Larger Groups for Grower-Finisher Pigs: Feeding and Social Behaviours and Impacts on Social Stress

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on January 1, 2006 | No Comments

Most studies on feeding and social behaviours of pigs have been conducted on groups of fewer than 40 pigs/group. However, these group sizes are much smaller than some that are now used in some commercial operations (100-1000 pigs/group) in North America and elsewhere. The social dynamics of feeding and other behavioural activities of pigs in large social groups are not well understood and the competition for and the utilization of important resources such as feeders by pigs in larger social groups is therefore unclear. The present study was conducted to gain a better understanding of feeding and other behavioural activities and the impacts of larger social groups on social stress in grower-finisher pigs.

To address this question, two blocks, which consisted two group-size treatments, 18 (Small Group) and 108 (Large Group) grower-finisher pigs per pen, were carried out. Each block, which lasted 10 weeks in duration, consisted of two pens of Large Group and four pens of Small Group size. A total of five hundred seventy six barrows and gilts (Pig Improvement Canada) were used in the experiment at the PSC Elstow facility. The animals were weaned at approximately 18-day of age, were then held in nurseries for eight weeks, before being used in the experiment. The ratio of barrows to gilts was kept constant (1:1) between the two group sizes and the average starting weight of pigs was 34.6 kg ± 4.1 kg (S.D). Pigs were housed on fully-slatted floors with floor space allowance per pig of 0.76m 2.

Wet/dry feeders supplied feed and water to the animals, with a pig to feeder space ratio of 9 to 1. Feeders were spread equidistantly along the central line in large groups with four feeder holes per feeder location. This maintained an equal distribution of feeders within the large group, giving an equal opportunity for all the pigs to access the feeders without any difficulty. The individual pig feeding behaviour and group feeding patterns were studied during weeks 1, 5, 7 and 10 of the grower-finisher cycle. In addition, other behavioural activities such as percentage of time spent on eating/drinking, resting (lying) and standing/walking and diurnal patterns of these activities of pigs in both large and small groups were studied during weeks 2, 5 and 10 following re-grouping.

To evaluate the group size effect on social stress, salivary cortisol levels were measured periodically throughout the grower-finisher cycle i.e. during weeks 1, 2, 5 and 10. In addition, morphological parameters of the adrenal glands were measured at the end of grower finisher cycle to understand any effects of chronic stress on pigs that were formed into larger groups.

The pigs in large groups had more bouts of feeding (35 vs. 25, P<0.05) and the feeding bouts were shorter in duration (232 vs. 301 sec, P<0.05) during day 3 following re-grouping. However, no differences in number of feeding bouts and bout lengths were found during weeks 5, 7 and 10. More importantly, we found that the percentage of pigs queuing at the feeders to be high in larger groups than in smaller groups during day 3 (0.90 vs. 0.59, %, P <0.05). This trend of higher percentage of queuing at feeders were also apparent during day 6 following re-grouping (0.79 vs. 0.60, %, for large and small groups, P=0.08) but not thereafter. There were similar 24 hr group feeding patterns in pigs of both SG and LG during weeks 1, 5, 7 and 10 (Figure 1). Furthermore, the average percentage of feeder spaces occupied (mean day 3 and 6 and week 5, 7 and 10) was also similar between the two group sizes (55.7 vs. 56.2, %, for large and small groups). The average times spent on eating/drinking (5.2 vs. 5.2 %, for small and large groups), tanding/walking (5.1 vs. 5.4 %, for small and large groups) and resting (89.6 vs. 89.3 %, for small and large groups) did not differ between the two group sizes. Furthermore, the diurnal patterns of these activities were also not affected by the large groups. One main concern of large group sizes for pigs is the potential for increased social stressors. Interestingly however in our study, during the entire 10 wk experimental period, pigs in larger groups did not demonstrate any short-term (acute) or long-term (chronic) responses of social stress (Table 1). Therefore, it was apparent that the pigs had not gone through any adverse social stressors by living in larger groups.

Evaluation of an innovative in-barn manure handling system with a belt conveyor to separate feces and urine: impact on odour and gaseous emissions

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments

Estimating the Market Demand for Value-Added Beef: Testing for BSE Announcement Effects Using a Nested PIGLOG Model Approach

Posted in: Meat Quality by admin on | No Comments

To analyze the market demand for fresh retail meats in the grocery store distribution channel, we build upon a well-developed microeconomic model of consumer choice that incorporates the role information plays in individual decision-making (Swartz and Strand; Smith, van Ravenswaay and Thompson; Brown and Schrader; Wessells, Miller and Brooks; Piggott; Piggott and Marsh; Kalaitzandonakes, Marks and Vickner; Marks, Kalaitzandonakes and Vickner). Mathios (2000) in particular investigated the impact of labels on a processed food market using a random utility model. Teisl, Bockstael and Levy (2001) used the Foster and Just (1989) framework in conjunction with an Almost Ideal Demand System (Deaton and Muelbauer) to investigate the impact of labeling in a small sample of stores in New England. Both the Mathios and Teisl et al. studies were limited in terms of data quality; lack of a representative sample and low frequency time series diminished their findings.

Les effets de la ractopamine chez les porcs en finition – Performance et composition de la carcasse

Posted in: French Articles by admin on | No Comments

La ractopamine à 5 ppm/kg de moulée a amélioré la croissance et l’efficacité alimentaire de 13% quand elle a été donnée aux porcs durant une moyenne de 26 à 27 jours. La ractopamine a diminué le gras dorsal et a augmenté l’épaisseur des longes. Les pertes en transport étaient plus élevées chez le groupe qui a reçu le supplément de ractopamine. Introduction – Le Paylean est un additif alimentaire qui a été récemment certifié au Canada. L’ingrédient actif du Paylean est la ractopamine, un agoniste beta-adrénergétique qui stimule la croissance des muscles et prévient la croissance des lipides. Ce produit a déjà été certifié dans plusieurs pays du monde, et son usage est répandu dans l’industrie porcine de ces pays pour augmenter les profits de la production de porcs. À cause des différences dans la mise en marché et les systèmes de classement entre ces pays et le Canada, il était nécessaire d’évaluer ce produit dans les conditions locales. L’objectif général de cette étude était d’évaluer l’efficacité du Paylean, nourri pour livrer 5ppm de ractopamine, sur la performance, les caractéristiques de la carcasse, la qualité de la carcasse et les facteurs économiques de la production porcine chez les porcs en finition. Méthodologie – L’étude a été élaborée de façon à ce que le poids moyen du début de l’essai soit de 87 kg. Cela a été établi pour procurer une moyenne de 28 jours de traitement au Paylean avant l’abattage. À la porcherie du Prairie Swine Centre à Elstow, tous les porcs disponibles dans deux salles (1 salle débutait chaque semaine) ont été placés de façon aléatoire par sexe à l’un des huit enclos. Seuls les porcs avec des problèmes de santé évidents ont été exclus de cette étude pour que la variation observée soit typique d’une régie normale. À la fin de l’essai, tous les porcs restants ont été pesés et ainsi que la moulée restante dans les trémis. Tout porc qui n’avait pas atteint le poids de vente minimum à la fin de l’essai a été envoyé à l’abattoir et l’information de carcasse pour ceux-ci a été fournie par l’abattoir. Le nombre de porcs « légers » ou « déclassés » a été noté par sexe et par traitement. Tous les animaux ont reçu une ration comparable à celle d’une femelle normale en finition. L’étude a consisté en deux traitements : contrôle ou 0,25% de Paylean®, équivalent à 5ppm de ractopamine (RAC). À part d’une augmentation de 1,00% de la lysine totale et le 5ppm de ractopamine, les porcs nourris avec le Paylean ont reçu une ration formulée en suivant les mêmes spécifications que celle des porcs du groupe contrôle. Résultats et Discussion – Un total de 271 castrats et de 259 femelles ont commencé l’étude (Tableau 1). Durant celle-ci, 5 porcs ont dû être retirés des essais, tous pour des raisons qui n’avaient rien à voir avec l’étude elle-même. Trois femelles du groupe RAC sont mortes durant le transport vers l’abattoir, et deux castrats du groupe RAC ont été condamnés à l’abattoir. Pour la taille de cette étude, il est difficile de conclure si ces morts peuvent être attribuées au traitement ou à d’autres facteurs aléatoires. Cependant, d’autres études suggèrent que les porcs traités avec la RAC pourraient être plus susceptibles au stress durant le transport. Le gain de poids moyen quotidien était plus élevé de 13% chez les porcs traités à la RAC, relativement à ceux qui ont reçu la ration contrôle (P < 0,001); les femelles et castrats ont montré des résultats similaires. Il n’y a pas eu d’effet du traitement sur la prise alimentaire, résultant ainsi à une conversion alimentaire supérieure de 13% chez les porcs traités à la RAC (P < 0,001). Comme ils ont eu une croissance plus efficace, les porcs au ration de RAC ont consommé environ 11,5 kg de moulée de moins que les porcs au ration contrôle pour atteindre le poids d’abattage. Cette étude a donc confirmé que, même à 5ppm, la RAC a des effets positifs sur le taux de croissance chez les castrats et femelles. Les porcs nourris avec la RAC ont en essai pendant une durée de 26,5 jours en moyenne, et de 30,1 jours pour les porcs avec la ration contrôle (Tableau 1), donc le nombre de porcs légers a été réduit pour le groupe de RAC. Tableau 3 montre la performance hebdomadaire des porcs, durant le traitement, classé par la semaine où le porc a été mis au marché. Il est possible de voir que, durant la première semaine de l’étude, les porcs du groupe RAC ont performé de façon supérieure comparativement aux porcs au ration contrôle, excepté pour les porcs qui ont été envoyés à l’abattage durant la 5e semaine. Cependant ces porcs à croissance plus lente semblent avoir bénéficié de la RAC durant la 2e semaine de l’essai. La réponse au Rac, pour les porcs envoyés durant les 5e et 6e semaines de l’essai, avait diminué. Comme il est démontré dans Figure 1, à cause de la croissance plus rapide des porcs en ration RAC durant les premières semaines de l’étude, plus de porcs en ration contrôle que de porcs en ration RAC ont été envoyés à l’abattoir durant les deux dernières semaines. Cette diminution de la réponse à la RAC avec une exposition plus prolongée au produit est bien documentée. Les porcs qui ont grandi le plus vite (> 1,3 kg/J) ont démontré une augmentation de 13% et les porcs qui ont grandi le plus lentement (< 1,3 kg/J) ont eu une amélioration de 7% de leur taux de croissance durant les deux premières semaines de l’étude. La croissance accélérée des porcs du groupe RAC a réduit le nombre de porcs légers de 7,5% à 0,8%, une découverte qui mérite mention à cause des pénalités sévères associées à la mise en marché de porcs légers. Le tableau 4 montre les effets du RAC sur les carcasses. Le rendement des carcasses n’a pas été affecté par le traitement (P > 0,20). La RAC a réduit l’épaisseur du gras dorsal de 1 mm en moyenne (P < 0,02); cependant, cette diminution était de 1,8 mm chez les castrats et de seulement 0,3 mm chez les femelles (traitement par sexe, P = 0,06). L’épaisseur des longes a augmenté de 2,5 mm, le rendement en muscle s’est amélioré (P < 0,001) et l’index de carcasse avait tendance à s’améliorer chez les porcs traités à la RAC (P = 0,06). Ces résultats sont en accord avec le mode d’action du RAC. CONCLUSION - L’ajout de RAC dans la ration à 5 ppm donne un taux de croissance plus élevé, un rendement en muscle plus élevé et un cycle d’élevage plus rapide. Cette réponse au RAC diminue si les porcs en reçoivent pour plus de 28 jours. REMERCIEMENTS - Subventions stratégiques de Sask Pork, Alberta Pork, Manitoba Pork Council et Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food Development Fund. Nous tenons à remercier Elanco Animal Health pour leur subvention spécifique à cette étude.

To What Extent Does Wealth Maximization Benefit Farmed Animals? A Law and Economics Approach to a Ban on Gestation Crates in Pig Production

Posted in: Economics by admin on | No Comments

To understand whether wealth maximization will work to advance the protections of nonhuman animals, and farmed animals in particular, it is important to first evaluate whether, on a theoretical level, valuing human interests can achieve such protections. Accordingly, part II of this article discusses the basic principles of Posner’s wealth maximization theory. Part III discusses the extent to which humans can provide for nonhuman animal protection through economic evaluation. Part IV changes course from the theoretical to the practical and discusses the attempts of animal advocates to influence the market and the need for legislation where the economic system fails to reflect human valuation of nonhuman interests. Part V discusses the first of what may become many animal welfare measures for farmed animals: the Florida ban on gestation crate usage in pig production. Part VI examines the economic aspects of this ban, including the efficiency of alternative housing methods and the elasticity of demand of the pork market. Part VII draws the conclusion that the economic arguments for animal welfare protections might weigh in favor of those protections, and that it is essential that animal advocates make strong economic arguments to gain protections as quickly as possible for the billions of farmed animals that need help each year.

Space and Water Availability Issues for Nursery and Grow-Finish Pigs

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

Economic success of a modern facility relies largely on the methods of providing feed and water as well as how many pigs are in the facility. Maximum stocking density space is determined by how large the pig will be by the time it will leave the pen to advance to the next stage of production. Pigs with too little floor space see a decrease in feed intake resulting in a decrease of daily gain. For a fully slatted pen, every 3% decrease in space allocation results in a 1% reduction in daily gain and feed intake for the entire grow-finish period (it is recommended 8 ft2/pig from 150 lb to slaughter). Proper space allocation can also contribute to a slight decrease in back fat and a leaner carcass.
Water is a component that is frequently mismanaged among producers. Factors such as pen size and stocking density should be taken into account when planning number of drinkers, number of drinking spaces, drinker type, and delivery rate of drinkers. Water consumption appears to go in seasonal patterns. For example, in the summer, pigs’ water consumption peaks earlier in the day, with a decline beginning midday. Water recording devices can be used to monitor water wastage. Water-to-feed ratios decrease as pigs grow. At the start of their life they require about a 3.35:1 ratio and this declines to about 2.25:1 (with gate-mounted nipple drinkers). Although the volume of manure is less when water wastage is minimized, the amount of total nutrients does not vary. A flow rate of 1000 ml/min appears to be accurate for grower-finisher pigs, and 2 drinkers are recommended for every 15 to 20 grower-finisher pigs.

Sensitivity Analysis to Evaluate the Impact of Uncertain Factors in a Scenario Tree Model for Classical Swine Fever Introduction

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

Effect of floor space during transport of market-weight pigs on the incidence of transport losses at the packing plant and the relationships between transport conditions and losses

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

Losses of pigs (dead and nonambulatory) during transport are of great concern from animal welfare and economic perspectives. Based on several field studies, the incidence of transport losses in market-weight pigs is approximately 1% (Ellis et al., 2003, 2004). Survey evidence suggests that overcrowding pigs during transport is associated with greater mortality rates (Robertson, 1987; Guardia et al., 1996; Riches et al., 1996). Currently, the National Institute for Animal Agriculture (2004) recommends floor space allowances of 0.40 to 0.45 m2/pig for pigs weighing between 114 to 136 kg (equivalent to approximately 0.35 and 0.33 m2/100 kg of BW, respectively). The objective of this study was to investigate effects of 2 floor spaces (0.39 and 0.48 m2/pig) during transport, which represent the range currently being used in commercial practice in the United States, on the incidence of dead and nonambulatory pigs and to evaluate relationships between transport conditions and losses. Data on 74 trailer loads of finishing pigs (mean BW = 129.0, SEM = 0.63 kg) from wean-to-finish buildings on 2 farms within 1 production system were collected to investigate the effect of amount of floor space on the trailer (0.39 or 0.48 m2/pig) during transport on the incidence of losses (dead and nonambulatory pigs) at the packing plant and to study the relationships between transport conditions and losses. Pigs were loaded using standard commercial procedures for pig handling and transportation. Two designs of flat-deck trailers with 2 decks were used. Floor space treatments were compared in 2 similarly sized compartments on each deck of each trailer type. Varying the number of pigs in each compartment created differences in floor space. The incidence of nonambulatory pigs at the farm during loading and at the plant after unloading, average load weight, load number within each day, event times, and temperature and relative humidity in the trailer from loading to unloading were recorded. Of the 12,511 pigs transported, 0.26% were nonambulatory at the farm, 0.23% were dead on arrival, and 0.85% were nonambulatory at the plant. Increasing transport floor space from 0.39 to 0.48 m2/pig reduced the percentage of total nonambulatory pigs (0.62 vs. 0.27 ± 0.13%, respectively; P < 0.05), nonambulatory, noninjured pigs (0.52 vs. 0.15 ± 0.11%, respectively; P < 0.01), and total losses (dead and nonambulatory pigs) at the plant (0.88 vs. 0.36 ± 0.16%, respectively; P < 0.05) and tended to reduce dead pigs (0.27 vs. 0.08 ± 0.08%, respectively; P = 0.06). However, transport floor space did not affect the percentage of nonambulatory, injured pigs at the plant. Nonambulatory pigs at the farm were positively correlated with relative humidity during loading and load number within the day (r = 0.46 and 0.25, respectively; P < 0.05). The percentage of total losses at the plant was positively correlated to waiting time at the plant, unloading time, and total time from loading to unloading (r = 0.24, 0.51, and 0.36, respectively; P < 0.05). Average temperature during loading, waiting at the farm, transport, waiting at the plant, unloading, and average pig weight on the trailer were not correlated to losses. These results suggest that floor space per pig on the trailer and transport conditions can affect transport losses.

Assessing hygiene proficiency on organic and conventional pig farms regarding pork safety: A pilot study in Finland

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

Role of Cooperative in Improving Accessibility to Production Resources and Household Economy of Backyard Pig Raisers in Batangas, Philippines

Posted in: Production by admin on | No Comments

Backyard pig operation is characterized by the main use of available household resources. The size of animal holding per farm is relatively small and usually accounts for only 2-4 % of the commercial farm. The ownership of household labor at low opportunity cost is one of their comparative advantages with those commercial operators that require more hired labor to run their enterprise. However, being a resource poor and non-organized, they are unlikely to get, on their own, access to the limited resources relating to high quality genetic stocks, animal nutrition and health services and premium markets for output. Backyard pig raisers have been shown to be a heterogeneous entity. Nevertheless, it has been regarded as forefront of the country’s agricultural growth by contributing the highest and consistent average annual growth of 4.6% in gross value-added in agriculture from 1990-2000 despite the financial crisis which struck Philippines and other Asian countries in the latter part of this decade. For years, this sector dominates the country’s pig industry by producing 70% of the total domestic pork supply; comprising 80% of the aggregate pig inventory and providing livelihood to 3.8 million dependents that rely on this livestock activity as their substantial source of income (Tibayan, 2003).
Costales’ (2002) study on backyard pig raisers’ production and market characteristics in Southern Luzon revealed that access to scarce production resources necessary for expanded smallholder participation is not a sole working of the market force and is unevenly distributed across locations (provinces). It is found greater in areas with institutions like cooperatives where members are encouraged and taught to pool together their available scarce resources to benefit
2
everyone in the group. As everyone gains access to these resources, they are enabled to expand their operation, which consequently empowers them to gain more revenue, better profit, and greater income for the household. Thus, the challenge to assemble these backyard pig raisers into institution like cooperatives, which adheres to principles of cooperation, is viewed as a potential measure to directly link them with the whole spectrum of market chain ranging from the acquisition of available production resources and services to the efficient marketing of their differentiated final products. Based on a field survey1, this paper aims to highlight the role of the cooperatives in improving the backyard pig raisers’ access to various production resources and their household economy.