Abstract
BackgroundPig performance and risk of disease are associated with production flow. Given the link between health and welfare, it is likely that animal welfare indicators are also associated with production flow. This study investigated the association between production flow and tail, ear and skin lesions on a farm with a purported ‘all-in/all-out’ policy. This was an observational study whereby pigs were managed according to routine farm practice. A total of 1,016 pigs born within 1 week from the same batch were followed through the production stages and the presence or absence of welfare indicators was recorded at 4, 7, 9, 12, 16 and 24 weeks of age. Three production flows were retrospectively identified: flow 1 = ‘normal’ pigs that advanced through the production stages together ‘on time’, flow 2 = pigs delayed from advancing from the 1st to the 2nd nursery stage by 1 week and flow 3 = pigs delayed from advancing through the production stages by > 1 week. A nested case control design was applied by matching pigs by sow parity, number of born alive and birth weight.ResultsThe presence of ear lesions was 4.5 less likely in pigs in flow 2 and 2.9 times less likely in pigs in flow 3 (P < 0.001) compared to pigs in flow 1. Pigs in flow 3 were 2.2 more likely to have tail and 1.6 times more likely to have ear lesions (P < 0.001) compared to pigs in flow 2. Pigs in flow 2 were less likely to have tail lesions compared with pigs in flow 1 (P < 0.05). Differences between production flows for the risk of skin lesions varied according to age (P < 0.05).ConclusionAll production flows were associated with a high risk of lesions which raises concerns for pig welfare. However, risks for ear, tail and skin lesions varied according to each production flow likely due to the specific management practices inherent to each flow. Results from this study could be used to modify existing management practices, thus leading to improvements in animal welfare and possibly performance in intensive pig systems.
Highlights
Pig performance and risk of disease are associated with production flow
We reported that pigs repeatedly delayed from the normal production flow were, on average, 10 kg lighter at slaughter and at higher risk of diseases such as pleurisy and pericarditis [3] when compared with pigs that followed the normal production flow it was not possible to deduce whether these outcomes in delayed pigs were causative or explanatory
Animal management Contrary to the purported AIAO policy followed in the farm, three production flows were identified according to the time pigs spent in each of the production stages (Fig. 1)
Summary
Pig performance and risk of disease are associated with production flow. Given the link between health and welfare, it is likely that animal welfare indicators are associated with production flow. The practice of re-grading pens by size/BW on transfer to the production stage is widely practised [3] in an effort to achieve uniformity in slaughter weight as producers must adhere to specific BW range specifications at the time of slaughter [4] This usually means that faster growing pigs continue to the production stage ‘on time’ and represent the ‘normal’ flow but slow growing and/or sick pigs are delayed from moving to the production stage, sometimes for several weeks, and are re-grouped with similar sized, though younger pigs, from the following batch. We reported that pigs repeatedly delayed from the normal production flow were, on average, 10 kg lighter at slaughter and at higher risk of diseases such as pleurisy and pericarditis [3] when compared with pigs that followed the normal production flow it was not possible to deduce whether these outcomes in delayed pigs were causative or explanatory
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
