Literature DB >> 29293713

Effects of tail docking and tail biting on performance and welfare of growing-finishing pigs in a confinement housing system.

Y Z Li, H F Zhang, L J Johnston, W Martin, J D Peterson, J F Coetzee.   

Abstract

A study was conducted to evaluate the effect of tail docking on the welfare and performance of victimized pigs by tail biting and tail biters. Pigs ( = 240; 25.7 ± 2.9 kg average weight), including 120 pigs that were tail docked at birth and 120 pigs that remained with intact tails, were used. Pigs were housed in 8 pens of 30 pigs in a confinement barn for 16 wk, with 4 pens each housing pigs of both sexes with docked or intact tails. Tail biters and victimized pigs with damaged tails were identified during outbreaks of tail biting. Growth performance was monitored, and skin lesions on the tail, ears, and body were assessed. Blood samples were collected from focal tail biters, victimized pigs, and nonvictimized pigs for analysis of total serum protein, IgG, and substance P concentrations. When pigs were marketed, carcass weights and the number of pigs with carcass trim loss were recorded. During the growing-finishing period, 48% of pigs with docked tails and 89% of pigs with intact tails experienced lesions on their tails, including 5% of docked pigs and 30% of intact pigs identified as victimized pigs that experienced puncture wounds with signs of infection on their tails or loss of tails ( < 0.001). Victimized pigs tended to gain less weight ( = 0.07) between 17 and 21 wk of age than other pigs when tail biting prevailed in this study. Victimized pigs were more frequently ( = 0.04) sold for less than full value and had a lower dressing percentage ( < 0.001) compared with nonvictimized pigs. For victimized pigs, total serum protein and IgG concentrations were elevated 5 d after tails were injured, suggesting that tail damage can cause inflammation, which may lead to carcass abscesses and trim loss. Compared with victimized pigs and nonvictimized pigs, tail biters had lower total serum protein ( = 0.01) and IgG ( = 0.01) concentrations, indicating that tail biters may experience poor immune functions. Results of this study demonstrated that tail docking reduced tail damage in pigs kept in a confinement system. Tail damage can cause inflammation and reduce the value of market pigs. More research is needed to test whether compromised immune functions predispose pigs to tail biting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29293713      PMCID: PMC6292262          DOI: 10.2527/jas2017.1571

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  28 in total

Review 1.  An overview of the physiology of pain for the veterinarian.

Authors:  Roy A Meintjes
Journal:  Vet J       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 2.688

2.  The physiological and behavioral response of pigs castrated with and without anesthesia or analgesia.

Authors:  M A Sutherland; B L Davis; T A Brooks; J F Coetzee
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Brain gene expression differences are associated with abnormal tail biting behavior in pigs.

Authors:  E Brunberg; P Jensen; A Isaksson; L J Keeling
Journal:  Genes Brain Behav       Date:  2012-12-07       Impact factor: 3.449

4.  Prevalence of risk factors for tail biting on commercial farms and intervention strategies.

Authors:  Nina R Taylor; Richard M A Parker; Michael Mendl; Sandra A Edwards; David C J Main
Journal:  Vet J       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 2.688

Review 5.  Neuroendocrine pharmacology of stress.

Authors:  Gonzalo A Carrasco; Louis D Van de Kar
Journal:  Eur J Pharmacol       Date:  2003-02-28       Impact factor: 4.432

6.  Behavior and performance of pigs previously housed in large groups.

Authors:  Y Z Li; L J Johnston
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2008-12-19       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  Tail biting induces a strong acute phase response and tail-end inflammation in finishing pigs.

Authors:  Mari Heinonen; Toomas Orro; Teija Kokkonen; Camilla Munsterhjelm; Olli Peltoniemi; Anna Valros
Journal:  Vet J       Date:  2009-04-26       Impact factor: 2.688

8.  Plasma concentrations of substance P and cortisol in beef calves after castration or simulated castration.

Authors:  Johann F Coetzee; Brian V Lubbers; Scott E Toerber; Ronette Gehring; Daniel U Thomson; Bradley J White; Michael D Apley
Journal:  Am J Vet Res       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 1.156

Review 9.  Tail-biting: a new perspective.

Authors:  Nina R Taylor; David C J Main; Mike Mendl; Sandra A Edwards
Journal:  Vet J       Date:  2009-10-04       Impact factor: 2.688

10.  Scoring tail damage in pigs: an evaluation based on recordings at Swedish slaughterhouses.

Authors:  Linda J Keeling; Anna Wallenbeck; Anne Larsen; Nils Holmgren
Journal:  Acta Vet Scand       Date:  2012-05-28       Impact factor: 1.695

View more
  3 in total

1.  The Relationship between Carcass Condemnations and Tail Lesion in Swine Considering Different Production Systems and Tail Lengths.

Authors:  Alice Gomes; Claudia Romeo; Sergio Ghidini; Madalena Vieira-Pinto
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-07       Impact factor: 3.231

2.  Association Between Tail-Biting and Intestinal Microbiota Composition in Pigs.

Authors:  Nassima Rabhi; Alexandre Thibodeau; Jean-Charles Côté; Nicolas Devillers; Benoit Laplante; Philippe Fravalo; Guillaume Larivière-Gauthier; William P Thériault; Luigi Faucitano; Guy Beauchamp; Sylvain Quessy
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2020-12-09

Review 3.  A Systematic Review of Genomic Regions and Candidate Genes Underlying Behavioral Traits in Farmed Mammals and Their Link with Human Disorders.

Authors:  Amanda B Alvarenga; Hinayah R Oliveira; Shi-Yi Chen; Stephen P Miller; Jeremy N Marchant-Forde; Lais Grigoletto; Luiz F Brito
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-06       Impact factor: 2.752

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.