Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-78dcdb465f-jsbx8 Total loading time: 5.309 Render date: 2021-04-15T09:10:44.178Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Article contents

A longitudinal study of pre- and post-weaning tail damage in non-docked pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 May 2020

F. Hakansson
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Groennegaardsvej 8, Frederiksberg, Copenhagen1870, Denmark
H. P. Lahrmann
Affiliation:
SEGES, Danish Pig Research Centre, Agro Food Park 15, Aarhus8200, Denmark
B. Forkman
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Groennegaardsvej 8, Frederiksberg, Copenhagen1870, Denmark
Corresponding
E-mail address:
Get access

Abstract

Tail-biting occurs pre-weaning, but literature on tail damage during lactation and on the development of damage over time is sparse, especially for non-docked piglets. We assessed the prevalence of tail damage in non-docked piglets in a commercial Danish piggery during the lactation and weaning period, and investigated the within-animal association of tail lesions pre- and post-weaning. Non-docked piglets (n = 741) from 51 loose-housed sows were individually marked and tracked from birth to 9 weeks (w9) of age. Tail damage was scored during lactation at w1 and w4, and once a week post-weaning (average weaning age 30 days) at w6 to w9. The within-animal association of tail damage before and after weaning was investigated at pig level using generalized mixed models. Tail damage was prevalent already pre-weaning. During the lactation period, the prevalence of tail lesions was 5% at w1 and 42% at w4, with the most prevalent score being ‘superficial damages’ (66.7%, score 1; pre-weaning scheme: 0 = no damage, 3 = tail wound). Post-weaning, 45% of pigs had a tail lesion at least once over the four assessments, with 16.7% of pigs having a tail lesion at least at two assessments. The majority of lesions were ‘minor scratches’ (34.2%, score 1; post-weaning scheme: 0 = no damage, 4 = wound – necrotic tail end) and a ‘scabbed wound’ (19.9%, score 3). The number of pigs with lesions as well as wound severity increased over time. More pigs had a tail wound at w8 (15%, P < 0.001 and < 0.01) and w9 (19%, P < 0.001 and < 0.001) compared to w6 (2.7%) and w7 (5.6%). Pigs with tail lesions pre-weaning (w1: OR 3.0, 95% CI 0.9 to 10.2; w4: OR 3.4, 95% CI 2.0 to 5.8) had a significantly higher risk of having a wound post-weaning, and pigs with lesions at w4 additionally were at a higher risk (OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.8 to 5.1) of having a lesion over several assessments. Females compared to castrated males had a significantly lower risk of having tail lesions at w1 (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.8). Similarly, females were at a significantly lower risk (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.4 to 0.9) of having a wound post-weaning, and tended to have a lower risk of having lesions over several assessments (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.5 to 1.2). Our study confirmed that tail damage is prevalent already during the lactation period, and that pre-weaning tail damage is predictive of tail wounds post-weaning.

Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 14 , Issue 10 , October 2020 , pp. 2159 - 2166
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Animal Consortium

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Abriel, M and Jais, C 2013. Influence of housing conditions on the appearance of cannibalism in weaning piglets. Landtechnik 68, 389393.Google Scholar
Anonymous 2016. Deutscher Schweine Boniturschlüssel (DSBS). Riems, Germany: Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut. Retrieved on 2 September 2019 https://www.fli.de/.Google Scholar
Beattie, V, Breuer, K, O’connell, N, Sneddon, I, Mercer, J, Rance, K, Sutcliffe, M and Edwards, S 2005. Factors identifying pigs predisposed to tail biting. Animal Science 80, 307312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brajon, S, Ringgenberg, N, Torrey, S, Bergeron, R and Devillers, N 2017. Impact of prenatal stress and environmental enrichment prior to weaning on activity and social behaviour of piglets (Sus scrofa). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 197, 1523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunberg, E, Jensen, P, Isaksson, A and Keeling, LJ 2013. Behavioural and brain gene expression profiling in pigs during tail biting outbreaks–evidence of a tail biting resistant phenotype. PLoS ONE 8, e66513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunberg, E, Wallenbeck, A and Keeling, LJ 2011. Tail biting in fattening pigs: associations between frequency of tail biting and other abnormal behaviours. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 133, 1825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Kloet, ER, Joëls, M and Holsboer, F 2005. Stress and the brain: from adaptation to disease. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 6, 463.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Díaz, JAC, Boyle, LA, Diana, A, Leonard, FC, Moriarty, JP, McElroy, MC, McGettrick, S, Kelliher, D and Manzanilla, EG 2017. Early life indicators predict mortality, illness, reduced welfare and carcass characteristics in finisher pigs. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 146, 94102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, SA 2006. Tail biting in pigs: understanding the intractable problem. The Veterinary Journal 171, 198199.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
European Union 2008. Council Directive 2008/120/EC on laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs. Official Journal of the European Union 2009, 513.Google Scholar
European Union 2016. Commission Recommendation (EU) 2016/336 on the application of Council Directive 2008/120/EC on laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs as regards measures to reduce the need for tail-docking’. Official Journal of the European Union 2016, 2062.Google Scholar
Hennessy, MB, Kaiser, S, Tiedtke, T and Sachser, N 2015. Stability and change: stress responses and the shaping of behavioral phenotypes over the life span. Frontiers in Zoology 12, S18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kritas, S and Morrison, R 2007. Relationships between tail biting in pigs and disease lesions and condemnations at slaughter. Veterinary Record 160, 149152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lahrmann, HP, Busch, ME, D’Eath, RB, Forkman, B and Hansen, CF 2017. More tail lesions among undocked than tail docked pigs in a conventional herd. Animal 11, 18251831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lahrmann, HP, Hansen, CF, D’Eath, R, Busch, ME and Forkman, B 2018. Tail posture predicts tail biting outbreaks at pen level in weaner pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 200, 2935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen, MLV, Andersen, HM-L and Pedersen, LJ 2016. Can tail damage outbreaks in the pig be predicted by behavioural change? The Veterinary Journal 209, 5056.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsen, MLV, Andersen, HML and Pedersen, LJ 2017. Which is the most preventive measure against tail damage in finisher pigs: tail docking, straw provision or lowered stocking density? Animal 12, 12601267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moinard, C, Mendl, M, Nicol, CJ and Green, LE 2003. A case control study of on-farm risk factors for tail biting in pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 81, 333355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munsterhjelm, C, Heinonen, M and Valros, A 2016. Can tail-in-mouth behaviour in weaned piglets be predicted by behaviour and performance? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 184, 1624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munsterhjelm, C, Valros, A, Heinonen, M, Hälli, O, Siljander-Rasi, H and Peltoniemi, OAT 2009. Environmental enrichment in early life affects cortisol patterns in growing pigs. Animal 4, 242249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otten, W, Kanitz, E, Couret, D, Veissier, I, Prunier, A and Merlot, E 2010. Maternal social stress during late pregnancy affects hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal function and brain neurotransmitter systems in pig offspring. Domestic Animal Endocrinology 38, 146156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penny, R, Walters, J and Tredget, S 1981. Tail-biting in pigs: a sex frequency between boars and gilts. Veterinary Record 108, 3535.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prunier, A, Averos, X, Dimitrov, I, Edwards, S, Hillmann, E, Holinger, M, Ilieski, V, Leming, R, Tallet, C and Turner, SP 2020. Early life predisposing factors for biting in pigs. Animal 14, 570587.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team 2017. R: a language and environment for statistical computing, version 3.1. 2. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Schrøder-Petersen, DL and Simonsen, H 2001. Tail biting in pigs. The Veterinary Journal 162, 196210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schrøder-Petersen, DL, Simonsen, HB and Lawson, LG 2003. Tail-in-mouth behaviour among weaner pigs in relation to age, gender and group composition regarding gender. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science 53, 2934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statham, P, Green, L, Bichard, M and Mendl, M 2009. Predicting tail-biting from behaviour of pigs prior to outbreaks. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 121, 157164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, NR, Main, DCJ, Mendl, M and Edwards, SA 2010. Tail-biting: a new perspective. The Veterinary Journal 186, 137147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ursinus, WW, Van Reenen, CG, Kemp, B and Bolhuis, JE 2014. Tail biting behaviour and tail damage in pigs and the relationship with general behaviour: predicting the inevitable? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 156, 2236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valros, A 2018. Tail biting. In Advances in pig welfare (ed. Špinka, M), pp. 137166. Woodhead Publishing, Elsevier, Cambridge, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valros, A, Ahlström, S, Rintala, H, Häkkinen, T and Saloniemi, H 2004. The prevalence of tail damage in slaughter pigs in Finland and associations to carcass condemnations. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science 54, 213219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valros, A and Heinonen, M 2015. Save the pig tail. Porcine Health Management 1, 2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wallgren, P and Lindahl, E 1996. The influence of tail biting on performance of fattening pigs. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 37, 453460.Google ScholarPubMed
Zonderland, JJ, Schepers, F, Bracke, MBM, den Hartog, LA, Kemp, B and Spoolder, HAM 2011. Characteristics of biter and victim piglets apparent before a tail-biting outbreak. Animal 5, 767775.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zonderland, JJ, van Riel, JW, Bracke, MBM, Kemp, B, den Hartog, LA and Spoolder, HAM 2009. Tail postures predict tail damage among weaned piglets. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 121, 165170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hakansson et al. supplementary material

Table S1 and Figure S1

File 5 MB

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 17
Total number of PDF views: 82 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 18th May 2020 - 15th April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

A longitudinal study of pre- and post-weaning tail damage in non-docked pigs
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

A longitudinal study of pre- and post-weaning tail damage in non-docked pigs
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

A longitudinal study of pre- and post-weaning tail damage in non-docked pigs
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *