TGE – A Bio-security Wake-Up Call?

Posted in: Welfare by admin on January 1, 2006 | No Comments

TGE (Transmissable Gastro Enteritis) is a disease, which rears its head almost every spring in Manitoba, and 2006 is certainly no exception. It is a disease that is feared by producers because of the speed and devastation it can cause in a sow herd. TGE causes a watery diarrhea and occasional vomiting in pigs of all ages. Upon entry into the herd, it will spread completely through the herd over the course of 3-7 days. TGE takes its biggest toll on piglets less than 10 to14 days of age, where close to 100% mortality is common. Bringing infected animals or infected manure into the barn often causes an outbreak. The virus is readily “trackable,” meaning dirty boots, trucks, vehicles and hands can spread it. The virus survives well in frozen conditions, but is very susceptible to most disinfectants, sunlight and warm dry conditions. Birds, insects and rodents can also be a source of the virus. There are 2 parts of any bio-security program for your farm, keep it off the yard and keep it from getting into your barn from your yard. Don’t let trucks back up to the barn that haven’t had appropriate wash and disinfection procedures applied. Manage foot traffic at delivery points so manure will not be tracked back into trucks/trailers. Prevent entry of rodents and birds into the barn or feed bins. Establish and maintain clear “dirty” and “clean” zones where barn boots and sock traffic don’t mix with outside footwear. Shower in or wash hands thoroughly and change clothes before entering the barn. Take control of materials entering the barn- remove outer packaging and disinfect as appropriate. Also review load out bio-security and design so load outs can be safely and effectively washed and disinfected. The goal is a practical and science based bio-security program that is sustainable all year round, and effective for all infectious disease threats.

Genetic diversity of Streptococcus suis isolated from pigs and humans in Chiang Mai and Lamphun province, Thailand

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

The accumulation of skin lesions and their use as a predictor of individual aggressiveness in pigs

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

Under wild conditions, the ancestors of the domestic pig cohabit in small, genetically related matriarchal groups. Outside of the mating season, aggression between individuals is infrequent and rarely injurious; a feature common to domestic pigs housed in an extensive enclosure (Stolba and Wood-Gush, 1984, 1989; Mendl, 1995). Group social stability is facilitated by the infrequent and gradual integration of new members to the group (Mauget, 1981), close kinship, the preservation of individual space and the use of threats and non-aggressive behaviour to maintain dominance relationships (Mendl, 1995). In contrast, many commercial pigs are repeatedly exposed to sudden mixing episodes with unrelated animals in an environment that limits effective dispersal and the display of appropriate submissive behaviour. Under these conditions, post-mixing aggression is intense during the first 24 h after mixing (Meese and Ewbank, 1973), but varies considerably between members of the group (Mount and Seabrook, 1993; Erhard et al., 1997). The number of skin lesions (lesion score, LS) has frequently been used as a proxy indicator of the extent of post-mixing aggressive behaviour. This approach offers a rapid means of assessing aggressiveness of a large number of pigs and has been used commonly when investigating the development of aggression over several days or weeks or when using large social group sizes (e.g. Francis et al., 1996; Erhard et al., 1997; Spoolder et al., 1999; Turner et al., 1999, 2000, 2002). The objective of this work was to investigate the factors that contribute to LS in order to assess the validity of LS as a measure of individual aggressiveness. After mixing into new groups of 12, the durations of reciprocal fighting and bullying, the proportions of fights initiated, won and lost and physical attributes of the pigs were investigated for their impact on LS using multiple regression on a sample of 342 growing pigs. Pig live weight was the single greatest determinant of LS. The duration spent in reciprocal fighting and being bullied were also significant determinants of the LS and contributed to the total LS in proportions of 0.17 and 0.14, respectively. The proportion of fights initiated, won and lost did not influence the LS for pigs of a given weight. On an individual pig basis, it was impossible to establish the relative importance of reciprocal fighting and the receipt of bullying to the accumulation of lesions by reference to the total LS alone. Engagement in reciprocal fighting was found to result in lesions to the anterior third of the body, whilst the receipt of bullying resulted in lesions accruing on the caudal third of the body. Reference to the location of lesions, in addition to their number, is a refinement of the methodology that potentially allows discrimination of pigs that accumulate lesions as a result of reciprocal fighting or receipt of bulling. A partial replication of the experiment at a second unit (n = 84 pigs) with different genotypic, environmental and husbandry conditions confirmed that the duration spent in reciprocal fighting and being bullied were significant determinants of the LS and that the LS approach is applicable across units. These results suggest that the LS methodology provides a rapid means of estimating aggressive behavioural phenotypes when reference is made to both the number and location of lesions and pig weight and pen identity effects are accounted for.

Circovirus – What is this New Disease?

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

Porcine circovirus type 2 (PCV2) is found all over the world in domestic pigs. It was first identified in Western Canada in 1991. PCV2 is associated with a number of disease syndromes termed porcine circovirus diseases (PCVD). Post weaning multi-systemic wasting syndrome (PMWS) is the most economically significant expression of the disease, and it can have a severe impact on nursery and/or grower production. PCV2 can be found in all herds, but not all herds have PMWS. We believe that other factors in addition to the virus are needed to trigger PMWS. Some of these factors include the co-existence of other diseases agents such as PRRS, as well as management or production issues such as overcrowding, mixing, grain molds, and other stresses. Also, we believe that there has been some genetic change in the virus compared to the original virus. The new “strain” of the virus has been identified in herds that have experienced the most significant clinical problems. PMWS generally affects pigs that are around 2 to 4 months old. The common clinical signs are wasting or weight loss, pale or yellowish skin color, labored breathing, and diarrhea. Very commonly, affected pigs will have noticeably enlarged lymph nodes. Most herds have seen individual pigs affected with PMWS. On the other hand, more frequently there are reported cases of “herd breaks” with PMWS where the morbidity (number of affected pigs) can range from 4 to 30%, and the mortality (death loss) can reach as high as 20%. Management of PCV2 and PMWS has been very frustrating. There are no effective treatments for affected pigs. Two vaccines have recently been made available in Canada on an “emergency release basis” so we are hopeful that these will assist in control of the disease. To this point, most of the control strategies have been focused on general management principles that help ensure a healthy pig population and minimize viral shedding. It is difficult for us to tell you what steps to take to prevent PMWS if you have not experienced the disease. All the usual bio-security rules should be adhered to as well as possible to try to prevent introduction of the “new strain” of the virus. Good management principles at farrowing, nursery and finisher stages should be followed to minimize the ability for the virus to express itself clinically.

Residual Effects of Composted and Fresh Solid Swine (Sus scrofa L.) Manure on Soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] Growth and Yield

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

Preference of Growing Pigs for Illuminance

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

Inappropriate lighting has a negative impact on the welfare of many captive animals; photoperiod, illuminance and spectrum all influence the suitability of a light source or regime. The lighting under which a pig is raised can influence an animal’s ocular, physical and neural development, as well as its behaviour. Although there are no published data for the UK pig industry, photoperiod and illuminance are thought to vary widely within pig housing. In England, the legal requirements for pigs housed under artificial lighting are: (i) that lighting with an intensity of at least 40 lx must be provided for a minimum period of 8 h per day (The Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2003; S.I. 2003 No. 299; following EC regulation: Council Directive 2001/88/EC) and (ii) that animals kept in buildings must have an appropriate period of rest from artificial lighting (TheWelfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2000; S.I. 2000 No. 1870; DEFRA, 2003), though the duration of this period is not specified. Additionally, adequate lighting (whether fixed or portable) must be available to enable the animals to be thoroughly inspected at any time (ibid). One UK farm assurance scheme (Freedom Food, 2003) further requires that housed pigs must have access to an area that provides a minimum illuminance of 50 lx for a continuous period of at least 8 h and a continuous dark period of at least 6 h; either of these temporal minima may be reduced to correspond with seasonal changes in daylength. The research described in this paper stresses the importance of identifying the needs and preferences of domestic animals rather than imposing conditions based on human perception and preference. The preferences of growing pigs for different illuminances and indirectly for photoperiod were determined experimentally. This experiment investigated the preference of juvenile pigs for illuminance, and indirectly photoperiod, at two ages. The animals were equally familiar with all illuminances prior to testing. Four groups, each of four pigs, occupied a four-compartment preference chamber in which a different illuminance was applied to each compartment: minimum (2.4), 4, 40 and 400 lx. Illuminances were rearranged every 2 days to avoid positional bias. The pigs significantly preferred the dimmest illuminance (mean occupancy 7 h 20 min per 24 h, backtransformed data) and spent the least time in the brightest (4 h 49 min per 24 h), with an intermediate and similar length of time spent in the other illuminances (6 h 25 min and 5 h 25 min in 4 and 40 lx, respectively, F3, 127 = 8.93, P < 0.001). The most common behaviours of the pigs when in the darkest compartment were resting and sleeping. The EU directive 2001/88 requires a minimum illuminance of 40 lx for pig production; this illuminance was neither aversive nor strongly preferred by the pigs. Our findings also suggest that pigs should be provided with an appropriate period of rest at an illuminance of 2.4 lx for at least 6 h per day. The only active behaviour affected by illuminance was defecation; the pigs preferred to defecate in the brighter illuminances. Spatial provision of minimal illuminance could potentially improve pig welfare by providing a preferred light environment for resting and also by creating a resting area distinct from dunging areas, thus improving hygiene.

Value Added Opportunities Based on Animal Care

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

Fifty years ago, most consumers still had grandparents or relatives that lived on farms and were involved in production agriculture. The average consumer still had a direct “connection” to agriculture. That is not the case today, customers and consumers are asking questions about environmental performance, animal welfare, food safety and security and worker care issues. Animal agriculture is facing increased pressure and growing questions about the production systems and practices. Activist groups opposed to contemporary production practices are pressuring customers and initiating legislation and litigation to change the way things operate. Today, there is little understanding of livestock production and a general lack of trust in our practices. Animal agriculture is challenged by anthropomorphism, affluence, and agricultural alienation. This list of socially responsible attributes is growing and becoming more embraced by the supply chain each day. To be successful today, animal agriculture must understand and address the consumers’ questions of trust and their values. When customers and consumers ask questions about animal welfare and the industry responds only with science and data, they perceive this as uncaring and non-responsive. Even though animal welfare today is not a top-of the mind concern for those who purchase meat, there is a societal expectation that animals used for meat will be treated humanely (USDA, 2004). Those who do not believe animals are being treated humanely or have other additional agendas are seeking changes by pressuring consumers, initiating legislation, and litigating against certain production practices. The demand for socially responsible production practices such as animal welfare will continue to increase. These demands will eventually become industry standards as the practices initiated by the innovators and early adaptors are adopted. As time passes, socially responsible production will become a requirement for doing business. As we increase both the distance most consumers have from the farm and the level of technology we implement in food production, consumers will become more interested in social responsibility. That means producers will have to become more and more concerned about non-product specific attributes like animal welfare, environmental stewardship, the use of health products and worker care issues. Science alone will not prevail. It is not persuasive in a value-based culture. The list of socially responsible production attributes is growing and being embraced by more of the supply chain every day. Trust must be built between the consumer, processor, and the producer. Building trust will require transparency, professionalism, and third-party certification and verification at all levels of production and processing. The biggest trend in the food system in the next two to three years will involve increased focus by food marketers and others on how producers operate their farms. Specifically, outside sources will want to know a lot more detail about how producers care for their animals, how they care for the land, how they care for their workers, and how they produce a safe product.

Detection of Swine Torque Teno Virus in Italian Pig Herds

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

Anellovirus is a recently created, floating genus of viruses. Torque teno virus (TTV), the type species in the genus, was first discovered in a human patient with a post-transfusion
hepatitis of unknown aetiology. Recently, TTV genetically related to but distinct from those discovered in humans have also been found in animals, including pigs. The aims of this study were to estimate the prevalence of swine TTV in Italian pig herds and some risk factors possibly associated with this infection. Serum samples from 179 healthy pigs from 10 farms located in north-central Italy were tested by polymerase chain reaction for the presence of swine TTV DNA. Viral DNA was
found in the sera of 43 pigs (24.0%), coming from eight of the 10 farms examined. Prevalence was significantly higher in finishing herds (40.1%) than in farrow-to-finish herds (11.0%) and did not depend on the size of the herd. Within the finishing herds the prevalence was significantly higher in weaners (57.4%) than in fatteners (22.9%), but this difference was not observed in farrow-to-finish herds. No relationship was observed between the prevalence of swine TTV and the implementation of some general hygiene practices and biosecurity procedures within the herds.

Pig’s responses to repeated social regrouping and relocation during the growing-finishing period

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

Mixing of unfamiliar animals with a change of physical environment is a common practice in pig husbandry. The pigs have to cope with novelty in their life environment, whereas it is well known that pigs exhibit novel-induced anxiety when submitted to a novel area (Janczak et al., 2003). At the same time, pigs have to cope with social challenges, which may cause injuries and physiological reactions of acute stress. Fighting between newly mixed pigs over the first 24 h is part of the process necessary to establish a dominance order (Meese and Ewbank, 1972). As for other domestic mammals, once established, this social hierarchy regulates aggressive interactions, improves the predictability of social relationships between animals and thus reduces stressful social encounters in stable groups (Tennessen, 1989). However, the abrupt breaking of a stable social group leads to the re-establishment of a new hierarchy (Ewbank and Meese, 1971; Tan and Shackleton, 1990; Puppe, 1998) that may be detrimental for animal welfare. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of repeated mixing and relocation in growing pigs using production, behavioural and physiological indices of stress. Thirty-two growing-finishing pigs were housed in pairs. Animals of half of the pairs were placed in a new pen with a new partner three times a week during 4 weeks (R pigs, n = 8 pairs). Other animals stayed in the same pen with the same partner (C pigs, n = 8 pairs). During the first 90 min following each regrouping, vigorous fights were frequent in R pigs (same pen same partner). Those pigs exhibited more agonistic behaviour than C pigs (new pen with new partner) throughout the experiment (P < 0.05). The number of offensive acts realized by R pigs decreased throughout the experiment (P < 0.05) whereas the number of defensive acts did not vary (P > 0.1). The time-budget determined during 24 h 2 days after the third, sixth, ninth and 12th regrouping was similar in both groups of pigs except the percentage of standing that was higher in R pigs after the last regrouping. R pigs tended to have a lower daily liveweight gain at the fifth regrouping (P = 0.07). Salivary cortisol concentrations were higher in R than in C pigs 4–5 h after the second and fifth regrouping (P < 0.05) but were similar in both groups after the ninth and 11th regrouping. Basal cortisol measured 2 days after the last regrouping in plasma and saliva was higher in R than C pigs. In response to a dexamethasone/ACTH challenge, cortisol in saliva and plasma was similar in both groups (P > 0.05). The behavioural and cortisol responses to regrouping and relocation in pigs decreased over time but were still obvious after 12 mixings. Repeated regroupings induce a chronic stress in pigs without altering severely growth rate.

Porcine Circovirus Disease (PCVD) – Have we won the war in Europe?

Posted in: Welfare by admin on | No Comments

The objective of the present review is to describe the nowadays situation of PMWS in Europe and to compare it with that of late 90s and beginning of 2000s, when major outbreaks of disease were diagnosed. Speculation on the effect of the implemented control and prevention strategies on PMWS evolution is discussed. Since a centralized database on PMWS occurrence is not available at a European level, some of the information given in this review is based on personal observations, discussions and information given by veterinarian colleagues throughout Europe. Countries in Europe can be divided into five main different categories in regards to PMWS at present (adapted from Segalés, 2006): Countries in which the impact of the disease has been or it is still severe or very severe, countries in which, despite describing cases of PMWS, the disease does not seem to represent a major problem, or it is absent nowadays, countries that have reported PMWS cases but have no data to establish how important the disease is in their respective swine populations, countries that have never reported the disease, although surveillance systems have been implemented and finally, countries with unknown PMWS status. The prevalence and incidence of PMWS in most significant pig producing countries has decreased during the last 3-4 years. Some factors that may explain the lower number of PMWS diagnoses are: Veterinarians have learnt how to clinically diagnose or suspect the disease much better that in the past, so they do not confirm the diagnosis with laboratory analyses, both veterinarians and farmers have learnt to “live together” with higher rates of postweaning mortality, so the same levels of mortality that in the past deserved laboratory analyses do not deserve them today, laboratory diagnostic submissions have been limited to those cases where a reasonable doubt regarding “to be or not to be” PMWS exists or to those where the objective is only to rule out PMWS. In fact, herds affected by PMWS rarely return to postweaning mortality rates existing before the first detection of the disease, in the opinion of a significant proportion of veterinarians. Therefore, it would not be surprising that a more enzootic form of PMWS (not so easy to diagnose as before, from a clinical point of view), with lower levels of mortality and less severe clinical signs, is nowadays present in those countries that first experienced severe outbreaks of disease. Common sense indicates that the best way to control a viral infection would be using vaccines if such products were available. However, only one PCV2 vaccine is currently commercially available and in use under special license in France, Germany and Denmark, indicating that most European countries still demand a vaccine product to control the disease. PMWS is defined as a multi-factorial disease that involves infection of pigs with PCV2 and the influence of infectious and non-infectious factors or triggers for the development of clinical disease (Segalés et al., 2005). The most studied co-factors and triggers in relation to disease progression or protection are: The implementation of the Madec’s 20-point plan (a list of management measures to lower the impact of the disease), control of concurrent viral and bacterial infections in the postweaning area, the induction of clinical disease following immunostimulation in conventional pigs reared under commercial conditions, an increase in the nutrient density of young pig diets and addition of commercial feed additives, also, subcutaneous injection of PCV2 hyperimmune sera from commercial slaughterhouse age pigs in suckling or nursery pigs. Field observations from farmers and veterinarians suggested that certain genetic lines of pigs were more or less susceptible to PMWS, and PCV2 vaccination. Definitively, many different measures have been implemented across European countries and an overall significant improvement has been noted from the point of view of disease evolution. However, it is rather difficult to establish the specific measure(s) that helped to diminish the impact of the disease in Europe. Moreover, normal disease evolution (epizootic to enzootic scenarios) may have played a role independently of those measures.