Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T07:47:34.529Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Characteristics of biter and victim piglets apparent before a tail-biting outbreak

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2010

J. J. Zonderland ,
F. Schepers ,
M. B. M. Bracke ,
L. A. den Hartog ,
B. Kemp  and
H. A. M. Spoolder
J. J. Zonderland*
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB Lelystad, The Netherlands
F. Schepers
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB Lelystad, The Netherlands
M. B. M. Bracke
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB Lelystad, The Netherlands
L. A. den Hartog
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
B. Kemp
Affiliation:
Adaptation Physiology Group, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
H. A. M. Spoolder
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB Lelystad, The Netherlands
*
†E-mail: Johan.Zonderland@wur.nl
Get access

Abstract

Little is known about the characteristics of biters and victims before the appearance of a tail-biting outbreak in groups of pigs. This study aimed to characterise biters and victims (according to gender and performance) and to quantify their behavioural development during the 6 days preceding the tail-biting outbreak. The hypotheses tested were: (a) biters are more often female, are the lighter pigs in the group, are more restless and perform more aggressive behaviour; and (b) victims are more often male, heavier and less active. Using video recordings we carried out a detailed study of 14 pens with a tail-biting outbreak among the weaned piglets. All piglets were individually marked and we observed the behaviour of biters, victims and control piglets (piglet types). In every pen, each piglet type was observed every other day from 6 days before (D−6) to the day of the first visible tail damage (i.e. day of tail biting outbreak; D0). While the number of male biters (6 of the 14 biters) and male victims (11 of the 14 victims) was not significantly different (P = 0.13), this numerical contrast was considerable. The start weight of victims was significantly (P = 0.03) higher (8.6 kg) than those of biters (7.5 kg) and control piglets (8.0 kg). Biters tended (P = 0.08) to spend longer sitting/kneeling (3.1 min/h) than controls (1.7 min/h), but no differences were seen in the time spent lying or standing. Victims tended (P = 0.07) to change posture more often (restlessness) than controls and chased penmates more (P = 0.04) than biters. Victims also performed more (P = 0.04) aggressive behaviour than biters and controls. In contrast, biters tended (P = 0.08) to be chased by penmates more often and tended (P = 0.06) to receive more aggressive behaviour than controls. Furthermore, biters spent longer manipulating the enrichment device (P = 0.01) and the posterior/tail (P = 0.02) of their penmates than controls and tended (P = 0.06) to perform more tail bites than victims. Victims received more posterior/tail manipulation (P = 0.02) and tail bites (P = 0.04) than controls. It was also noticed that, independent of piglet type, restlessness (P = 0.03) increased and the frequency of performed tail bites tended (P = 0.08) to increase in the 6 days preceding a tail-biting outbreak. These findings may contribute to the early identification of biters or victims and support the development of strategies to minimise the occurrence of tail biting.

Keywords

pigswelfaretail bitingbehavioural characteristics
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 5 , Issue 5 , 04 April 2011 , pp. 767 - 775
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blackshaw, JK 1981. Some behavioural deviations in weaned domestic pigs: persistent inguinal nose thrusting, and tail and ear biting. Animal Production 33, 325–332.Google Scholar
Bolhuis, JE, Schouten, WGP, Schrama, JW, Wiegant, VM 2005. Behavioural development of pigs with different coping characteristics in barren and substrate-enriched housing conditions. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 93, 213–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bracke, MBM, Hulsegge, B, Keeling, L, Blokhuis, HJ 2004. Decision support system with semantic model to assess the risk of tail biting in pigs: 1. Modelling. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 87, 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breuer, K, Sutcliffe, MEM, Mercer, JT, Rance, KA, O'Connell, NE, Sneddon, IA, Edwards, SA 2005. Heritability of clinical tail-biting and its relation to performance traits. Livestock Production Science 93, 87–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breuer, KB, Beattie, VE, Dunne, LM, Slade, EC, Davies, Z, Mercer, JT, Rance, KA, Sneddon, IA, Sutcliffe, MEM, Edwards, SA 2001. Validation and development of a behavioural test to predict the predisposition of growing pigs to perform harmful social behaviour such as tail biting. In Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, New York, USA, p. 50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, SA 2006. Tail biting in pigs: understanding the intractable problem. Veterinary Journal 171, 198–199.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 2007. Scientific report on the risks associated with tail biting in pigs and possible means to reduce the need for tail docking considering the different housing and husbandry systems. The EFSA Journal 611, 1–98.Google Scholar
Feddes, JJ, Fraser, D, Buckley, DJ, Poirier, P 1993. Electronic sensing of non- destructive chewing by growing pigs. Transactions of the ASAE 36, 955–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, JJ 1990. Differentiation of sexual behaviour in pigs. Journal of Reproduction Fertility Supplement 40, 311–321.Google ScholarPubMed
Fraser, D 1987. Attraction to blood as a factor in tail-biting by pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 17, 1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritschen, R, Hogg, A 1983. Preventing tail biting in swine (anti-comfort syndrome). In NebGuide G 75-246, revised. Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 61801.Google Scholar
Hansen, LL, Hagelsø, AM 1980. A general survey of environmental influence on the social hierarchy function in pigs. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 30, 388–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, MJ, Gonyou, HW 1998. Increasing available space in a farrowing crate does not facilitate postural changes or maternal responses in gilts. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 59, 285–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, EJ, Jones, TA, Guise, HJ, Penny, RHC, Hoste, S 1999. Tail biting in pigs 1: the prevalence at six UK abattoirs and the relationship of tail biting with docking, sex and other carcass damage. Pig Journal 43, 18–32.Google Scholar
Kritas, SK, Morrison, RS 2007. Relationships between tail biting in pigs and disease lesions and condemnations at slaughter. Veterinary Record 160, 149–152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, P, Bateson, P 1986. Measuring behaviour: an introductory guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Morrison, RS, Johnston, LJ, Hilbrands, AM 2007. A note on the effects of two versus one feeder locations on the feeding behaviour and growth performance of pigs in a deep-litter, large group housing system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 107, 157–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penny, RHC, Walters, JR, Tredget, SJ 1981. Tail-biting in pigs: a sex frequency between boars and gilts. Veterinary Record 108, 35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Penny, RHC, Hill, FWG, Field, JE, Plush, JT 1972. Tail-biting in pigs: a possible sex incidence. Veterinary Record 91, 482–483.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sambraus, HH 1985. Mouth-based anomalous syndromes. World Animal Sciences, A5, Ethology of Farm Animals. A Comprehensive Study of the Behavioural Features of Common Farm Animals, 391–472.Google Scholar
Schrøder-Petersen, DL, Heiskanen, T, Ersbøll, AK 2004. Tail-in-mouth behaviour in slaughter pigs, in relation to internal factors such as: age, size, gender, and motivational background. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 54, 159–166.Google Scholar
Statham, P, Green, L, Bichard, M, Mendl, M 2009. Predicting tail-biting from behaviour of pigs prior to outbreaks. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 121, 157–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svendsen, J, Olsson, AC, Botermans, J 2006. Data on tail biting in pigs. In Proceedings of the 19th IPVS congress, Copenhagen, Denmark, p. 613.Google Scholar
Taylor, NR, Main, DCJ, Mendl, M, Edwards, SA 2010. Tail-biting: a new perspective. Veterinary Journal, doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2009.08.028.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ushijima, R, Rodenburg, TB, Zonderland, JJ 2009. Who is biting tails? In Proceedings of the 4th Congress of Asian Pig Veterinary Society, Tsukuba, Japan, p. 449.Google Scholar
Valros, A, Ahlstrom, S, Rintala, H, Hakkinen, T, 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, 213–219.Google Scholar
Van de Weerd, HA, Docking, CM, Day, JEL, Edwards, SA 2005. The development of harmful social behaviour in pigs with intact tails and different enrichment backgrounds in two housing systems. Animal Science 80, 289–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Putten, G 1969. An investigation into tail-biting among fattening pigs. British Veterinary Journal 125, 511–517.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Putten, G 1980. Objective observations on the behaviour of fattening pigs. Animal Regulatory Studies 3, 105–118.Google Scholar
Zonderland, JJ, Vermeer, HM, Vereijken, PFG, Spoolder, HAM 2003. Measuring a pig's preference for suspended toys by using an automated recording technique. CIGR Ejournal V, 1–11.Google Scholar
Zonderland, JJ, de Leeuw, JA, Nolten, C, Spoolder, HAM 2004. Assessing long-term behavioural effects of feeding motivation in group-housed pregnant sows; what, when and how to observe. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 87, 15–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zonderland, JJ, Bracke, MBM, Kemp, B, den Hartog, LA, Spoolder, HAM 2010a. Gender effects on tail damage development in single- or mixed-sex groups of weaned piglets. Livestock Science 129, 151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zonderland, JJ, Kemp, B, Bracke, MBM, den Hartog, LA, Spoolder, HAM 2010b. Individual piglet's contribution to the development of tail biting. Animal (In press).Google Scholar
Zonderland, JJ, Wolthuis-Fillerup, M, van Reenen, CG, Bracke, MBM, Kemp, B, den Hartog, LA, Spoolder, HAM 2008. Prevention and treatment of tail biting in weaned piglets. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 110, 269–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar