = 5/32) mainly focused on the fattening period of batch 2 due to a failure in the ventilation system. No significant differences concerning the distribution of Score ≥ 2 in pens of the SG and CG could be identified. Bite marks (Score 1) were documented in 395 observations at animal level (SG n = 197, CG n = 198) in all batches. In the nursery period, the air velocity significantly increased the chance that at least one pig per pen and week showed a tail lesion score ≥1 (p = 0.024). In the fattening period ammonia concentration was positively associated with tail lesions (p = 0.007). The investigation of blood samples revealed infections with Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae in all batches and a circulation of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (NA-vaccine strain) and Porcine Circovirus Type 2 in two batches each. The average daily straw consumption was 3.5 g/pig (standard deviation (SD) = 1.1) during the rearing period and 31.9 g/pig (SD = 7.7) during the fattening period.

CONCLUSION

Due to the low prevalence of tail biting in all batches the effect of the FT tower could not be evaluated conclusively. The operation of the FT with an average daily straw consumption of 3.5 g/pig (SD = 1.1) during the rearing period and 31.9 g/pig (SD = 7.7) during the fattening period did not affect the weight gain. Exploratory behaviour seems to cause bite marks (score 1), which do not necessarily result in tail biting. The main outbreak of tail biting was probably triggered by a failure of the ventilation system, which resulted in a number of climatic and air quality changes including higher ammonia concentrations and sudden temperature changes.