Forming groups of aggressive sows based on a predictive test of aggression does not affect overall sow aggression or welfare

Systematic review of animal-based indicators to measure thermal, social, and immune-related stress in pigs

The intense nature of pig production has increased the animals’ exposure to stressful conditions, which may be detrimental to their welfare and productivity. Some of the most common sources of stress in pigs are extreme thermal conditions (thermal stress), density and mixing during housing (social stress), or exposure to pathogens and other microorganisms that may challenge their immune system (immune-related stress). The stress response can be monitored based on the animals’ coping mechanisms, as a result of specific environmental, social, and health conditions. These animal-based indicators may support decision making to maintain animal welfare and productivity. The present study aimed to systematically review animal-based indicators of social, thermal, and immune-related stresses in farmed pigs, and the methods used to monitor them. Peer-reviewed scientific literature related to pig production was collected using three online search engines: ScienceDirect, Scopus, and PubMed. The manuscripts selected were grouped based on the indicators measured during the study. According to our results, body temperature measured with a rectal thermometer was the most commonly utilized method for the evaluation of thermal stress in pigs (87.62%), as described in 144 studies. Of the 197 studies that evaluated social stress, aggressive behavior was the most frequently-used indicator (81.81%). Of the 535 publications examined regarding immune-related stress, cytokine concentration in blood samples was the most widely used indicator (80.1%). Information about the methods used to measure animal-based indicators is discussed in terms of validity, reliability, and feasibility. Additionally, the introduction and wide spreading of alternative, less invasive methods with which to measure animal-based indicators, such as cortisol in saliva, skin temperature and respiratory rate via infrared thermography, and various animal welfare threats via vocalization analysis are highlighted. The information reviewed was used to discuss the feasible and most reliable methods with which to monitor the impact of relevant stressors commonly presented by intense production systems on the welfare of farmed pigs.

Once bitten, twice shy: Aggressive and defeated pigs begin agonistic encounters with more negative emotions

Aggression between unfamiliar commercial pigs is common and likely invokes strong emotions in contestants. Furthermore, contest outcomes affect subsequent aggressive behaviour, suggesting a potential lasting influence on affective state. Here we used a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods to assess the emotional expression of pigs in agonistic encounters. We investigated how recent victory or defeat influences emotions expressed in a subsequent contest, and the role of aggressiveness as a personality trait in emotional expression. We observed the pre-escalation contest behaviour (second contest; age 13 wks) in animals of different aggressiveness (categorised using two resident intruder tests as Agg+ or Agg-, age 9 wks), which had recently won or lost a contest (first contest; 10 wks). We measured gaze direction and ear position. Observers watched video clips of the initial 30 s of the second contest and evaluated the emotional expression of 57 pigs (25 contest 1 winners, 32 contest 1 losers) using qualitative behavioural assessment (QBA) with a fixed list of 20 descriptive terms. QBA identified three principal components (PCs), accounting for 68% of the variation: PC1 (agitated/tense to relaxed/content), PC2 (fearful/aimless to confident/enjoying) and PC3 (listless/ indifferent). Agg- pigs and males showed a more positive emotionality (PC2). PC1 and PC3 were unaffected by first contest outcome and aggressiveness. Agg+ pigs were more likely to hold their ears back (X2 =7.8, p = 0.005) during the early contest period. Differences in attention were detected in the contest outcome × aggressiveness interaction (χ24.3, p = 0.04), whereby approaching the opponent was influenced by winning and losing in the Agg- pigs only. QBA and gaze behaviour reveal differences in emotional valence between pigs of different aggressiveness: less aggressive pigs may be more susceptible to the emotional impact of victory and defeat but overall, more aggressive pigs express more negative emotionality at the start of agonistic encounters.

Social status and previous experience in the group as predictors of welfare of sows housed in large semi-static groups

Mixing gestating sows implies hierarchy formation and has detrimental consequences on welfare. The effects of social stress on the most vulnerable individuals may be underestimated and it is therefore important to evaluate welfare between individuals within groups. This study aimed at investigating the impact of social status and previous experience in the group on well-being of sows housed in large semi-static groups. We assessed aggression (d0 (mixing), d2, d27, d29), body lesions (d1, d26, d84) and feeding order on 20 groups of 46–91 animals. Social status was based on the proportion of fights won during a 6-hr observation period between d0 and d2. Dominants (29%) were those who won more fights than they lost, Subdominants (25%) won fewer fights than they lost, Losers (23%) never won any fight in which they were involved while Avoiders (23%) were never involved in fights. Resident sows (70%) were already present in the group in the previous gestation while New sows (30%) were newly introduced at mixing. Subdominants and Dominants were highly involved in fights around mixing but this was more detrimental for Subdominants than Dominants, Losers and Avoiders since they had the highest body lesion scores at mixing. Avoiders received less non-reciprocal agonistic acts than Losers on d2 (P = 0.0001) and had the lowest body lesion scores after mixing. However, Avoiders and Losers were more at risk in the long-term since they had the highest body lesions scores at d26 and d84. They were followed by Subdominants and then Dominants. New sows fought more (P<0.0001), tended to be involved in longer fights (P = 0.075) around mixing and had more body lesions throughout gestation than Resident sows. Feeding order from one-month post-mixing was influenced both by the previous experience in the group and social status (P<0.0001). New sows, especially with a low social status, are more vulnerable throughout gestation and could serve as indicators of non-optimal conditions.