Reducing estimated tail biting risk in German weaner pigs using a management tool

Assessing Decision Support Tools for Mitigating Tail Biting in Pork Production: Current Progress and Future Directions

Tail biting (TB) in pigs is a complex issue that can be caused by multiple factors, making it difficult to determine the exact etiology on a case-by-case basis. As such, it is often difficult to pinpoint the reason, or set of reasons, for TB events, Decision Support Tools (DSTs) can be used to identify possible risk factors of TB on farms and provide suitable courses of action. The aim of this review was to identify DSTs that could be used to predict the risk of TB behavior. Additionally, technologies that can be used to support DSTs, with monitoring and tracking the prevalence of TB behaviors, are reviewed. Using the PRISMA methodology to identify sources, the applied selection process found nine DSTs related to TB in pigs. All support tools relied on secondary information, either by way of the scientific literature or expert opinions, to determine risk factors for TB predictions. Only one DST was validated by external sources, seven were self-assessed by original developers, and one presented no evidence of validation. This analysis better understands the limitations of DSTs and highlights an opportunity for the development of DSTs that rely on objective data derived from the environment, animals, and humans simultaneously to predict TB risks. Moreover, an opportunity exists for the incorporation of monitoring technologies for TB detection into a DST.

The Evidence for a Causal Link Between Disease and Damaging Behavior in Pigs

Damaging behaviors (DB) such as tail and ear biting are prevalent in pig production and reduce welfare and performance. Anecdotal reports suggest that health challenges increase the risk of tail-biting. The prevalence of tail damage and health problems show high correlations across batches within and between farms. There are many common risk factors for tail-biting and health problems, notably respiratory, enteric and locomotory diseases. These include suboptimal thermal climate, hygiene, stocking density and feed quality. The prevalence of tail damage and health problems also show high correlations across batches within and between farms. However, limited evidence supports two likely causal mechanisms for a direct link between DB and health problems. The first is that generalized poor health (e.g., enzootic pneumonia) on farm poses an increased risk of pigs performing DB. Recent studies indicate a possible causal link between an experimental inflammation and an increase in DB, and suggest a link between cytokines and tail-biting. The negative effects of poor health on the ingestion and processing of nutrients means that immune-stimulated pigs may develop specific nutrient deficiencies, increasing DB. The second causal mechanism involves tail-biting causing poor health. Indirectly, pathogens enter the body via the tail lesion and once infected, systemic spread of infection may occur. This occurs mainly via the venous route targeting the lungs, and to a lesser extent via cerebrospinal fluid and the lymphatic system. In carcasses with tail lesions, there is an increase in lung lesions, abscessation, arthritis and osteomyelitis. There is also evidence for the direct spread of pathogens between biters and victims. In summary, the literature supports the association between poor health and DB, particularly tail-biting. However, there is insufficient evidence to confirm causality in either direction. Nevertheless, the limited evidence is compelling enough to suggest that improvements to management and housing to enhance pig health will reduce DB. In the same way, improvements to housing and management designed to address DB, are likely to result in benefits to pig health. While most of the available literature relates to tail-biting, we suggest that similar mechanisms are responsible for links between health and other DB.

Interactive Rooting Towers and Behavioural Observations as Strategies to Reduce Tail Biting on Conventional Pig Fattening Farms

Eight pens (25 pigs/pen; n = 200) provided with an interactive straw-filled rooting tower (experimental group) and five pens (25 pigs/pen; n = 125) with a stationary (fixed) tower without straw (control group) were compared within three fattening periods on a conventional farm with fully slatted flooring. The effectiveness of the tower to trigger favourable behaviour in feeding and outside feeding periods was assessed. The incidence of deep tail injuries was lower in the experimental group (experimental group: Odds Ratio 0.3, p < 0.001) and was influenced by the batch (Odds Ratio: 2.38, p < 0.001) but not by pen and sex. In spring, most pens were excluded due to severe tail biting. Tail injury scores were more severe in the control group in weeks 5, 6 and 7 compared to the experimental group (p = 0.002, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively). Tower manipulation was more frequent during feeding compared to outside feeding time (p = 0.002). More head than tail manipulation occurred in the experimental group (p = 0.03). The interactive tower as the only measure was not appropriate to reduce tail biting sufficiently in pigs with intact tails on a conventional fattening farm. Of high priority to prevent tail biting outbreaks was the early detection of biting pigs.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Seven Measures to Reduce Tail Biting Lesions in Fattening Pigs

Tail biting is an important animal welfare issue in the pig sector. Studies have identified various risk factors which can lead to biting incidents and proposed mitigation measures. This study focused on the following seven key measures which have been identified to affect the risk of tail biting lesions: improvements in straw provision, housing ventilation, genetics, stocking density, herd health, provision of point-source enrichment objects, and adoption of early warning systems. The aim of this study was to examine whether these selected measures to reduce the risk of tail biting lesions in pig fattening are cost-effective. The problem was analyzed by first summarizing the most prospective interventions, their costs and expected impacts on the prevalence of tail biting lesions, second, by using a stochastic bio-economic model to simulate the financial return per pig space unit and per pig at different levels of prevalence of tail biting lesions, and third by looking at how large a reduction in tail biting lesions would be needed at different levels of initial prevalence of lesions to cover the costs of interventions. Tail biting lesions of a severity which would require an action (medication, hospitalization of the pig or other care, or taking preventive measures) by the pig producer were considered in the model. The results provide guidance on the expected benefits and costs of the studied interventions. According to the results, if the average prevalence of tail biting lesions is at a level of 10%, the costs of this damaging behavior can be as high as €2.3 per slaughtered pig (~1.6% of carcass value). Measures which were considered the least expensive to apply, such as provision of point-source enrichment objects, or provided wider production benefits, such as improvements in ventilation and herd health, became profitable at a lower level of efficacy than measures which were considered the most expensive to apply (e.g., straw provision, increased space allowance, automated early warning systems). Measures which were considered most efficient in reducing the risk of tail biting lesions, such as straw provision, can be cost-effective in preventing tail biting, especially when the risk of tail biting is high. At lower risk levels, the provision of point-source objects and other less costly but relatively effective measures can play an important role. However, selection of measures appropriate to the individual farm problem is essential. For instance, if poor health or barren pens are causing the elevated risk of tail biting lesions, then improving health management or enriching the pens may resolve the tail biting problem cost-effectively.

Omics Application in Animal Science-A Special Emphasis on Stress Response and Damaging Behaviour in Pigs

Increasing stress resilience of livestock is important for ethical and profitable meat and dairy production. Susceptibility to stress can entail damaging behaviours, a common problem in pig production. Breeding animals with increased stress resilience is difficult for various reasons. First, studies on neuroendocrine and behavioural stress responses in farm animals are scarce, as it is difficult to record adequate phenotypes under field conditions. Second, damaging behaviours and stress susceptibility are complex traits, and their biology is not yet well understood. Dissecting complex traits into biologically better defined, heritable and easily measurable proxy traits and developing biomarkers will facilitate recording these traits in large numbers. High-throughput molecular technologies (“omics”) study the entirety of molecules and their interactions in a single analysis step. They can help to decipher the contributions of different physiological systems and identify candidate molecules that are representative of different physiological pathways. Here, we provide a general overview of different omics approaches and we give examples of how these techniques could be applied to discover biomarkers. We discuss the genetic dissection of the stress response by different omics techniques and we provide examples and outline potential applications of omics tools to understand and prevent outbreaks of damaging behaviours.