Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:07:42.425Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The welfare of growing pigs in five different production systems in France and Spain: assessment of health

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

D Temple ,
V Courboulay ,
A Velarde ,
A Dalmau  and
X Manteca
D Temple*
Affiliation:
Campus de la UAB, Edifici V Unitat d'etologia (Despatx V0-135), 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), Barcelona, Spain IRTA, Finca Camps i Armet s/n, 17121, Monells, Girona, Spain
V Courboulay
Affiliation:
IFIP, Institut du Porc, BP 35104, 35651 Le Rheu Cedex, France
A Velarde
Affiliation:
IRTA, Finca Camps i Armet s/n, 17121, Monells, Girona, Spain
A Dalmau
Affiliation:
IRTA, Finca Camps i Armet s/n, 17121, Monells, Girona, Spain
X Manteca
Affiliation:
Campus de la UAB, Edifici V Unitat d'etologia (Despatx V0-135), 08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), Barcelona, Spain
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: deborah.temple@uab.cat
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This study was carried out to compare the health of growing pigs in five different production systems in France and Spain using measures provided by the Welfare Quality® protocol. A total of 11,647 pigs housed on 91 commercial farms were evaluated over a two-year period (2007-2009). Farms considered as conventional were close to the European dominant production system, rearing ‘white’ pigs (eg Large White; Landrace * Pietrain) housed on concrete floors. Systems considered as differentiated had specifications to distinguish them from the conventional one. Farms that housed ‘white’ breeds of pigs on straw were then considered as a different production system. Mallorcan Black pigs managed extensively on family farms in the Balearic islands represented a third production system. The remaining two systems assessed were represented by the methods used for Iberian pig rearing extensively or intensively. Multiple Generalised Linear Mixed Models were performed for each animal-based measure of health. The straw-bedded and the conventional systems did not differ in the prevalence of any animal-based measures. Mallorcan Black pigs and Iberian pigs kept extensively had a lower prevalence of severe wounds than pigs in the conventional system and the lowest prevalence of tail biting. Focusing on pigs housed in the conventional system, several possible causal factors (such as the feeding system and the type of floor) were identified relating to severe wounds, tail biting and lameness. Therefore, the recording of simple environmental-based factors can be useful in detecting farms that are more likely to show these problems.

Keywords

animal welfarecausal factorsgrowing pighealthhousing systemsWelfare Quality®
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , May 2012 , pp. 257 - 271
Copyright
© 2012 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Altman, DG, Lausen, B, Sauerbrei, W and Schumacher, M 1994 Dangers of using ‘optimal’ cutpoints in the evaluation of prognostic factors. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 86: 829–835. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jnci/86.11.829CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aparicio Tovar, MA and Vargas Giraldo, JD 2006 Considerations on ethics and animal welfare in extensive pig production: breeding and fattening Iberian pigs. Livestock Science 103: 237–242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.05.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arey, DS 1991 Tail biting in pigs. Farm Building Progress 105: 20–23Google Scholar
Beattie, VE, O’ Connell, NE and Moss, BW 2000 Influence of environmental enrichment on the behaviour, performance and meat quality of domestic pigs. Livestock Production Science 65: 71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beattie, VE, Walker, N and Sneddon, IA 1996 An investigation of the effect of environmental enrichment and space allowance on the behaviour and production of growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 48: 151–158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(96)01031-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blokhuis, HJ 2008 International cooperation in animal welfare: the Welfare Quality® project. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 50: 1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Botermans, JAM and Svendsen, J 2000 Effect of feeding environment on performance, injuries and behaviour in growing-finishing pigs: group-based studies. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 50: 237–249Google Scholar
Botreau, R, Veissier, I, Butterworth, A, Bracke, MBM and Keeling, LJ 2007 Definition of criteria for overall assessment of animal welfare. Animal Welfare 16: 225–228Google Scholar
Bracke, MBM, Hulsegge, B, Keeling, L and 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2003.12.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 2006 Behaviour and welfare in relation to pathology. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 97: 73–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2005.11.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, DM 2010 Welfare of animals: behaviour as a basis for decisions. In: Breed, MD and Moore, J (eds) Encyclopedia of Animal Behavior pp 580–584. Academic Press: Oxford, UK. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-045337-8.00080-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cagienard, A, Regula, G and Danuser, L 2005 The impact of different housing systems on health and welfare of grower and finisher pigs in Switzerland. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 68: 49–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2005.01.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cameron, R 2006 Diseases of the skin. In: Straw, B, Zimmerman, JJ, D’Allaire, S and Taylor, D (eds) Diseases of Swine pp 179–198. Blackwell Publishing: Iowa, USAGoogle Scholar
Capdeville, J and Veissier, I 2001 A method of assessing welfare in loose housed dairy cows at farm level, focusing on animal observations. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 51: 62–68Google Scholar
Chambers, C, Powell, L, Wilson, E and Green, LE 1995 A postal survey of tail biting in pigs in south-west England. Veterinary Record 136: 147–148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.136.6.147CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Courboulay, V, Eugène, A and Delarue, E 2009 Welfare assessment in 82 pig farms: effect of animal age and floor type on behaviour and injuries in fattening pigs. Animal Welfare 18: 515–521Google Scholar
Cronin, GM, Dunshea, FR, Butler, KL, McCauley, I, Barnett, JL and Hemsworth, P 2003 The effects of immuno- and surgical-castration on the behaviour and consequently growth of group housed, male finisher pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 81: 111–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00256-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dohoo, I, Martin, W and Stryhn, H 2009 Model-buiding strategies. In: Dohoo, I, Martin, W and Stryhn, H (eds) Veterinary Epidemiological Reseach pp 368–374. VER Inc: Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, CanadaGoogle Scholar
Farm Animal Welfare Council 1992 FAWC updates the five freedoms. Veterinary Record 17: 357Google Scholar
Fraser, D and Broom, DM 1990 Abnormal behaviour 3: addressed to another animal. In: Fraser, D and Broom, DM (eds) Farm Animal Behaviour and Welfare pp 327–328. Baillière Tindall: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D, Phillips, P, Thompson, BK and Tennessen, T 1991 Effect of straw on the behaviour of growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 30: 307–318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(91)90135-KCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fredriksen, B, Lium, BM, Marka, CH, Mosveen, B and Nafstad, O 2008 Entire male pigs in farrow-to-finish pens: effects on animal welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 110: 258–268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2007.04.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geers, R, Dellaert, B, Goedseels, V, Hoogerbrugge, A, Vranken, E, Maes, F and Berckmans, D 1989 An assessment of optimal air temperatures in pig houses by the quantification of behavioural and health-related problems. Animal Production 48: 571–578. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100004098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonyou, HW, Lemay, SP and Zhang, Y 2006 Effects of the environment on productivity and disease. In: Straw, B, Zimmerman, JJ, D’Allaire, S and Taylor, D (eds) Diseases of Swine pp 1027–1038. Blackwell Publishing: Iowa, USAGoogle Scholar
Guy, JH, Rowlinson, P, Chadwick, JP and Ellis, M 2002 Health conditions of two genotypes of growing-finishing pig in three different housing systems: implications for welfare. Livestock Production Science 75: 233–243. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(01)00327-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hessel, EF, Wulbers-Mindermann, M, Berg, C, Van den Weghe, HFA and Algers, B 2006 Influence of increased feeding frequency on behavior and integument lesions in growing-finishing restricted-fed pigs. Journal of Animal Science 84: 1526–1534CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hunter, EJ, Jones, TA, Guise, HJ, Penny, RHC and Hoste, S 2001 The relationship between tail biting in pigs, docking procedure and other management practices. The Veterinary Journal 161: 72–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/tvjl.2000.0520CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jaume, J and Alfonso, L 2000 The Mallorcan Black pig. Agri 2000 27: 53–58Google Scholar
JØrgensen, B 2003 Influence of floor type and stocking density on leg weakness, osteochondrosis and claw disorders in slaughter pigs. Animal Science 77: 439–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KilBride, AL, Gillman, CE and Green, LE 2009 A cross-sectional study of the prevalence of lameness in finishing pigs, gilts, and pregnant sows and associations with limb lesions and floor types on commercial farms in England. Animal Welfare 18: 215–224Google Scholar
Lee, Y, Nelder, JA and Pawitan, Y 2006 Generalized linear models. In: Lee, Y, Nelder, JA and Pawitan, Y (eds) Generalized Linear Models with Random effects pp 54–64. Chapman and Hall CRC: Boca Raton, FL, USA. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781420011340.ch2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lohse, E 1977 Einfluss unterschiedlicher umwelttemperaturen auf die motorische aktivität von ferklen. Institut für tierproduktion der technischen. Universität Berlin Journal 925: 68–71. [Title translation: Influence of different environmental temperatures on the motor activity of piglets]Google Scholar
Lyons, CAP, Bruce, JM, Fowler, VR and English, PR 1995 A comparison of productivity and welfare of growing pigs in four intensive systems. Livestock Production Science 43: 265–274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0301-6226(95)00050-UCrossRefGoogle Scholar
MAPA 2007 Real Decreto 1469/2007, de 2 de noviembre, por el que se aprueba la norma de calidad para la carne, el jamón, la paleta y la caña de lomo ibéricos. BOE 264: 45087–45104. [Title translation: Quality standards of Iberian pork]Google Scholar
Meese, GB and Ewbank, R 1973 The establishment and nature of the dominance hierarchy in the domesticated pig. Animal Behaviour 21: 326–334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(73)80074-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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: 333–355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00276-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molony, V and Kent, JE 1997 Assessment of acute pain in farm animals using behavioral and physiological measurements. Journal of Animal Science 75: 266–272CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mouttotou, N, Hatchell, FM and Green, LE 1998 Adventitious bursitis of the hock in finishing pigs: prevalence, distribution and association with floor type and foot lesions. Veterinary Record 142: 109–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.142.5.109CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paul, ES, Moinard, C, Green, LE and Mendl, M 2007 Farmers’ attitudes to methods for controlling tail biting in pigs. Veterinary Record 160: 803–805. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.160.23.803CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pearce, GP 1999 Epidemiology of enteric disease in grower-finisher pigs: a postal survey of pig producers in England. Veterinary Record 144: 338–342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.144.13.338CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rainville, P 2002 Brain mechanisms of pain affect and pain modulation. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 12: 195–204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4388(02)00313-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodríguez-Estévez, V, García, A, Peña, F and Gómez, AG 2009 Foraging of Iberian fattening pigs grazing natural pasture in the dehesa. Livestock Science 120: 135–143. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2008.05.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sambraus, HH 1985 Mouth-based anomalous syndromes. In: Fraser, AF (ed) Ethology of Farm Animals pp 391–422. Elsevier: Amsterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
SchrØder-Petersen, DL and Simonsen, HB 2001 Tail biting in pigs. The Veterinary Journal 162: 196–210CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, K, Chennells, DJ, Campbell, FM, Hunt, B, Armstrong, D, Taylor, L, Gill, BP and Edwards, SA 2006 The welfare of finishing pigs in two contrasting housing systems: fully-slatted versus straw-bedded accommodation. Livestock science 103: 104–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.01.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, K, Chennells, DJ, Armstrong, D, Taylor, L, Gill, BP and Edwards, SA 2007 The welfare of finishing pigs under different housing and feeding systems: liquid versus dry feeding in fully-slatted and straw-based housing. Animal Welfare 16: 53–62Google Scholar
Stolba, A and Wood-Gush, DGM 1989 The behaviour of pigs in a semi-natural environment. Animal Production 48: 419–425. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100040411Google Scholar
Taylor, NR, Main, DCJ, Mendl, M and Edwards, SA 2010 Tail-biting: a new perspective. The Veterinary Journal 186: 137–147. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2009.08.028CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Temple, D, Dalmau, A, Ruiz de la Torre, JL, Manteca, X and Velarde, A 2011a Application of the Welfare Quality® protocol to assess growing pigs kept under intensive conditions in Spain. Journal of Veterinary Behavior 6: 138–149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2010.10.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temple, D, Manteca, X, Velarde, A and Dalmau, A 2011b Assessment of animal welfare through behavioural parameters in Iberian pigs in intensive and extensive conditions. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 131: 29–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2011.01.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temple, D, Courboulay, V, Velarde, A, Manteca, X and Dalmau, A 2012 The welfare of growing pigs in five production systems: Assessment of feeding and housing. Animal 6: 656–667. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1751731111001868CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thomson, JR, Smith, WJ and Murray, BP 1998 Investigations into field cases of porcine colitis with particular reference to infection with serpulina pilosicoli. Veterinary Record 142: 235–239. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/vr.142.10.235CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turner, SP, Farnworth, MJ, White, IMS, Brotherstone, S, Mendl, M and Knap, P 2006 The accumulation of skin lesions and their use as a predictor of individual aggressiveness in pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 96: 245–259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2005.06.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van de Weerd, HA and Day, JEL 2009 A review of environmental enrichment for pigs housed in intensive housing systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 116: 1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van de Weerd, HA, Docking, CM, Day, JEL and 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/ASC40450289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, PK and Bilkei, G 2006 Tail-biting in outdoor pig production. The Veterinary Journal 171: 367–369. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2004.10.011CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Welfare Quality® 2009 Welfare Quality® applied to growing and finishing pigs. In: Dalmau, A, Velarde, A, Scott, K, Edwards, S, Veissier, I, Keeling, L and Butterworth, A (eds) Welfare Quality® Assessment Protocol for Pigs pp 49–78. Welfare Quality® Consortium: Lelystad, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Whay, HR 2007 The journey to animal welfare improvement. Animal Welfare 16: 117–122Google Scholar
Whay, HR, Main, DCJ, Green, LE and Webster, AJF 2003 Animal-based measures for the assessment of welfare state of dairy cattle, pigs and laying hens: consensus of expert opinion. Animal Welfare 12: 205–217Google Scholar
Wolfinger, R and O’Connell, M 1993 Generalised Linear Mixed Models: a pseudo-likelihood approach. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 4: 233–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar