Associations between animal and herd management factors, serological response to three respiratory pathogens and pluck lesions in finisher pigs on a farrow-to-finish farm

Assessment of individual and population-based sampling for detection of influenza A virus RNA in breeding swine herds

Sample types currently used for Influenza A virus (IAV) surveillance in swine farms vary in sensitivity, convenience of collection, and herd representativeness. Family oral fluids are an effective population-based sample type for detecting porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) (ribonucleic acid) RNA by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-rtPCR) in breeding herds. However, little is known about the efficacy of family oral fluids samples for detecting IAV RNA in these herds. This study compared the probability of IAV RNA detection among individual and population-based samples. A 3,500-sow breeding herd was sampled for matched sets (n = 57) of family oral fluids, udder wipes, sow nasal wipes, individual piglet nasal wipes, and drinker wipes, tested by RT-rtPCR for IAV RNA. Overall, 57.9 % (33/57) of family oral fluids, 49.1 % (28/57) of udder wipes, 28.1 % (16/57) of sow nasal wipes, 15.8 % (9/57) of drinker wipes, and 66.6 % (38/57) of individual piglet nasal wipes were positive. Family oral fluids showed a Kappa value of 0.81, indicating near-perfect agreement with individual piglet nasal wipes, while udder wipes had a substantial agreement (Kappa = 0.65). Other sample types showed fair agreement (Kappa < 0.28). These results validate family oral fluids as an efficient alternative population-based sample for IAV surveillance in breeding herds. The proportion of positive piglets within litters by room was 91 % in room A (20/22), 70 % in room B (17/24), and 9 % in room C (1/11). This study also highlights the importance of sampling different farrowing rooms within the same breeding herd to enhance IAV surveillance.

Identifying challenges to manage body weight variation in pig farms implementing all-in-all-out management practices and their possible implications for animal health: a case study

Background

Managing body weight (BW) variation is a challenge in farrow-to-finish farms implementing all-in/all-out (AIAO) production systems due to the lack of “off-site” facilities to segregate slow growing pigs (SGP). This case study investigated different approaches to managing BW variation in a farrow-to-finish commercial pig farm with a self-declared AIAO management and the possible implications for animal health.

Case presentation

A total of 1096 pigs (1047 pigs born within 1 week plus 49 pigs born 1 week later) were tracked until slaughter as they moved through the production stages. Piglets were individually tagged at birth and their location on the farm was recorded on a weekly basis. In total, 10.3% of pigs died during lactation. Four main cohorts of pigs were created at weaning and retrospectively identified: cohort 1 = pigs weaned at 21 days (4.5%); cohort 2 = pigs weaned at 28 days (81.0%), which was sub-divided at the end of the first nursery stage into sub-cohort 2a = pigs split at 3 weeks post-weaning (29.7%); sub-cohort 2b = pigs split at 3 weeks post-weaning from cohort 2a and split again 5 weeks post-weaning (35.5%) and sub-cohort 2c = remaining smaller size pigs from cohort 2b (10.9%); cohort 3 = pigs weaned at 35 days (2.7%) and cohort 4 = pigs weaned at 49 days (1.5%) that were later mixed with SPG, delayed pigs from other cohorts and sick/injured pigs that recovered. Four strategies to manage BW variation were identified: i) earlier weaning (cohort 1); ii) delayed weaning of SGP (cohort 3 and 4); iii) re-grading pens by BW (sub-cohorts 2a, 2b and 2c) and, iv) delayed movement of SGP to the next production stage (several pigs from all cohorts). A higher percentage of delayed pigs presented pericarditis, pleurisy and enzootic pneumonia like lesions at slaughter compared with pigs under other strategies.

Conclusion

A variety of management practices were implemented to minimise BW variation during the production cycle. However, several cohorts of pigs were created disrupting AIAO management. Earlier weaning should only be practiced under specific circumstances where optimal animal health and welfare are guaranteed. Delayed weaning of SGP and delaying pigs to move to the next production stage could negatively affect animal health and should be avoided.