Jejunal morphology and blood metabolites in tail biting, victim and control pigs

The Influence of Piper sarmentosum Extract on Growth Performance, Intestinal Barrier Function, and Metabolism of Growing Chickens

In the poultry industry, there is an urgent need to evaluate and introduce natural, effective, and safe alternatives for synthetic antibiotics, which have been banned in most countries. The present study aimed to investigate the effects of dietary supplementation with Piper sarmentosum extract (PSE) on the growth performance, intestinal barrier function, and metabolism of growing chickens. A total of 400 seven-day-old female chicks were randomly assigned to four dietary treatments, each of which consisted of five replicates and twenty birds each. The four experimental treatments were fed a basal diet containing 0, 100, 200, and 300 mg PSE/kg (BC, PSE1, PSE2, and PSE3 groups), respectively. The experiment lasted for 28 days. The results showed that dietary supplementation with PSE had no significant effects on the final body weight, average daily gain (ADG), average daily feed intake (ADFI), and the ratio of ADFI to ADG (F/G) (p > 0.05). Compared with the BC group, dietary supplementation with 200-300 mg/kg PSE increased the villus height in the jejunum and ileum of chickens (p < 0.05). The PSE-treated groups significantly increased the mRNA expression of Occludin, ZO-1, and Claudin-1 in the ileal mucosa of chickens (p < 0.05). In addition, a significant decrease in ileal TNF-α and IL-8 mRNA expression (p < 0.05) and a significant increase in IL-22 (p < 0.05) were observed in the PSE2 treatment compared to the BC group. Additionally, three gut metabolites (i.e., citrate, isocitrate, and spermine) showed significant differences among treatments (p < 0.05) and were involved in the tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle, the transfer of acetyl groups into mitochondria, and spermidine and spermine biosynthesis, respectively. In conclusion, the findings obtained here indicate that supplemental PSE can enhance the anti-inflammatory capacity and intestinal mucosal barrier function of chickens.

Filling gaps in animal welfare assessment through metabolomics

Sustainability has become a central issue in Italian livestock systems driving food business operators to adopt high standards of production concerning animal husbandry conditions. Meat sector is largely involved in this ecological transition with the introduction of new label claims concerning the defense of animal welfare (AW). These new guarantees referred to AW provision require new tools for the purpose of authenticity and traceability to assure meat supply chain integrity. Over the years, European Union (EU) Regulations, national, and international initiatives proposed provisions and guidelines for assuring AW introducing requirements to be complied with and providing tools based on scoring systems for a proper animal status assessment. However, the comprehensive and objective assessment of the AW status remains challenging. In this regard, phenotypic insights at molecular level may be investigated by metabolomics, one of the most recent high-throughput omics techniques. Recent advances in analytical and bioinformatic technologies have led to the identification of relevant biomarkers involved in complex clinical phenotypes of diverse biological systems suggesting that metabolomics is a key tool for biomarker discovery. In the present review, the Five Domains model has been employed as a vademecum describing AW. Starting from the individual Domains-nutrition (I), environment (II), health (III), behavior (IV), and mental state (V)-applications and advances of metabolomics related to AW setting aimed at investigating phenotypic outcomes on molecular scale and elucidating the biological routes most perturbed from external solicitations, are reviewed. Strengths and weaknesses of the current state-of-art are highlighted, and new frontiers to be explored for AW assessment throughout the metabolomics approach are argued. Moreover, a detailed description of metabolomics workflow is provided to understand dos and don'ts at experimental level to pursue effective results. Combining the demand for new assessment tools and meat market trends, a new cross-strategy is proposed as the promising combo for the future of AW assessment.

Novel saliva biomarkers for stress and infection in pigs: Changes in oxytocin and procalcitonin in pigs with tail-biting lesions

There is a need for feasible and reliable measures to improve and evaluate production animal health and welfare. Oxytocin is a promising novel stress-related biomarker and procalcitonin may be a measure of sepsis. Both have potential for use in pigs and can be measured from saliva, which allows on-farm sampling with minimal impact on the animals. The current study sought to further validate these measures using a spontaneous situation that causes both stress and an increased risk for infections in pigs, namely a tail-biting outbreak. Grower pigs on a commercial farm belonging to three different phenotype groups were selected: control pigs from control pens (CC, N = 30), control pigs (CTB, N = 10), and pigs with tail lesions from pens with a tail-biting outbreak (LTB, N = 27). A single sample of saliva was collected from each pig and analysed for a range of biomarkers related to stress, infection, inflammation, and immune activation. Oxytocin tended to be higher in CC pigs than in LTB pigs, while cortisol was higher in CTB than CC pigs. Procalcitonin tended to be higher, and haptoglobin was higher in LTB than in CC pigs. Adenosine-deaminase levels were similar between phenotypes. These results provide further evidence for the link between stress and tail biting, and indicate that tail-biting lesions are potential routes for systemic spread of bacteria. Further research into saliva oxytocin as a stress biomarker and saliva procalcitonin as a sepsis biomarker in pigs is warranted.

The Evidence for a Causal Link Between Disease and Damaging Behavior in Pigs

Damaging behaviors (DB) such as tail and ear biting are prevalent in pig production and reduce welfare and performance. Anecdotal reports suggest that health challenges increase the risk of tail-biting. The prevalence of tail damage and health problems show high correlations across batches within and between farms. There are many common risk factors for tail-biting and health problems, notably respiratory, enteric and locomotory diseases. These include suboptimal thermal climate, hygiene, stocking density and feed quality. The prevalence of tail damage and health problems also show high correlations across batches within and between farms. However, limited evidence supports two likely causal mechanisms for a direct link between DB and health problems. The first is that generalized poor health (e.g., enzootic pneumonia) on farm poses an increased risk of pigs performing DB. Recent studies indicate a possible causal link between an experimental inflammation and an increase in DB, and suggest a link between cytokines and tail-biting. The negative effects of poor health on the ingestion and processing of nutrients means that immune-stimulated pigs may develop specific nutrient deficiencies, increasing DB. The second causal mechanism involves tail-biting causing poor health. Indirectly, pathogens enter the body via the tail lesion and once infected, systemic spread of infection may occur. This occurs mainly via the venous route targeting the lungs, and to a lesser extent via cerebrospinal fluid and the lymphatic system. In carcasses with tail lesions, there is an increase in lung lesions, abscessation, arthritis and osteomyelitis. There is also evidence for the direct spread of pathogens between biters and victims. In summary, the literature supports the association between poor health and DB, particularly tail-biting. However, there is insufficient evidence to confirm causality in either direction. Nevertheless, the limited evidence is compelling enough to suggest that improvements to management and housing to enhance pig health will reduce DB. In the same way, improvements to housing and management designed to address DB, are likely to result in benefits to pig health. While most of the available literature relates to tail-biting, we suggest that similar mechanisms are responsible for links between health and other DB.

Breeding for disease resilience: opportunities to manage polymicrobial challenge and improve commercial performance in the pig industry

Disease resilience, defined as an animal's ability to maintain productive performance in the face of infection, provides opportunities to manage the polymicrobial challenge common in pig production. Disease resilience can deliver a number of benefits, including more sustainable production as well as improved animal health and the potential for reduced antimicrobial use. However, little progress has been made to date in the application of disease resilience in breeding programs due to a number of factors, including (1) confusion around definitions of disease resilience and its component traits disease resistance and tolerance, and (2) the difficulty in characterizing such a complex trait consisting of multiple biological functions and dynamic elements of rates of response and recovery from infection. Accordingly, this review refines the definitions of disease resistance, tolerance, and resilience based on previous studies to help improve the understanding and application of these breeding goals and traits under different scenarios. We also describe and summarize results from a "natural disease challenge model" designed to provide inputs for selection of disease resilience. The next steps for managing polymicrobial challenges faced by the pig industry will include the development of large-scale multi-omics data, new phenotyping technologies, and mathematical and statistical methods adapted to these data. Genome editing to produce pigs resistant to major diseases may complement selection for disease resilience along with continued efforts in the more traditional areas of biosecurity, vaccination and treatment. Altogether genomic approaches provide exciting opportunities for the pig industry to overcome the challenges provided by hard-to-manage diseases as well as new environmental challenges associated with climate change.

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.

Tail-Biting in Pigs: A Scoping Review

Tail-biting is globally recognized as a welfare concern for commercial swine production. Substantial research has been undertaken to identify risk factors and intervention methods to decrease and understand this vice. Tail-biting appears to be multifactorial and has proven difficult to predict and control. The primary objective of the scoping review was to identify and chart all available literature on the risk factors and interventions associated with tail-biting in pigs. A secondary objective was to identify gaps in the literature and identify the relevance for a systematic review. An online literature search of four databases, encompassing English, peer-reviewed and grey literature published from 1 January 1970 to 31 May 2019, was conducted. Relevance screening and charting of included articles were performed by two independent reviewers. A total of 465 citations were returned from the search strategy. Full-text screening was conducted on 118 articles, with 18 being excluded in the final stage. Interventions, possible risk factors, as well as successful and unsuccessful outcomes were important components of the scoping review. The risk factors and interventions pertaining to tail-biting were inconsistent, demonstrating the difficulty of inducing tail-biting in an experimental environment and the need for standardizing terms related to the behavior.

Maternal and direct genetic parameters for tail length, tail lesions, and growth traits in pigs

Tail length and tail lesions are the major triggers for tail biting in pigs. Against this background, 2 datasets were analyzed to estimate genetic parameters for tail characteristics and growth traits. Dataset 1 considered measurements for trait tail length (T-LEN) and for the growth traits birth weight (BW), weaning weight (WW), postweaning weight (PWW), and average daily gain (ADG) from 9,348 piglets. Piglets were born in the period from 2015 to 2018 and kept on the university Gießen research station. Dataset 2 included 4,943 binary observations from 1,648 pigs from the birth years 2016 to 2019 for tail lesions (T-LES) as indicators for nail necrosis, tail abnormalities, or tail biting. T-LES were recorded at 30 ± 7 d after entry for rearing (T-Les-1), at 50 ± 7 d after entry for rearing (end of the rearing period, T-LES-2), and 130 ± 20 d after entry for rearing (end of fattening period, T-LES-3). Genetic statistical model evaluation for dataset 1 based on Akaike's information criterion and likelihood ration tests suggested multiple-trait animal models considering covariances between direct and maternal genetic effects. The direct heritability for T-LEN was 0.42 (±0.03), indicating the potential for genetic selection on short tails. The maternal genetic heritability for T-LEN was 0.05 (±0.04), indicating the influence of uterine characteristics on morphological traits. The negative correlation between direct and maternal effects for T-LEN of -0.35 (±0.13), as well as the antagonistic relationships (i.e., positive direct genetic correlations in the range from 0.03 to 0.40) between T-LEN with the growth traits BW, WW, PWW, and ADG, complicate selection strategies and breeding goal definitions. The correlations between direct effects for T-LEN and maternal effects for breeding goal traits, and vice versa, were positive but associated with a quite large SE. The heritability for T-LES when considering the 3 repeated measurements was 0.23 (±0.04) from the linear (repeatability of 0.30) and 0.21 (±0.06; repeatability of 0.29) from the threshold model. The breeding value correlations between T-LES-3 with breeding values from the repeatability models were quite large (0.74 to 0.90), suggesting trait lesion recording at the end of the rearing period. To understand all genetic mechanisms in detail, ongoing studies are focusing on association analyses between T-LEN and T-LES, and the identification of tail biting from an actor's perspective.

Association Between Tail-Biting and Intestinal Microbiota Composition in Pigs

Tail-biting (TB) in pigs is a serious behavioral disorder. It is an important challenge in swine production as it impacts animal welfare and health and the economics and safety of the pork meat supply chain. To prevent TB, approaches including enrichment material and tail docking are proposed but none are optimal. Nutrition appears to be an important factor in TB behavior, perhaps by modulating the intestinal microbiota (IM). Our aim was to assess the association between TB behavior and IM in pigs through comparisons of IM in groups of biter, bitten and non-biter/non-bitten pigs. Each group composed of 12 pigs was formed at the beginning of the growing/finishing phase based on a target behavior analysis centered on TB behavior for the biter group and a score of damages caused to the tail for the bitten group. Blood and fecal samples were collected from each pig during a TB episode, at time 0, t0, and when the TB episode was considered finished, 4 weeks later, at time 1, t1. Serum cortisol level was determined by ELISA and used as an indicator of stress. The pig's fecal microbiota was analyzed from DNA extracted from freshly collected fecal matter using amplicon sequencing of the V4 hypervariable region of the 16S rRNA gene. Serum cortisol levels were significantly higher in either the biter or bitten pig groups compared to the negative control group (p = 0.02 and p = 0.01, respectively). The microbiota alpha-diversity was not significantly different between all groups, biter, bitten and negative control. Analyses of beta-diversity, however, revealed a significant difference between either the biter or the bitten group in comparison to the non-biter/non-bitten negative control group in terms of structure and composition of the microbiota. Lactobacillus were significantly more abundant in the negative control group compared to the two other groups (p = 0.001). No significant difference was revealed between the biter and bitten groups. Quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) confirmed that lactobacilli were more abundant in the negative control group. Our study indicates that TB behavior is associated with the IM composition in pigs.

Omics Application in Animal Science-A Special Emphasis on Stress Response and Damaging Behaviour in Pigs

Increasing stress resilience of livestock is important for ethical and profitable meat and dairy production. Susceptibility to stress can entail damaging behaviours, a common problem in pig production. Breeding animals with increased stress resilience is difficult for various reasons. First, studies on neuroendocrine and behavioural stress responses in farm animals are scarce, as it is difficult to record adequate phenotypes under field conditions. Second, damaging behaviours and stress susceptibility are complex traits, and their biology is not yet well understood. Dissecting complex traits into biologically better defined, heritable and easily measurable proxy traits and developing biomarkers will facilitate recording these traits in large numbers. High-throughput molecular technologies (“omics”) study the entirety of molecules and their interactions in a single analysis step. They can help to decipher the contributions of different physiological systems and identify candidate molecules that are representative of different physiological pathways. Here, we provide a general overview of different omics approaches and we give examples of how these techniques could be applied to discover biomarkers. We discuss the genetic dissection of the stress response by different omics techniques and we provide examples and outline potential applications of omics tools to understand and prevent outbreaks of damaging behaviours.

Irish pig farmer's perceptions and experiences of tail and ear biting

Abnormal behaviours such as ear and tail biting of pigs is of significant welfare and economic concern. Currently, pig welfare legislation is under renewed focus by the EU commission and is likely to be enforced more thoroughly. The legislation prohibits routine tail docking and requires adequate enrichment to be provided. In Ireland, tail-docking is still the most utilised control mechanism to combat tail biting, but biting is still widespread even in tail-docked pigs. In addition, as pig farms are almost all fully slatted, bedding type material cannot be provided. Thus, the opinions, and practices of farmers in countries like Ireland, which may need to make significant adaptations to typical pig management systems soon, need to be considered and addressed. We carried out a survey of pig farmers during 2015 in order to gain a greater understanding of the extent of biting on Irish farms, perception on the most important preventive measures, current enrichment use and actions following outbreaks. Fifty-eight farmers from 21 Counties responded with an average herd size of 710 ± 597 sows (range 90–3000 sows). Only two farms had experienced no biting in the last year. Of the farms that had experienced tail biting (88%), 86% had also experienced ear biting. The most common concerns relating to biting were condemnation and reduced productivity of bitten pigs with both receiving an average score of 4 (most serious). Ear biting occurred most commonly in the 2nd stage (approximately 47–81 days from weaning) weaner and tail biting in the finishing stage. The most important preventive measures were felt to be taking care of animal health, restricting density, maintaining an even quality of feed/content and maintaining good air movement. Sixty-five percent of respondents added additional enrichment following an outbreak. Chains were the most common form of enrichment currently used (83%). Those not using chains favoured wood, toys and rope (17%). Identification of the most effective and accessible control and prevention measures both for the animals and for the farming community is thus essential. Improved understanding of the concerns and practices of producers, which this survey contributes to, is a first step towards this aim.

Antimicrobial peptide KR-32 alleviates Escherichia coli K88-induced fatty acid malabsorption by improving expression of fatty acid transporter protein 4 (FATP4)1

Bacterial infection causes nutrient malabsorption in small intestine. KR-32, a kind of synthetic antimicrobial peptide, has the bacteriostatic effect. In the present study, 2 experiments were designed to analyze the effects of KR-32 on fat absorption of piglets with or without Escherichia coli infection. In Exp. 1, 12 weaning piglets (21 d old) were allocated to 2 groups: piglets with an intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection of antimicrobial peptide KR-32 (APK) and piglets with an i.p. injection of an equivalent volume (1 mL) of phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) (CON-1). Results showed that after 7 d of growth, KR-32 did not significantly change growth performance and apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of feed nutrients of normal pigs. To confirm whether KR-32 affects those of enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) K88-challenged pigs, we performed Exp. 2, in which 18 piglets (28 d old) were divided into the following 3 groups: 1) piglets orally challenged with 1 × 1010 cfu ETEC K88 on day 1 followed by an i.p. injection of 0.6 mg/kg KR-32 (K88 + APK); 2) piglets orally challenged with 1 × 1010 cfu ETEC K88 on day 1 followed by an i.p. injection of an equivalent volume (1 mL) of PBS (K88); and 3) piglets with an oral administration of fresh Luria-Bertani broth (50 mL) followed by an i.p. injection of an equivalent volume of PBS (CON-2). Results showed that ETEC K88 challenge led to poor ADFI, ADG, and G:F in piglets; decreased ATTD of feed nutrients, especially CP and ether extract (EE); and intestinal morphology disorder. After i.p. injection of KR-32, ADG and ATTD of CP and EE were greatly increased, G:F was significantly reduced (P < 0.05), and, especially, ATTD of EE returned to a normal level compared with group CON-2. Fatty acid absorption also highly increased after KR-32 injection. Then we focused on fat digestion and fatty acid uptake. The pH in the intestine and pancreas lipase showed no difference among the 3 treatment groups, whereas fatty acid transporter protein 4 (FATP4) expression was remarkably improved (P < 0.05) and the epithelial barrier was recovered after i.p. injection of KR-32. In conclusion, KR-32, given to ETEC K88-challenged piglets, improved growth performance, ATTD of EE, fatty acid absorption, and intestinal morphology, which indicated that KR-32 was likely to improve the expression of FATP4 and by repairing the epithelial barrier, thereby alleviating fatty acid malabsorption.

Save the pig tail

Tail biting is a common problem in modern pig production and has a negative impact on both animal welfare and economic result of the farm. Tail biting risk is increased by management and housing practices that fail to meet the basic needs of pigs. Tail docking is commonly used to reduce the risk of tail biting, but tail docking in itself is a welfare problem, as it causes pain to the pigs, and facilitates suboptimal production methods from a welfare point-of-view. When evaluating the cost and benefit of tail docking, it is important to consider negative impacts of both tail docking and tail biting. It is also essential to realize that even though 100% of the pigs are normally docked, only a minority will end up bitten, even in the worst case. In addition, data suggests that tail biting can be managed to an acceptable level even without tail docking, by correcting the production system to better meet the basic needs of the pigs.

Injurious tail biting in pigs: how can it be controlled in existing systems without tail docking?

Tail biting is a serious animal welfare and economic problem in pig production. Tail docking, which reduces but does not eliminate tail biting, remains widespread. However, in the EU tail docking may not be used routinely, and some 'alternative' forms of pig production and certain countries do not allow tail docking at all. Against this background, using a novel approach focusing on research where tail injuries were quantified, we review the measures that can be used to control tail biting in pigs without tail docking. Using this strict criterion, there was good evidence that manipulable substrates and feeder space affect damaging tail biting. Only epidemiological evidence was available for effects of temperature and season, and the effect of stocking density was unclear. Studies suggest that group size has little effect, and the effects of nutrition, disease and breed require further investigation. The review identifies a number of knowledge gaps and promising avenues for future research into prevention and mitigation. We illustrate the diversity of hypotheses concerning how different proposed risk factors might increase tail biting through their effect on each other or on the proposed underlying processes of tail biting. A quantitative comparison of the efficacy of different methods of provision of manipulable materials, and a review of current practices in countries and assurance schemes where tail docking is banned, both suggest that daily provision of small quantities of destructible, manipulable natural materials can be of considerable benefit. Further comparative research is needed into materials, such as ropes, which are compatible with slatted floors. Also, materials which double as fuel for anaerobic digesters could be utilised. As well as optimising housing and management to reduce risk, it is important to detect and treat tail biting as soon as it occurs. Early warning signs before the first bloody tails appear, such as pigs holding their tails tucked under, could in future be automatically detected using precision livestock farming methods enabling earlier reaction and prevention of tail damage. However, there is a lack of scientific studies on how best to respond to outbreaks: the effectiveness of, for example, removing biters and/or bitten pigs, increasing enrichment, or applying substances to tails should be investigated. Finally, some breeding companies are exploring options for reducing the genetic propensity to tail bite. If these various approaches to reduce tail biting are implemented we propose that the need for tail docking will be reduced.