Factors influencing the risk for tail lesions in weaner pigs (Sus scrofa)

Grümpel, Angelika; Krieter, Joachim; Veit, Christina; Dippel, Sabine

doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2018.09.001

Cited by 28 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, processed wood (posts, pressed shavings) or permanently present metal and plastic objects did not lead to a significant reduction in tail damage in any of the reviewed studies (although visual inspection of means sometimes suggested some decrease in damage) [32,35,40,42]. This is worrying, as such objects are the most common types of enrichment on many commercial farms [24,25]. Epidemiological studies on tail damage carried out on commercial pig farms in the UK and Italy could not show reduced tail damage in the presence of metal, plastic, and wooden objects [23,25].…”

Section: Effects Of Non-straw Enrichment On Tail Damagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are many alternatives to straw, however, some of which pigs actually prefer over straw (peat, compost, sand, sawdust, wood shavings, branches, bark, beets and silage [20,21]). Although the use of straw (or other loose organic materials) is common on commercial farms in some countries (Finland 72% of farms [22], United Kingdom 68% [23]) it is far less common in others (Germany 34% [24], Italy 0% [25]) where non-straw enrichments, including plastic objects, chains, rope, and wood, are much more common. Such non-straw enrichments are considered to be less effective, and to be sufficient only when provided in certain combinations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Review of the Effects of Non-Straw Enrichment on Tail Biting in Pigs

Buijs

Muns

2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryTail biting, a damaging behaviour that one pig directs at another, causes pain, wounding and health problems. It reduces both pig welfare and market value. Enrichment can reduce tail biting substantially. Many pig producers are reluctant to use straw as enrichment, but many non-straw alternatives exist. We aimed to evaluate their ability to reduce tail biting based on studies on the effects of enrichment on tail damage and manipulation of other pigs, and on the duration of interaction with enrichment. Additionally, we reviewed how pigs interact with different enrichments (e.g., by rooting or chewing it). This was done to clarify which type of enrichment could satisfy which behavioural motivation (that may lead to tail biting if not satisfied). However, very little information on separate enrichment-directed behaviours was uncovered. Several effective types of non-straw enrichment were identified, but these correspond poorly with the types of enrichment commonly applied on commercial farms. More detailed observations of how pigs interact with different enrichments, other pigs, and their environment would improve our understanding of how to combine enrichments to minimize tail biting. This is essential because although single non-straw enrichments can reduce tail biting significantly, the remaining levels of damage can still be high.AbstractTail biting remains a common problem in pig production. As producers are reluctant to use straw to reduce this behaviour, we review studies on the effectiveness of other types of enrichment. Roughage, hessian sacks, compost, fresh wood, space dividers, rope, and providing new objects regularly can significantly reduce tail damage. These results should be interpreted with some caution, as often only one study per enrichment could be identified. No evidence was found that commonly applied enrichment objects (processed wood, plastic or metal) reduce tail biting significantly unless exchanged regularly, even though multiple studies per type of enrichment were identified. Many studies evaluated the duration of enrichment use, but few evaluated the manner of use. This hampers identification of combinations of enrichment that will satisfy the pig’s motivation to eat/smell, bite, root and change enrichments, which is suggested to reduce tail biting. New objects designed to satisfy specific motivations were shown to receive high levels of interaction, but their effectiveness at reducing tail damage remains unknown. More in-depth study of how pigs interact with non-straw enrichment, which motivations this satisfies and how this affects behaviour towards conspecifics, is necessary to optimize enrichment strategies. Optimization is necessary because ceasing tail docking in a way that improves pig welfare requires more effective enrichments than those described in this review, or alternatively, better control over other factors influencing tail biting.

show abstract

Section: Effects Of Non-straw Enrichment On Tail Damagementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of the Effects of Non-Straw Enrichment on Tail Biting in Pigs

Buijs

Muns

2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tail biting is most commonly observed when pigs are housed in suboptimal conditions (e.g., a high stocking density [6], high levels of competition for feed or water, and poor ventilation [7]). A lack of environmental stimulation for pigs has also been recognised as a key risk factor for tail biting [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rearing Undocked Pigs on Fully Slatted Floors Using Multiple Types and Variations of Enrichment

Chou

Drique

Sandercock

et al. 2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In fully slatted systems, tail biting is difficult to manage when pigs’ tails are not docked because loose enrichment material can obstruct slurry systems. This pilot study sought to determine: a) whether intact-tailed pigs can be reared with a manageable level of tail biting by using multiple slat-compatible enrichment; b) whether a variation of enrichment has an effect; and c) whether pigs show a preference in enrichment use. Ninety-six undocked pigs were given the same enrichment items from one week after birth until weaning. At weaning, four different combinations of 8 enrichment items were utilized based on predefined characteristics. These were randomly assigned to 8 pens (n = 12 pigs/pen). Four pens had the same combination (SAME) from assignment and four pens switched combinations every two weeks (SWITCH). Individual lesion scores, interactions with the enrichment, and harmful behaviours were recorded. The average tail score during the experiment was low (0.93 ± 0.02). Only one pig in a SAME pen had a severely bitten tail (partly amputated). The overall level of interaction with enrichment did not decline over time. Pigs interacted with a rack of loose material most frequently (p < 0.001). The study showed promising results for rearing undocked pigs on fully slatted floors using slat-compatible enrichment.

show abstract

“…Surprisingly, stocking density and group size as risk factors are not well documented in experimental studies (D'Eath et al, 2014) and available studies are not conclusive for the effect of group size in negative social behavior (Averós et al, 2010;Sutherland and Tucker, 2011). Tail lesions have been associated with high stocking density (Grümpel et al, 2018) and pens with more than 30 pigs (Pandolfi et al, 2018). However, Klaaborg et al (2019) found no effect of bigger space allowance on pen mate directed behavior and Meyer-Hamme et al, (2016) didn't consider group size as a risk factor in tail docked pigs.…”

Section: Risk Factors For Pig Tail Bitingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although EFSA (2007) considers mixing of piglets to be a risk factor, Veit et al (2017) indicated that there is no direct effect between mixing and tail biting at rearing period while Grümpel et al (2018) found more tail lesions in farms that mixed less than 7.5 litters. In addition, Li et al (2018) suggested that pigs from same litter could be predisposed to tail biting as they are less socially connected.…”

Section: Risk Factors For Pig Tail Bitingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Update on Tail biting in pigs: An undesirable damaging behaviour

Kakanis

Sossidou²,

Kritas

et al. 2021

J Hellenic Vet Med Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tail-biting is an abnormal behavior of multifactorial origin, that consists a major problem in modern pig industry. It has a serious impact on both welfare and health status of the pigs involved, as well as on economic profitability of the farm. It is considered to be a problem of pig adaptation in poor environment triggered by a plethora of external and internal risk factors interacting with each other. A great variation exists on prevalence of tail biting between different studies across the world. Tail docking is the common practice applied by farmers to prevent this behavior, while treatments are based on enrichment material provision. The aim of this review is to explore the most recent literature on risk factors and impacts of tail biting and to discuss promising areas on early prediction and treatment of the topic.

show abstract

Factors influencing the risk for tail lesions in weaner pigs (Sus scrofa)

Cited by 28 publications

References 48 publications

A Review of the Effects of Non-Straw Enrichment on Tail Biting in Pigs

A Review of the Effects of Non-Straw Enrichment on Tail Biting in Pigs

Rearing Undocked Pigs on Fully Slatted Floors Using Multiple Types and Variations of Enrichment

Update on Tail biting in pigs: An undesirable damaging behaviour

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About