Search

Two experiments were done to assess the effects of season, truck type, and location in the truck on the gastrointestinal tract temperature (GTT) of market-weight pigs during transport. In Exp. 1, a total of 504 sentinel pigs were selected from a total load of 3,756 pigs over 12 wk in summer or winter and transported in either a double-decked (DD) hydraulic truck or a pot-belly (PB) trailer for 2 h. In Exp. 2, a total of 330 sentinel pigs were selected from a total load of 2,145 pigs over 11 wk in summer or winter and transported in a PB trailer for 8 h. In both experiments, sentinel pigs were equipped with a temperature data logger for the real-time GTT recording from the farm to slaughter. Transport was divided into 8 periods in Exp. 1 (rest, pretravel, initial travel, prearrival 1, prearrival 2, unloading, lairage 1, and lairage 2) and in Exp. 2 (rest, pretravel 1, pretravel 2, travel, prearrival 1, prearrival 2, lairage 1, and lairage 2). A delta GTT (ΔGTT) was calculated as the difference between the measured GTT at any determined event and the GTT measured at rest. In Exp. 1, the ΔGTT of pigs was greater ( < 0.001) in summer than in winter and only during the pretravel and initial travel periods. No difference was observed in the ΔGTT between the 2 truck types ( > 0.10). In summer, pigs located in the front top and rear top compartments of the PB trailer presented greater ( < 0.05) ΔGTT values than those transported in the middle top and front belly compartments during initial travel. In summer, during prearrival 1 and 2, a greater ( < 0.05) loss of GTT was found in pigs located in the rear top compartment of the DD truck compared with the rear lower compartment and in the front middle compartment compared with the rear middle compartment of the PB trailer. In Exp. 2, the ΔGTT of pigs was greater ( = 0.03) in summer than in winter during pretravel 2. Pigs in the front top compartment had a greater ( < 0.05) ΔGTT compared with pigs in the middle top, lower deck, and front belly compartments during the pretravel periods. Based on the results of the 2 experiments, modifications of the PB trailer model are recommended to limit body temperature increase due to physical stress at loading and unloading, and during transport due to inconsistent ventilation rate across vehicle locations.

Selection for high prolificacy has resulted in litters comprising a large number of low-birth-weight (LBW) piglets. Given their presence in over 75% of litters and increased mortality rate, it is clear that a greater understanding of LBW piglet management is required for both animal welfare and productivity. In this study, we compared the effects of tail docking and ear notching LBW and average-birth-weight (ABW) piglets at 1 or 3 d of age on suckling, behavior, passive transfer of immunoglobulins, and growth. Six piglets per litter from 20 litters (n = 120 piglets) were used in a 2 × 2 complete block design. Piglets were weighed at birth and designated as LBW (0.6 to 1.0 kg) or ABW (≥ 1.2 kg) and "processed" (tail docked and ear notched) at either 1 or 3 d of age. Vocalizations were recorded during the procedures. The acute behavioral responses were observed for 10 min after the procedure. Piglets were observed for 6 h after birth and after the procedure to determine their presence at nursing bouts. On d 5, blood samples were collected to determine concentrations of serum immunoglobulins (IgA and IgG) and IGF-I. Piglet weights were recorded at birth and on d 5, 14, and 21. During the procedures, LBW piglets produced fewer (P = 0.03) calls than ABW piglets. Piglets from either birth weight category produced a similar number (calls/s; P = 0.29) of high-frequency calls (≥ 1,000 Hz), which are indicative of pain and distress, although the average frequency (Hz) of these calls was greatest (P = 0.05) for ABW piglets processed on d 3. Immediately following the procedures, LBW piglets spent more (P = 0.005) time dog-sitting and less (P = 0.005) time lying than ABW piglets. When observed with the sow, LBW males spent more (P = 0.001) time alone and had the lowest (P = 0.007) attendance at nursing bouts compared with LBW females and all ABW piglets. Concentrations of serum IgA (P = 0.06) and IgG (P = 0.04) and plasma IGF-I (P = 0.003) were lower for LBW than ABW piglets regardless of age of processing although the magnitude of these differences was likely not of biological significance. Average-birth-weight piglets may be less reactive to the acute effects of the procedures on d 1 than on d 3. Given the decreased likelihood of a LBW piglet surviving to weaning (P = 0.001), delaying processing until 3 d of age for LBW piglets may eliminate unnecessary procedures.

There is evidence that season and truck/trailer design play important roles in pig welfare during transportation although little is known about their interaction and effect on pig behavior. This experiment was designed to examine the influence of season and truck/trailer design on the behavior during loading, transit, unloading, and lairage of market-weight pigs transported to slaughter. A total of 3,756 pigs were transported on either a 3-deck pot-belly trailer (PB; n = 181 pigs/wk in 8 experimental compartments) or a double-decker hydraulic truck (DD; n = 85 pigs/wk in 4 compartments) for 2 h to a commercial abattoir in summer and winter (6 wk in each season). Density on both vehicles was 0.40 m(2)/pig. Accounting for the number of pigs, loading took longer (P = 0.033) onto the DD than the PB, but season did not (P = 0.571) influence loading time. Pigs loaded onto the PB moved backward more (P = 0.003) frequently than those loaded onto the DD. The frequency of tapping by handler was the lone handling intervention affected by truck type, with more (P = 0.014) tapping needed to move pigs on and off DD than PB. During loading, pigs made more (P < 0.001) slips and falls, overlaps, 180° turns, underlaps, and vocalizations in winter compared with summer. On truck, more (P < 0.001) pigs were standing on the DD at the farm and in transit than on the PB whereas more (P = 0.012) pigs were lying in transit in summer than in winter. Pigs took longer to unload (P < 0.001) from the PB than the DD, but no difference between vehicles (P = 0.473) in latency to rest in lairage was found. Pigs slipped and fell more (P < 0.001) during unloading, took longer (P < 0.001) to unload, and had a shorter (P = 0.006) latency to rest in lairage in winter than summer. Vehicle design, in particular the presence of ramps, influenced pig behavior before, during, and after transportation, regardless of the season. Season affected loading and unloading behavior, especially in terms of slips and falls on the ramp, and differences in truck/trailer designs were also partly to blame for unloading times and lairage behavior. Ramps and changes in direction during unloading appear to slow down the handling process.

Transportation of pigs to slaughter has the potential to negatively impact animal welfare, particularly in hot temperatures and over long transport durations. The objective of this experiment was to determine if season and location within vehicle influenced the behavior of market-weight pigs during loading, transit, unloading, and lairage after a long-distance trip to slaughter. On a pot-belly truck, 1,170 pigs were transported (n = 195 pigs/wk in 7 experimental compartments) for 8 h to a commercial abattoir in summer (6 wk) and winter (5 wk). Pig behavior was observed at loading, in transit, at unloading, and in lairage. Handler intervention at loading was observed, and the time to load and unload was recorded. Although season did not (P = 0.91) affect loading time, more prods (P = 0.014) were necessary to load pigs in summer than winter. Loading in winter also tended to be longer (P = 0.071) into compartments involving internal ramps. In transit, more pigs (P = 0.025) were standing in winter compared with summer. Unloading took longer (P < 0.006) in winter than in summer and from compartments where pigs had to negotiate ramps and 180° turns. Furthermore, pigs in summer experienced more slipping (P = 0.032), falling (P = 0.004), overlapping (P < 0.001), and walking backward (P < 0.001) than pigs in winter. Pigs unloading from compartments with internal ramps slipped more (P < 0.0001) than other pigs. Season influenced latency to rest in lairage, with those transported in summer resting sooner (P < 0.0001) than those in winter. In conclusion, season and location within trucks differentially affect pig behavior before, during, and after long-distance transportation. Differences in lighting and temperature between seasons and the inclusion of internal ramps within vehicles may play important roles in the welfare of pigs transported to slaughter.

This study aimed at evaluating the effects of trailer design on stress responses and meat quality traits of 3 different pig crosses: 50% Pietrain breeding with halothane (HAL)(Nn) (50Nn); 50% Pietrain breeding with HAL(NN) (50NN); and 25% Pietrain breeding with HAL(NN) genotype (25NN). Over a 6-wk period, pigs (120 pigs/crossbreed) were transported for 7 h in either a pot-belly (PB) or flat-deck (FD) trailer (10 pigs/crossbreed(-1)·trailer(-1)·wk(-1)). Temperature (T) and relative humidity (RH) were monitored in each trailer. Behaviors during loading and unloading, time to load and unload, and latency to rest in lairage were recorded, whereas a sub-population of pigs (4 pigs/crossbreed(-1)·trailer(-1)·wk(-1)) was equipped with gastro-intestinal tract (GIT) temperature monitors. Blood samples were collected at exsanguination for measurement of cortisol, creatine kinase (CK), lactate, haptoglobin, and Pig-MAP concentrations. Meat quality data were collected at 24 h postmortem from the LM and semimembranosus (SM) and adductor (AD) muscles of all 360 pigs. Greater T were recorded in the PB trailer during transportation (P = 0.006) and unloading (P < 0.001). Delta GIT temperature was greater (P = 0.01) in pigs unloaded from the PB. At loading, pigs tended to move backwards more (P = 0.06) when loaded on the FD than the PB trailer. At unloading, an interaction was found between trailer type and crossbreed type, with a greater (P < 0.01) frequency of overlaps in 50NN and 25NN pigs and slips/falls in 50Nn and 50NN pigs from the FD than the PB trailer. Cortisol concentrations at slaughter were greater (P = 0.02) in pigs transported in the PB than FD trailer. Greater lactate concentrations were found in 50Nn and 50NN pigs (P = 0.003) and greater CK concentrations (P < 0.001) in 50Nn pigs. As expected, 50Nn pigs produced leaner (P < 0.001) carcasses, with greater (P = 0.01) dressing percentages, as well as lower (P < 0.001) ultimate pH values and greater (P < 0.001) drip loss percentages in the LM and greater (P = 0.002) drip losses and a paler color (greater L* values, P = 0.02) in the SM than 50NN pigs. When used for long distance transportation under controlled conditions, the PB trailer produced no detrimental effects on animal welfare or pork quality. Pigs with 50% Pietrain crossbreeding appear to be more responsive to transport stress, having the potential to produce acceptable carcass and pork quality, provided pigs are free of the HAL gene.

Although there is increasing evidence regarding the negative welfare and meat quality implications of electric prod use for slaughter-weight pigs, this handling tool continues to be used. Therefore, the behavioral and physiological response and carcass and meat quality of 360 pigs being loaded onto a truck for transportation to slaughter according to 3 handling procedures were studied. The 3 handling procedures were 1) moving with an electric prod and board from the finishing pen to the truck (EP); 2) moving with a board and a paddle from the finishing pen to the truck (PAD); 3) moving with a board and a paddle from the finishing pen and using a compressed air prod in the ramp before going into the truck (CAP). A subpopulation of 144 pigs (48 pigs/treatment) was equipped with heart rate monitors. Blood samples were collected from the same animals at exsanguination for the analysis of creatine phosphokinase and lactate. Data were analyzed using an ANOVA for factorial design, with the animal as the experimental unit. Behavior was analyzed with MIXED model procedure with treatment as a fixed effect. During loading, EP pigs slipped and fell (P < 0.001) and overlapped (P = 0.03) more often, but stopped (P < 0.001) and attempted turns (P = 0.01) less often than CAP or PAD. With CAP, pigs made more 180° turns (P = 0.01) than with PAD or EP. Loading with EP led to more and longer vocalizations (P = 0.02 and P = 0.001, respectively) than loading with CAP or PAD. Loading took longest with CAP and was quickest with EP (P = 0.01). Pigs handled with EP had a greater heart rate than those moved with PAD and CAP at loading (P < 0.001), wait at loading (P < 0.001), at unloading (P = 0.05), and in lairage (P = 0.02). Pigs loaded with EP had greater (P = 0.05) lactate concentrations in blood at exsanguination compared with pigs handled with CAP, with pigs loaded with PAD being intermediate. Furthermore, ultimate pH values in the semimembranosus and adductor muscles of EP pigs were greater (P = 0.002 and P = 0.004, respectively) compared with those from PAD and CAP pigs. Greater (P = 0.04) incidence of blood-splashed hams was found in EP pigs compared with PAD and CAP pigs. Therefore, considering animal welfare, carcass bruising, and blood splashes standpoints, EP should be replaced with PAD or CAP. However, additional research is necessary to identify methods that improve the loading efficiencies of PAD and CAP without adversely affecting animal welfare parameters.

Neonatal piglets are often subject to potentially painful processing procedures such as tail docking and ear notching during the first few days after birth. However, these procedures may influence the development of suckling behavior and passive transfer of immunoglobulins, especially if done within the first day postpartum. The objective of this experiment was to compare the effects of processing piglets during the first 24 h versus at 3 d of age on suckling and pain-related behavior, the passive transfer of immunoglobulins, and growth. Six piglets per litter from 20 litters (n = 120 piglets) were used in a 3 x 2 complete block design. Piglets were weighed at birth and assigned to 1 of 3 treatments (balanced by birth weight): control (unmanipulated), sham processed (manually manipulated), and processed (tail docked and ear notched) at 1 of 2 ages (1 or 3 d of age). Vocalizations were recorded during the procedures, and piglets were observed after the procedures for pain-related behavior. Suckling behavior was observed for 6 h on each of d 1 to 4. Colostrum samples were collected after the birth of all piglets (before first suck), and blood samples were collected on d 5 to examine concentrations of immunoglobulins (IgA and IgG) and IGF-I. Body weights were measured at birth and on d 5 and 14. During the procedures, processed piglets, regardless of age, vocalized at a greater frequency (P < 0.001) and produced more high frequency calls (P = 0.016) than sham-processed piglets. All piglets on d 1 produced more high frequency calls than all piglets on d 3 (P = 0.047). Immediately after the procedures, sham-processed and processed piglets spent less time lying and more time standing than control piglets (P < 0.001), whereas processed piglets jammed their tail between their legs more than sham-processed or control piglets (P < 0.001). Lying, standing and tail posture were not influenced by age, nor were there age by treatment interactions. Piglets on d 1 trembled more than piglets on d 3 (P < 0.001), and this tended to be exacerbated by processing (P = 0.076). There was no effect of treatment or age of treatment on suckling behavior. Processed piglets had decreased IgG serum concentrations compared with sham-processed and control piglets (P = 0.029), although there was no interaction between treatment and age of treatment (P = 0.67). Whereas tail docking and ear notching do appear to result in short-term pain and modulated immune status, processing on d 1 appears neither better nor worse than processing on d 3.

During the first few days after weaning, pigs often experience BW loss as they adapt to eating solid food. During this time period, they are also known to drink excessively and develop abnormal oral behavior such as belly nosing. The excessive drinking may stem from the piglets' attempt to satiate hunger through gut fill from a familiar ingestive source. Gut fill through water intake may affect the establishment of feeding behavior. Using drinker devices other than the standard nipple drinker may ease the piglets' transition at weaning by facilitating the initiation of feeding and preventing the development of behavioral problems such as excessive drinking and belly nosing. In this experiment, we examined the effect of drinker type on water and food intake, growth rates, and belly nosing in newly weaned piglets. Eighteen pens of 15 piglets each (270 piglets total) were weaned at 18.1 +/- 0.1 d of age and housed in pens containing 1 of 3 drinker devices (standard nipple, push-lever bowl, and float bowl). Piglets' water and feed intake, water use, BW, and behavior were examined on a pen basis through 2 wk after weaning. Piglets with nipple drinkers wasted more water than the other piglets (P < 0.001; float, 295 +/- 70 mL x pig(-1) . d(-1); nipple, 1,114 +/- 63 mL x pig(-1) . d(-1); and push-lever, 186 +/- 63 mL x pig(-1) . d(-1)), whereas piglets with float bowls consumed less water than the other piglets (P < 0.001; float, 475 +/- 81 mL . pig(-1) x d(-1); nipple, 870 +/- 76 mL x pig(-1) . d(-1); push-lever, 774 +/- 76 mL x pig(-1) . d(-1)). Drinker type affected feeding behavior (P = 0.02); piglets with push-lever bowls spent less time at the feeder than the other piglets, although no difference was detected for feed intake (P = 0.64) or overall ADG (P = 0.16). Piglets with push-lever bowls also tended to perform less piglet-directed nosing behavior than piglets with the float bowl (P = 0.04). Piglets appear to use more water during the first 2 d after weaning with certain drinker devices. However, piglets do not appear to attain satiety through water consumption because most of the water used during the first few days after weaning is wasted. This excessive drinking and water wastage can be abated through the use of push-lever drinkers without negative implications for feed intake or growth rates.

Early-weaned pigs appear to be highly motivated to engage in motor patterns associated with nursing, which is thought to lead to the development of abnormal ingestive behaviors. If performance of these behaviors is related to sucking motivation, then the normal stimuli associated with nursing should stimulate pigs to perform these abnormal behaviors, specifically belly nosing. The goal of this study was to determine whether belly nosing could be affected by sow nursing vocalizations and whether the style of the drinker device influenced early-weaned pig behavior. Over six trials, 352 Yorkshire pigs were weaned at 15 d and assigned to pens (n = 44) of eight pigs based on litter, weight, and sex. Four pens in each of two rooms were outfitted with either a water nipple drinker or a drinker bowl. Rooms either had recorded sow vocalizations broadcast at hourly intervals or no sound (control). Pig behaviors were videotaped in a sample of pens (n = 32) on d 0, 1, 2, 5, 9, 11, 13, 16, and 18 after weaning. On d 0 to 2, pigs were observed continuously for feeding and drinking behaviors. On d 5 to 18, pigs were observed by scan sampling every 5 min for time budgets. Pigs with drinker bowls had higher apparent feed intakes during the first 2 d after weaning (P = 0.024), whereas they spent less time engaged in drinking behavior (P = 0.001). This coincided with an overall lower water use (P = 0.001) than that of pigs with nipple drinkers. Pigs with bowl drinkers also spent less time belly nosing than those with access to a nipple drinker (P = 0.012). Pigs in the sow vocalization treatment tended to have a higher ADG (P = 0.075), whereas they spent less time performing feeding behavior (P = 0.064). However, there was no effect of sow nursing grunts on belly nosing. These results suggest that there is a complex relationship between feeding, drinking and sucking, and belly nosing is not controlled by the same external stimuli as sucking. Because drinker type and the motor patterns that it accommodates affect belly nosing, it may be that the internal stimuli associated with nursing, such as the actual act of sucking, play a large role in the development of abnormal oral-nasal behaviors.