A total of 557 newborn piglets were used to compare eight identification devices, including one plastic ear tag as a control (C, n = 348) and two types of electronic ear tags (E1, n = 106; and E2, n = 103), and five types of injectable transponders (n = 557): small 12-mm (D12, n = 116; and S12, n = 110), medium 23-mm (T23, n = 108), and large (32-mm, T32, n = 115; and 34-mm, S34, n = 108). Injections were made s.c. in the auricle base (n = 248) and intraperitoneally (n = 309) using a new technique. All piglets were identified with two devices, but using electronic ear tags in conjunction with injection in the auricle was avoided on the same pig. Readability of devices was checked during fattening (until 110 kg BW) and slaughtering. On-farm losses were lower for control than for electronic ear tags (C = 1.1%; E1 = 8.8%; and E2 = 44.9%; P < 0.01); the latter also suffered electronic failures (E1 = 5.5%; and E2 = 55.1%; P < 0.001). On-farm losses of transponders injected in the auricle base were greater in large (S34 = 72.5%; and T32 = 46.3%; P < 0.05) than in small transponders (S12 = 19.4%; and D12 = 17.1%), but T23 (29.8%) only differed from S34. Transponder size did not affect on-farm losses for intraperitoneal injections in which only one loss was recorded (0.4%). All ear tags had similar losses during transportation to the slaughterhouse (1.2%), but no losses were observed in injectables. Slaughtering losses did not differ between ear tags (C = 11.2%; and E1 = 6.4%), but apart from losses, 12.8% of E1 failed electronically. Injection site affected losses and breakages during slaughtering (auricle base = 6.4%; and intraperitoneal = 0%), but recovery time did not significantly differ (auricle base = 28.6 s; and intraperitoneal = 18.9 s). Transponders in the auricle base were recovered by sight (30.2%), palpation (27.4%), or by cutting (42.5%). Intraperitoneal transponders were mainly recovered loose in the abdominal cavity (81.4%), whereas 18.6% fell on the floor. As a result, traceability varied significantly (P < 0.05) between control (86.7%) and electronic ear tags (0 to 68.1%) and injectable transponders, with the auricle base (17.8 to 75.0%) having lower values than intraperitoneal (98 to 100%). Intraperitoneal injection was a very effective tool for piglet identification and traceability, ensuring the transfer of information from farm to slaughterhouse. To warrant the use of this technique in practice, transponder recovery requires further investigation.

Dairy goat kids born during a 3-yr period (n = 97) and their mothers (n = 29) were used for a long-term evaluation of the performance of 9 types of identification (ID) devices. Kids wore multiple ID devices: visual ear tags (V1, tip-tag, n = 47; V2, official, n = 50), electronic ear tags (E1, button-button, n = 46; E2, flag-button, n = 46), electronic rumen boluses (B1, mini-bolus 14 g, n = 92; B2, mini-bolus 20 g, n = 28; B3, standard bolus 75 g, n = 34) and glass-encapsulated transponders injected in the forefeet (T1, 15 mm, n = 75; T2, 12 mm, n = 100). Visual ear tags were applied at birth and removed in yearlings, whereas electronic ear tags were applied after bolusing with B1 (6.7 kg BW and 30 d, on average); B2 were administered in the event of a B1 loss, and B3 in case of a B2 loss and in goat does. At d 60 of age, kids were allocated into 2 groups to evaluate the effects of rearing system on ID. Treatments were: weaned (n = 46), and not weaned (n = 46) where kids suckled a milk substitute until d 150. Readability of ID devices (read/readable x 100) was monitored from 1 to 3 yr of age, depending on device and year of birth. Long-term readability was analyzed using a nonparametric survival analysis. A total of 3.3% infections and 6.5% tissue reactions were reported for electronic ear tags, but ears were fully healed in yearlings. Weaning numerically reduced B1 losses at d 150 (weaned, 84.8% vs. not weaned, 73.3%). Readability of visual ear tags in yearlings (V1, 82.9%; V2, 94.0%) was lower than for electronic ear tags (E1 and E2, 100%). Mini-bolus readability in yearlings did not differ by type (B1, 71.4%; B2, 84.6%) or with visual ear tags. No effect of inject type was reported (T1, 92.0%; T2, 96.0%). Survival analysis after yr 3 gave the greatest readability value for E1 (100%), which did not differ from B3 (96.8%). The lowest readability was estimated for B1 (66.3%), followed by E2 (79.8%), B2 (81.4%), and T1 (90.4%). In conclusion, button-button electronic ear tags and standard boluses were the more efficient devices under our conditions, their readability values being greater than injects, electronic mini-boluses, and visual and flag-button electronic ear tags. Transponders injected in the forefeet and mini-boluses used here are not recommended in practice. Further research on E1 and B3 electronic devices should be done in a higher number of goats to confirm the current results.

Twelve types of electronic identification ruminal boluses of different dimensions were used to obtain a model for predicting their retention in the forestomachs of sheep. Boluses (n = 1,662) were made of ceramic materials, and their dimensions varied in o.d. (9 to 21 mm), length (37 to 68 mm), volume (2.5 to 21.0 mL), and specific gravity (0.85 to 3.91). Each bolus contained a half-duplex, standardized, glass-encapsulated transponder (32 x 3.8 mm). Boluses were administered to sheep (n = 1,497) of different ages by using the appropriate balling guns, and their retention under semiintensive conditions was recorded for at least 2 yr. When a bolus was lost, the sheep was rebolused with a heavier bolus. All sheep wore 2 plastic ear tags: one for the official control of health programs and the other for farm use. To determine the anatomical limit for a bolus passing through the gastrointestinal tract, the size of the reticulo-omasal orifice was measured in 46 adult sheep (male, n = 14; female, n = 32) that died by causes not related to bolus administration during the experiment. No signs of disease or growth alteration were detected in the bolused sheep. Total ear tag losses during the experiment period were 7.5% on average. Bolus retention (5 to 100%) varied according to bolus features and age of the sheep, but it showed a plateau after 18 mo. Inadequately dimensioned boluses were regurgitated or passed through the gastrointestinal tract and were excreted with the feces. The diameter of the reticulo-omasal orifice in adult sheep differed between male and female (23.1 and 21.8 mm, respectively; P < 0.01) and was greater than the o.d. of the retained boluses. Retention rate was predicted from bolus weight and volume by a logistic regression (R2 = 0.997; P < 0.001). When retention data from the literature (59.0 to 100%) were included in the model, the adjustment was slightly lower (R2 = 0.967). As a result, the minimum bolus weight estimated to reach a 99.5% retention rate in sheep varied between 16 and 45 g when volume varied between 3 and 22 mL, for boluses with a specific gravity between 2.0 and 5.2. In conclusion, bolus retention rate in sheep varied dramatically according to their features. For safe and efficient retention of electronic identification boluses in sheep, boluses of small volume and diameter (e.g., < 15 mm) with specific gravity and weight greater than 3.0 and 20 g, respectively, are recommended.

Three types of ceramic mini-boluses, B1 [13.8 g; 10.5 x 51.0 mm (o.d. x length)], B2 (16.2 g; 12.2 x 42.2 mm), and B3 (20.1 g; 11.2 x 56.4 mm), were used to electronically identify as soon as possible after birth a total of 545 lambs of 3 breeds: Ripollesa (meat breed, n = 274), Manchega (dairy breed, n = 129), and Lacaune (dairy breed, n = 142). Boluses were administered by a trained operator using a balling gun or directly by hand. Lambs were also identified with 2 types of plastic ear tags in the left (temporary, 1.5 g) and the right (permanent, 4.1 g) ears. Lamb and identification device performances were checked during suckling (to wk 5 or 7) and fattening. At 24 kg of BW, lambs were slaughtered (n = 385) or kept for breeding (n = 144). No differences in performance were observed between the 2 dairy breeds, and their data were pooled. Minimum BW for bolus administration was lower in dairy than in meat lambs (P < 0.001). Across breeds, B1 and B3 did not differ in lamb age (27 d) and weight (9.2 kg) at administration, but B2 required older and heavier lambs (33 d and 11.1 kg; P < 0.01). Boluses did not affect lamb performance, but final readability at slaughter differed between B1 and B2 (97.7 and 95.2%, respectively) and B3 (100%), and between ear tags (temporary, 98.1; permanent, 100%). Bolus recovery was 100% in all cases, but the proportion of boluses found in the reticulum varied among bolus type (83.3 to 93.8%; P < 0.05). Three B1 (2%) were recovered from the abomasum. In a second experiment, effects of the intermediate mini-bolus (B2) on diet digestibility were evaluated. Digestibility of control and bolus-administered, Manchega ram lambs (14.9 kg of BW; n = 8) fed ad libitum with 2 pelleted concentrates and barley straw was assessed in digestibility crates. Feed intake and nutrient digestibility were measured in four 21-d periods, during which lambs received the 2 diets consecutively. No differences in intake, growth performance, or nutrient digestibility were observed between control and bolused lambs. In conclusion, the B3 mini-bolus proved to be an efficient device for identification of lambs before weaning (recommended age, >4 wk; recommended BW, >10 kg), allowing a reliable traceability of dairy and meat lambs until slaughter.

A total of 1,822 pigs from 2 farms (farm A, n = 1,032; farm B, n = 790) were used to evaluate pig traceability under on-farm conditions by using identification devices (n = 4,434) of different technologies. The devices were visual ear tags (n = 1,533; Model 1, n = 776; Model 2, n = 757), electronic ear tags (n = 1,446; half-duplex, n = 702; full-duplex, n = 744), and intraperitoneally injected transponders (n = 1,455; half-duplex, n = 732; full-duplex, n = 723). A group of 790 pigs wore 3 types of devices, and 1,032 wore 2 devices. Piglets were identified before (wk 1 to 3 of age; farm A) or after (wk 3 to 4 of age; farm B) weaning and intensively fattened until approximately 100 kg of BW. Readability of devices was checked at each farm operation by using standardized handheld transceivers. No negative effects of the identification devices on animal health (mortality rate, 8.4%) or performance were detected. On-farm losses averaged 1.6% for ear tags (visual, 0.8%; half-duplex, 1.9%; full-duplex, 2.7%; P > 0.05) and 1.8% for intraperitoneally injected transponders (half-duplex, 1.7%; full-duplex, 1.9%; P > 0.05). Moreover, 1.4% electronic failures occurred in the electronic ear tags (half-duplex, 2.2%; full-duplex, 0.6%; P < 0.05) but not in the intraperitoneally injected transponders. Final on-farm readability was greater (P < 0.05) for visual ear tags (99.2%) than for electronic ear tags (half-duplex, 95.9%; full-duplex, 96.7%; P > 0.05). Readability for intraperitoneally injected transponders was intermediate (half-duplex, 98.3%; full-duplex, 98.1%; P > 0.05). Electronic devices were in all cases easier and faster to read than the visual ear tags. Visual ear tags and intraperitoneally injected transponders were efficiently retained under conditions of commercial pig farms, which agrees with the minimum values recommended by the International Committee for Animal Recording (> 98%). When readability and reading ease were also included as decision criteria, injectable transponders were preferred.