Transport losses (dead and nonambulatory pigs) present animal welfare, legal, and economic challenges to the US swine industry. The objectives of this review are to explore 1) the historical perspective of transport losses; 2) the incidence and economic implications of transport losses; and 3) the symptoms and metabolic characteristics of fatigued pigs. In 1933 and 1934, the incidence of dead and nonambulatory pigs was reported to be 0.08 and 0.16%, respectively. More recently, 23 commercial field trials (n = 6,660,569 pigs) were summarized and the frequency of dead pigs, nonambulatory pigs, and total transport losses at the processing plant were 0.25, 0.44, and 0.69% respectively. In 2006, total economic losses associated with these transport losses were estimated to cost the US pork industry approximately $46 million. Furthermore, 0.37 and 0.05% of the nonambulatory pigs were classified as either fatigued (nonambulatory, noninjured) or injured, respectively, in 18 of these trials (n = 4,966,419 pigs). Fatigued pigs display signs of acute stress (open-mouth breathing, skin discoloration, muscle tremors) and are in a metabolic state of acidosis, characterized by low blood pH and high blood lactate concentrations; however, the majority of fatigued pigs will recover with rest. Transport losses are a multifactorial problem consisting of people, pig, facility design, management, transportation, processing plant, and environmental factors, and, because of these multiple factors, continued research efforts are needed to understand how each of the factors and the relationships among factors affect the well-being of the pig during the marketing process. In 1933 and 1934, the incidence of dead and nonambulatory pigs was reported to be 0. 08 and 0.16%, respectively. More recently, 23 commercial field trials (n = 6,660,569 pigs) were summarized and the frequency of dead pigs, nonambulatory pigs, and total transport losses at the processing plant were 0.25, 0.44, and 0.69% respectively. In 2006, total economic

Pigs typically experience various environmental stressors, which can negatively affect performance. Cortisol concentrations and various immune and performance measures are influenced by breed, but few data exist describing the impact of breed on stress responsiveness in pigs. The objective of this experiment was to determine if certain physiological responses to chronic stressors differed among 3 breeds and 2 commercial lines of pigs. The pigs were Landrace (n = 36), Meishan (n = 30), Yorkshire (n = 32), or 1 of 2 commercial lines (Line-A and Line-B; both n = 36). All pigs were weaned at 17 to 21 d and kept in a common nursery. At 49 d of age, pigs were assigned to 1 of 2 treatments: stress (heat, crowding, and mixing) or control (no stress treatment). Pigs were allocated to groups of 3 pigs per pen of the same sex. Control pigs were kept with their littermates. At the onset of the experiment, stressed pigs were mixed with 2 unfamiliar pigs once, and heat and crowding stressors were implemented simultaneously for 14 d. Pigs allocated to the stress treatment were video-recorded for 24 h following initiation of mixing to determine social status: dominant, intermediate, or submissive. Blood samples were taken at d 0 (baseline), 1, 7, and 14 to assess cortisol concentrations and immune measures. Breed and treatment affected cortisol, immune, and performance measures, but no significant breed x treatment interactions were found. In general, pigs subjected to the chronic stressor had lower (P < 0.001) BW and ADG (P < 0.001) than did control pigs. Plasma cortisol was lower (P < 0.001) among stressed pigs at d 7 and 14. Regardless of breed, lipopolysaccharide-induced proliferation (P < 0.01) and natural killer (NK; P < 0.005) cytotoxicity were greater in stressed pigs compared with controls. Furthermore, among stressed pigs, dominant pigs had a greater total white blood cell count (P < 0.005), NK (P < 0.05), and phagocytosis (P < 0.05) than the subordinate pigs. The results indicate that pig breed did not influence the physiological responses to the chronic concurrent stressors imposed for 14 d in this study, but social status did influence the immune responsiveness of these pigs to heat, crowding, and mixing.

Different floor space allowances for dry, pregnant sows in pens were evaluated to determine the impacts of space on sow performance, productivity, and body lesions during 2 consecutive farrowings. Treatment groups of 5 sows/pen were assigned to 1.4, 2.3, or 3.3 m(2) of floor space/sow or of 5 sows in individual stalls (1.34 m(2)). The experiment consisted of 6 replications (blocks 1 to 6), and within each block measurements were recorded for 2 consecutive pregnancies and farrowings. A total of 152 sows were measured at 1 farrowing, and 65 of those sows were measured at the successive farrowing (n = 217 records). Performance traits were BCS, BW, backfat (BF), days until rebred, and proportion culled. Litter traits were number of piglets born alive, male:female ratio, and proportions of stillborn, mummified, or dead piglets after birth. Litter performance measures were mean piglet BW and gain and litter BW. Lesion scores were assessed for several body regions. There were treatment and parity effects and interactions for several traits. An interaction of space treatment and parity occurred for sow mean BW, d-110 BW, BF, litter size, and litter and piglet BW and gain, with most effects in parity 2, 3, and 4 sows. Space affected sow mean (P < 0.001) and d-110 BW (P < 0.05) and mean BF and adjusted BF (P < 0.001); sows in pens at

Routine procedures carried out on piglets (i.e. castration, tail docking, teeth clipping, and ear notching) are considered painful. Unfortunately the efficacy of current pain mitigation modalities is poorly understood. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the existing primary scientific literature regarding the effectiveness of pain management interventions used for routine procedures on piglets. The review question was, 'In piglets under twenty-eight days old, undergoing castration, tail docking, teeth clipping, and/or methods of identification that involve cutting of the ear tissue, what is the effect of pain mitigation compared with no pain mitigation on behavioral and non-behavioral outcomes that indicate procedural pain and post-procedural pain?' A review protocol was designed a priori. Data sources used were Agricola (EBSCO), CAB Abstracts (Thomson Reuters), PubMed, Web of Science (Thomson Reuters), BIOSIS Previews (Thomson Reuters), and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. No restrictions on year of publication or language were placed on the search. Eligible studies assessed an intervention designed to mitigate the pain of the procedures of interest and included a comparison group that did not receive an intervention. Eligible nonEnglish studies were translated using a translation service. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts for relevance using pre-defined questions. Data were extracted from relevant articles onto pre-defined forms. From the 2203 retrieved citations forty publications, containing 52 studies met the eligibility criteria. In 40 studies, piglets underwent castration only. In seven studies, piglets underwent tail docking only. In one study, piglets underwent teeth clipping only, and in one study piglets underwent ear notching only. Three studies used multiple procedures. Thirty-two trial arms assessed general anesthesia protocols, 30 trial arms assessed local anesthetic protocols, and 28 trial arms assessed non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) protocols. Forty-one trial arms were controls where piglets received either placebo or no treatment. Forty-five outcomes were extracted from the studies, however only the results from studies that assessed cortisol (six studies), b-endorphins (one study), vocalisations (nine studies), and pain-related behaviors (nine studies) are reported. Other outcomes were reported in only one or two studies. Confident decision making will likely be difficult based on this body of work because lack of comprehensive reporting precludes calculation of the magnitude of pain mitigation for most outcomes.