Search

Under the International Health Regulations (IHR, 2005), a legally binding document adopted by 196 States Parties, countries are required to develop their capacity to rapidly detect, assess, notify and respond to unusual health events of potential international concern. To support countries in monitoring and enhancing their capacities and complying with the IHR (2005), the World Health Organization (WHO) developed the IHR Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (IHR MEF). This framework comprises four complementary components: the State Party Annual Report, the Joint External Evaluation, after-action reviews and simulation exercises. The first two are used to review capacities and the second two to help to explore their functionality. The contribution of different disciplines, sectors, and areas of work, joining forces through a One Health approach, is essential for the implementation of the IHR (2005). Therefore, WHO, in partnership with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), and other international and national partners, has actively worked on facilitating the inclusion of the relevant sectors, in particular the animal health sector, in each of the four components of the IHR MEF. Other tools complement the IHR MEF, such as the WHO/OIE IHR-PVS [Performance of Veterinary Services] National Bridging Workshops, which facilitate the optimal use of the results of the IHR MEF and the OIE Performance of Veterinary Services Pathway and create an opportunity for stakeholders from animal health and human health services to work on the coordination of their efforts. The results of these various tools are used in countries' planning processes and are incorporated in their National Action Plan for Health Security to accelerate the implementation of IHR core capacities. The present article describes how One Health is incorporated in all components of the IHR MEF.

Collaborative, One Health approaches support governments to effectively prevent, detect and respond to emerging health challenges, such as zoonotic diseases, that arise at the human-animal-environmental interfaces. To overcome these challenges, operational and outcome-oriented tools that enable animal health and human health services to work specifically on their collaboration are required. While international capacity and assessment frameworks such as the IHR-MEF (International Health Regulations - Monitoring and Evaluation Framework) and the OIE PVS (Performance of Veterinary Services) Pathway exist, a tool and process that could assess and strengthen the interactions between human and animal health sectors was needed. Through a series of six phased pilots, the IHR-PVS National Bridging Workshop (NBW) method was developed and refined. The NBW process gathers human and animal health stakeholders and follows seven sessions, scheduled across three days. The outputs from each session build towards the next one, following a structured process that goes from gap identification to joint planning of corrective measures. The NBW process allows human and animal health sector representatives to jointly identify actions that support collaboration while advancing evaluation goals identified through the IHR-MEF and the OIE PVS Pathway. By integrating sector-specific and collaborative goals, the NBWs help countries in creating a realistic, concrete and practical joint road map for enhanced compliance to international standards as well as strengthened preparedness and response for health security at the human-animal interface.

The ability to minimise the harmful impact of biological threats relies on our capacity to rapidly detect unusual events, including the accidental or deliberate release of pathogenic or toxic agents, and immediately implement control measures. The development of this capacity for each country is the aim of the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005), a legally binding document adopted by 196 States Parties, including all Member States of the World Health Organization (WHO). Each country's animal health sector contributes to the implementation of the IHR through surveillance, disease reporting and its response to zoonotic diseases, foodborne diseases and other events that emerge at the interface between human and animal health. The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) Performance of Veterinary Services (PVS) Pathway allows countries to undertake a comprehensive evaluation of their Veterinary Services and identify areas that need improvement. The OIE and WHO have conducted an in-depth analysis of the differences and synergies between the tools used by WHO to monitor the implementation of the IHR and the OIE PVS Pathway, revealing a wide range of similarities, complementarities and synergies. Taking advantage of the outcomes and outputs from the assessment and gap analysis tools used in the IHR Monitoring Framework and the OIE PVS Pathway, and exploiting the strength of these institutional frameworks, WHO and the OIE have jointly developed methods to facilitate communication between the animal health and human health sectors. This enhanced dialogue improves operational coordination and more efficiently informs policy-makers on strategic investments to strengthen their preparedness for controlling the spread of zoonotic diseases.

Under the International Health Regulations (IHR, 2005), a legally binding document adopted by 196 States Parties, countries are required to develop their capacity to rapidly detect, assess, notify and respond to unusual health events of potential international concern. To support countries in monitoring and enhancing their capacities and complying with the IHR (2005), the World Health Organization (WHO) developed the IHR Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (IHR MEF). This framework comprises four complementary components: the State Party Annual Report, the Joint External Evaluation, after-action reviews and simulation exercises. The first two are used to review capacities and the second two to help to explore their functionality. The contribution of different disciplines, sectors, and areas of work, joining forces through a One Health approach, is essential for the implementation of the IHR (2005). Therefore, WHO, in partnership with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), and other international and national partners, has actively worked on facilitating the inclusion of the relevant sectors, in particular the animal health sector, in each of the four components of the IHR MEF. Other tools complement the IHR MEF, such as the WHO/OIE IHR-PVS [Performance of Veterinary Services] National Bridging Workshops, which facilitate the optimal use of the results of the IHR MEF and the OIE Performance of Veterinary Services Pathway and create an opportunity for stakeholders from animal health and human health services to work on the coordination of their efforts. The results of these various tools are used in countries' planning processes and are incorporated in their National Action Plan for Health Security to accelerate the implementation of IHR core capacities. The present article describes how One Health is incorporated in all components of the IHR MEF.En vertu du Règlement sanitaire international (RSI, 2005), instrument juridique ayant force obligatoire pour les 196 États Parties dans le monde, les pays s’engagent à renforcer leurs capacités de détection, d’évaluation, de notification et de réaction en cas d’événements sanitaires inhabituels ou présentant une dimension internationale inquiétante. Le Cadre de suivi et d’évaluation du RSI (2005) a été élaboré par l’Organisation mondiale de la santé (OMS) afin de soutenir les pays souhaitant évaluer et améliorer leurs capacités et leur niveau de conformité avec le RSI (2005). Ce cadre comprend quatre composantes complémentaires : le rapport annuel de l’État Partie, l’Évaluation extérieure conjointe, les examens « après action» et les exercices de simulation. Les deux premières composantes permettent de faire le point sur les capacités tandis que les deux dernières visent une connaissance détaillée de leur fonctionnement. La mise en oeuvre du RSI (2005) demande aux différentes disciplines, secteurs et domaines d’activités de fédérer leurs forces dans une approche Une seule santé. Par conséquent, en partenariat avec l’Organisation des Nations Unies pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture (FAO), avec l’Organisation mondiale de la santé animale (OIE) et avec d’autres partenaires internationaux et nationaux, l’OMS a fait en sorte de faciliter l’intégration de tous les secteurs concernés, en particulier celui de la santé animale, dans les diverses composantes du Cadre d’évaluation du RSI. D’autres outils complètent celui-ci, en particulier les ateliers de liaison nationaux OMS/OIE sur le RSI et le Processus d’évaluation des performances des Services vétérinaires (PVS), dont le but est de faciliter l’utilisation optimale des résultats du Cadre d’évaluation du RSI et du Processus PVS de l’OIE et de fournir aux acteurs des services de santé animale et de santé publique la possibilité de se concerter sur les modalités d’une synergie de leur action. Les résultats de ces outils sont ensuite pris en compte par les pays lors des procédures de planification et intégrés dans les Plans d’action nationaux pour la sécurité sanitaire afin d’accélérer la mise en oeuvre des capacités fondamentales décrites dans le RSI. Les auteurs décrivent l’intégration du concept Une seule santé dans chacune des composantes du Cadre d’évaluation du RSI.Según lo dispuesto en el Reglamento Sanitario Internacional (RSI, 2005), documento jurídicamente vinculante suscrito por 196 Estados Partes, los países están obligados a dotarse de la capacidad necesaria para detectar, evaluar, notificar y afrontar con rapidez todo evento sanitario inusual que pueda revestir importancia internacional. Para ayudar a los países a dotarse de mejores capacidades, a seguir de cerca su evolución al respecto y a dar cumplimiento al RSI (2005), la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) elaboró el marco de seguimiento y evaluación del RSI, que consta de cuatro elementos complementarios: el informe anual que debe presentar cada Estado Parte; la evaluación externa conjunta; exámenes posteriores a las intervenciones; y ejercicios de simulación. Los dos primeros sirven para examinar las capacidades, y los dos segundos para ayudar a estudiar su funcionalidad. Para la aplicación del RSI (2005) es fundamental la contribución de diferentes disciplinas, sectores y ámbitos de trabajo, que aúnen esfuerzos actuando desde los postulados de Una sola salud. Por ello la OMS, en colaboración con la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Alimentación y la Agricultura (FAO), la Organización Mundial de Sanidad Animal (OIE) y otros asociados internacionales y nacionales, ha trabajado activamente para facilitar la integración de los sectores pertinentes, en particular el de la sanidad animal, en cada uno de los cuatro componentes del marco de seguimiento y evaluación del RSI. Hay otros dispositivos que vienen a complementar este marco, por ejemplo los talleres nacionales dedicados a la creación de nexos entre el RSI y el proceso PVS (Prestaciones de los Servicios Veterinarios) de la OIE, organizados conjuntamente por la OMS y la OIE, que facilitan un uso idóneo de los resultados del marco de seguimiento y evaluación del RSI y del proceso PVS y brindan a las partes interesadas de los servicios sanitarios y zoosanitarios la oportunidad de trabajar sobre la coordinación de sus respectivas actividades. Los resultados de estas diversas herramientas alimentan después los procesos de planificación de los países y son incorporados a su Plan de acción nacional de seguridad sanitaria para acelerar la implantación de las capacidades básicas prescritas en el RSI. Los autores explican cómo se incorpora la filosofía de Una sola salud a todos los componentes del marco de seguimiento y evaluación del RSI.

The ability to minimise the harmful impact of biological threats relies on our capacity to rapidly detect unusual events, including the accidental or deliberate release of pathogenic or toxic agents, and immediately implement control measures. The development of this capacity for each country is the aim of the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005), a legally binding document adopted by 196 States Parties, including all Member States of the World Health Organization (WHO). Each country's animal health sector contributes to the implementation of the IHR through surveillance, disease reporting and its response to zoonotic diseases, foodborne diseases and other events that emerge at the interface between human and animal health. The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) Performance of Veterinary Services (PVS) Pathway allows countries to undertake a comprehensive evaluation of their Veterinary Services and identify areas that need improvement. The OIE and WHO have conducted an in-depth analysis of the differences and synergies between the tools used by WHO to monitor the implementation of the IHR and the OIE PVS Pathway, revealing a wide range of similarities, complementarities and synergies. Taking advantage of the outcomes and outputs from the assessment and gap analysis tools used in the IHR Monitoring Framework and the OIE PVS Pathway, and exploiting the strength of these institutional frameworks, WHO and the OIE have jointly developed methods to facilitate communication between the animal health and human health sectors. This enhanced dialogue improves operational coordination and more efficiently informs policy-makers on strategic investments to strengthen their preparedness for controlling the spread of zoonotic diseases.La faculté de minimiser l’impact néfaste des menaces biologiques dépend de la capacité des pays à détecter rapidement tout événement inhabituel, en particulier la dissémination accidentelle ou délibérée d’agents pathogènes ou toxiques, et à mettre en œuvre des mesures immédiates pour maîtriser ces événements. Le Règlement sanitaire international (RSI) (2005), un document juridiquement contraignant adopté par les 196 États parties, dont les États membres de l’Organisation mondiale de la santé (OMS) a précisément pour objectif de développer cette capacité dans chaque pays. Le secteur de la santé animale d’un pays participe à la mise en œuvre du RSI à travers une surveillance appropriée, la notification des maladies et l’adoption de mesures en cas de zoonoses, de maladies d’origine alimentaire et de tout autre événement émergeant à l’interface entre la santé humaine et la santé animale. Le Processus relatif aux performances des Services vétérinaires (Processus PVS) de l’Organisation mondiale de la santé animale (OIE) fournit aux pays la possibilité d’entreprendre une évaluation complète de leurs Services vétérinaires et d’identifier les domaines susceptibles d’être améliorés. L’OIE et l’OMS ont analysé de manière approfondie les différences et les synergies entre les outils utilisés par l’OMS pour vérifier la mise en œuvre du RSI, d’une part, et le Processus PVS de l’OIE, d’autre part, ce qui a mis en lumière de nombreuses similitudes, complémentarités et synergies. Sur la base des résultats et des données produites par les outils d’évaluation et d’analyse des écarts du Cadre de suivi du RSI et du Processus PVS de l’OIE, l’OMS et l’OIE ont exploité la puissance de ces cadres institutionnels pour mettre au point conjointement des méthodes visant à améliorer la communication entre les secteurs de la santé animale et de la santé humaine. Ce dialogue renforcé a pour effets d’améliorer la coordination opérationnelle et d’informer plus efficacement les décideurs politiques sur les investissements stratégiques permettant de mettre en place les conditions de préparation nécessaires pour lutter contre la propagation des zoonoses.La aptitud de reducir al mínimo los efectos perjudiciales de las amenazas biológicas depende de nuestra capacidad para detectar con rapidez episodios inusuales, como la liberación accidental o deliberada de agentes patógenos o tóxicos, e instituir de inmediato medidas de control. El Reglamento Sanitario Internacional (RSI) (2005) es un documento jurídicamente vinculante aprobado por 196 Estados Partes, entre ellos todos los Estados Miembros de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS), que precisamente tiene por objetivo dotar de esta capacidad a todos y cada uno de los países. El sector zoosanitario de cada país contribuye a la aplicación del RSI con actividades de vigilancia, notificación de enfermedades y respuesta ante enfermedades zoonóticas, enfermedades de transmisión alimentaria u otros episodios que puedan darse en la interfaz de la salud humana con la sanidad animal. El proceso de evaluación de las prestaciones de los Servicios Veterinarios (Proceso PVS) de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OIE) sirve a los países para llevar a cabo una evaluación completa de sus Servicios Veterinarios y determinar aquellos ámbitos en que se requieran mejoras. La OIE y la OMS han analizado a fondo las diferencias y sinergias existentes entre las herramientas que utiliza la OMS para seguir de cerca la aplicación del RSI y el Proceso PVS de la OIE, labor que ha puesto de relieve un buen número de semejanzas, sinergias y aspectos complementarios de diversa índole. Partiendo de los resultados y productos que deparan las herramientas de evaluación y análisis de carencias utilizadas en el Marco de seguimiento del RSI y el Proceso PVS de la OIE, y aprovechando la solidez de estos marcos institucionales, la OMS y la OIE han definido conjuntamente métodos para facilitar la comunicación entre los sectores de la salud humana y la sanidad animal. La existencia de un diálogo más fluido se traduce en una mejor coordinación operativa y permite informar con más eficacia a los planificadores de las inversiones estratégicas necesarias para reforzar las medidas de preparación destinadas a controlar la propagación de enfermedades zoonóticas.

Summary Reasons for performing study: Surveillance of equine influenza viruses has suggested that strains included in currently licensed vaccines are a poor match for those predominantly circulating in the field. Objective: To assess the ability of Duvaxyn IE-T Plus to provide cross protection against the newly evolved South Africa/4/03 (H3N8) strain of equine influenza virus. Methods: The vaccine efficacy was evaluated by challenge infection with influenza strain A/eq/South Africa/4/03 (H3N8) 2 weeks after a primary course of 2 vaccinations with Duvaxyn IE-T Plus given at a 4-week interval. The outcome of challenge in vaccinated ponies was compared with that in unvaccinated animals. Results: At the time of challenge, all vaccinated ponies had high levels of antibody to Newmarket/1/93, Newmarket/2/93 and South Africa/4/03 strains measured by single radial haemolysis. After challenge infection, there were statistically significantly decreased clinical scores and virus shedding was significantly lower in the vaccinated ponies compared to unvaccinated controls. Conclusion: Two doses of Duvaxyn IE-T Plus provides good clinical and virological protection against challenge with a variant virus 2 weeks after the 2 doses of vaccine. Potential relevance: When variant strains of equine influenza virus first emerge, booster immunisations with currently available vaccines may limit infection provided sufficiently high antibody levels are achieved, suggesting that vaccination in the face of an outbreak may be beneficial.

To effectively reduce health risks at the animal-human-ecosystems interface, a One Health strategy is crucially important to create strong national and regional animal health systems that are well coordinated with strong public health systems. Animal diseases, particularly those caused by new and emerging zoonotic pathogens, must be effectively controlled at their source to reduce their potentially devastating impact upon both animal and human health. As the international organisation responsible for developing standards, guidelines and recommendations for animal health, the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) plays an important role in minimising animal and public health risks attributable to zoonoses and other animal diseases, which can have severe consequences for global food safety and security. National Veterinary Services, which implement OIE animal health and welfare standards and other measures, are the first line of defence against these diseases, and must have the capacity to meet the core requirements necessary for their diagnosis and control. The OIE works collaboratively with the World Health Organization and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations to improve the ability of national animal and public health systems to respond to current and emerging animal health risks with public health consequences. In addition to improving and aligning national laboratory capacities in high-risk areas, the OIE collaborates on One Health-oriented projects for key diseases, establishing model frameworks which can be applied to manage other existing and emerging priority diseases. This article reviews the role and activities of the OIE in strengthening the national Veterinary Services of its Member Countries for a more effective and sustainable One Health collaboration.

EU Council Directive 91/630/EEC specifies a banded system of increasing space allowance for finishing pigs, which imposes a degree of inflexibility on housing management. The study presented in this paper investigated whether there are measurable differences in welfare when pigs are kept at the minimum stocking densities described by the bands of the regulations (B), compared to those calculated using an equation (E) relating space allowance and live weight; Area (m2)=0.030×Live weight0.67 (kg). Furthermore, the study compared different floor types [fully slatted (F), solid without straw (N) or solid with straw bedding (S)] at these stocking densities. Eighteen groups of 12 pigs were allocated to this 2×3 factorial experiment, between 29 and 110 kg live weight. Data were collected on a range of welfare parameters. No effects of the space allowance treatments or interactive effects between space allowance and floor type were found. S pigs showed higher levels of manipulative behaviours than N pigs (47 vs. 57% of time spent active, N vs. S; P

This study examines the interactive effects of mixing and the provision of kennels to finishing pigs on agonistic behaviour. Pigs were housed either in naturally ventilated kennelled accommodation, or in an unkennelled sloping floor accommodation with automatically controlled natural ventilation (ACNV). Under each of these two housing conditions, three groups of 10 pigs were subjected to one of the following four mixing/moving treatments: no mixing (control), mixing and moving at 55 kg only, mixing and moving at 75 kg only and mixing and moving on both occasions. Groups which were not mixed at 55 kg or at 75 kg were moved to a novel pen at the time that the others were mixed. Mixing and moving pigs resulted in higher levels of aggression and skin damage compared to moving only. Levels of skin lesions were lower when mixing at 55 kg compared to mixing at 75 kg. The duration and frequency of fights in the immediate post mixing period and skin damage measured on day 1 after mixing correlated well when mixing pigs at 75 kg, but not when mixing at 55 kg. This suggests that the hierarchy takes longer to be established in younger pigs than it does in older heavier pigs, or that skin damage inflicted by heavier pigs during fights is more severe. Previous mixing at 55 kg had minimal effects on mixing at 75 kg in terms of behaviour immediately post mixing and skin lesions in the following two days. The presence of a kennel appeared to have a positive effect on the average duration of fights, but the effect on the proportion of fights which involved location changes (lying to dunging area or vice versa) was not significant. Performance data suggested that food conversion ratios were poorer in the first two weeks after mixing in the kennelled building, but not in the sloping floor building. Increased social and thermal stress after mixing in the kennelled, naturally ventilated accommodation may have been the cause of this. Over the whole of the finishing period, daily live weight gains and food conversion ratios did not differ measurably between treatments.

Compared with small groups, housing in large groups offers the pig more total available space, resulting potentially in an increased degree of control over its (micro) environment. For the producer, large groups require fewer pen divisions and offer more possibilities for the sharing of resources such as feeders and drinkers. However, whilst large groups may offer benefits to higher ranking animals in the group, there may be serious disadvantages for those further down the social hierarchy, who also need to compete for access to resources. This study investigated the interactive effects on welfare of food availability (one single space hopper per 20 or per 10 pigs) and group size (20, 40 or 80 pigs per pen), at constant stocking density (0·55 m2per pig) in part-slatted pens. Groups provided with two feeding spaces per 20 pigs were less active than groups with one feeding space per 20 pigs. The number of aggressive interactions per pig at the food trough was not affected by group size but decreased with number of feeder spaces per 20 pigs. The number of skin lesions increased with group size. Average daily gain in the first half of the finishing period was negatively influenced by group size and positively by number of feeding spaces. No effect on weight gain was found subsequently. Within-group variation in growth was not affected by group size or number of feeder spaces. No differences between treatments were found in the number of pigs removed for health reasons. Interactive effects of the two treatments were found on some behaviours but not on any of the performance variables measured. It is concluded that, from a welfare point of view, the number of pigs per feeder space should be lower than 20, although performance levels appear acceptable at 20 pigs per feeder. Further research will have to identify whether the effects of group size on general aggression is common to all finishing pig systems, or whether the presence of straw can serve as a mitigating factor.

In group feeding systems, competition over access to food may be heightened by food restriction, as hungry sows remain active and motivated to feed. The behavioural effects of food restriction may be mitigated by satisfying feeding motivation more effectively or by providing sows with a substrate with which to express their foraging behaviour. Twenty groups of seven multiparous sows were used in a 2×2 factorial design to investigate the effects on behaviour of floor feeding sows the same daily weight of iso-energetic conventional (C) or high fibre (H; containing 600 g of unmolassed sugar beet pulp per kilogram of diet) pregnancy diets in strawed (S) or un-strawed (N) pens. Observations were conducted from the start of feeding for 2 h (0900–1100 h) and for 2 h in the afternoon (1300–1500 h). Sows on S treatments received more aggressive interactions ( P P P P P P

The inability of sows to appropriately express feeding motivation has been identified as one of the major contributory factors in the development of stereotypic behaviour. It has been proposed that the development of these repetitive behaviours may be mitigated either by reducing feeding motivation, for example by feeding sows bulky diets which increase gut fill, or by providing sows with a foraging substrate. Forty-eight nulliparous sows were used in a 2 = 2 factorial design comparing the interactive effects of a high fibre diet and the provision of straw on the behaviour of food restricted pregnant sows. Sows were fed the same daily weight of iso-energetic . . conventional C or high fibre H; containing 600 g of unmolassed sugar beet pulp per kg of food . . diets during gestation and were housed in pens with straw S or without straw N. Behaviour was recorded by direct observation and video during their second gestation. Levels of chain and bar-directed behaviour were highest in the hour immediately following food presentation. Al- though no difference was found in activity levels or levels of chain and bar manipulation between dietary treatments, sows fed the high fibre diet spent less time manipulating straw C vs. H; 46.3 . vs. 37.0%, P- 0.05 than sows fed the conventional diet, after adjustment for the time spent . feeding C vs. H; 20.0 vs. 29.4%, P- 0.001 . In addition, increasing dietary fibre tended to reduce the level of manipulation of substrates other than straw, but only in the final hour of observation. This suggests that fermentation of sugar beet pulp may play a role in maintaining levels of satiety later in the day, when the satiety levels of conventionally fed sows are starting to decline. The provision of straw significantly reduced levels of chains and bar manipulation S vs.

Comparative data on housing systems may facilitate the producer’s ability to choose, but are often confounded by farm effects. The present study aimed to provide information on production and labour input, as well as indicators of health and welfare in three different finishing pig systems, on one farm. The three systems were a Sloping Floor (S), a Kennelled (K) and a Part-slatted (P) system. Average Daily Gains tended to be different between housing systems (e.g. Summer data: 862, 885 and 844 g day -1 , for S, K and P respectively, F 2,17 =2.94; P =0.080). Food intakes showed corresponding differences, such that Food Conversion Ratio did not differ. The percentage of rejections for health reasons in K was nearly half that of S and P (1.9, 3.9 and 3.6% respectively) but the difference was not significant ( ? 2 =0.679; P >0.05). The number of skin lesions was greater in S compared to P, with K intermediate. However, this may have been confounded by pig cleanliness. The incidence of stomachs with lesions and / or parakeratosis did not differ significantly. Systems S and K required an average of 175 and 283 kg straw pig place -1 year -1 . Significantly more electricity was required to run P compared to the other systems (e.g. Summer: 0.07, 0.06 and 17.1 kWh week -1 for S, K and P respectively; F 5,54 =893.5; P

The causes and timing of piglet mortality were studied in different farrowing systems. In the first experiment 198 litters were recorded in three systems, two of which allowed the sows to move freely, and the third restricted them in conventional crates. More piglets were weaned from the conventional crates than from the open systems and they grew more quickly. More than half the liveborn mortality occurred during the first four days after parturition. In the open systems, 17 per cent and 14 per cent of the piglets born alive were crushed, compared with only 8 per cent in the crates. In the second experiment, 29 sows and litters were studied in detail in a communal pen system during the first seven days of lactation. Three-quarters of the liveborn mortality was due to crushing. The total number of piglets dying per litter, including stillbirths, was significantly associated with the total litter size and the sow's parity. The percentage liveborn mortality was significantly associated with the parity and body length of the sows and with the within-litter variation in the birth weight of the piglets. Individual birth weight was closely associated with percentage survival. Only 28 per cent of piglets weighing less than 1.1 kg at birth survived to seven days.

Although often described as “welfare-friendly”, the greater freedom of movement and choice of environments offered by communal farrowing systems does have potential welfare risks, primarily for the piglets. The maternal qualities of the sow will have a greater influence on the survival and growth of piglets in this communal farrowing system, than in a conventional farrowing crate and may be influenced by genotype. The objectives of this study were to compare the welfare of sows and piglets housed in farrowing crates and a communal farrowing system and to investigate whether sow genotype influences the quantity and quality of maternal behaviour and subsequent litter performance.

The farrowing crate was designed to make sow management easier, allow higher stocking densities and reduce piglet mortality. Recently, concerns about sow welfare within farrowing crates have lead to a reappraisal of open farrowing systems. However, more freedom of movement for the sow places greater influence on the quality of maternal care, if piglet welfare is to be safeguarded. The aims of this study were to compare the behaviour of gilts housed in different farrowing systems and to determine any differences in behaviour, that may affect piglet survival.After service, 38 LW x Landrace gilts (PIC, Abingdon, UK) were formed into groups of 3-5 and were assigned to either farrowing crates or a communal farrowing system. Each crate room housed six conventional crates with sow feeders, nipple drinkers and forward piglet creeps. Each pen room contained five individual strawed pens (2.7m x 1.9m) with a rectangular piglet creep at the rear, sloping walls along both sides and piglet and sow drinkers.

In competitive feeding systems in which sows are group rather than individually fed, aggression can arise as sows compete for limited supplies of food (Csermely and Wood-Gush, 1990). Aggression may also occur as a result of sows’ motivation to feed remaining unsatisfied due to restricted access to food (Buré, 1991). Feeding sows a high fibre diet which will rapidly increase gastric distention (Brouns et al., 1997) may reduce both the motivation to compete for food and aggression associated with sustained feeding motivation. Sows provided with straw bedding may use straw as a foraging substrate with which to express their foraging behaviour. The aim of this experiment was to investigate the interactive effects of a high fibre diet and straw bedding on levels of aggression in floor fed sows.

The Codes of Recommendation for the Welfare of Livestock (pigs) recommends “Pigs should be kept in stable groups with as little mixing as possible”. In practice, mixing can not always be avoided, particularly towards the end of the finishing period. The present study investigated welfare aspects of mixing finishing pigs in two different types of accommodation.A total of 240 finishing pigs (weight: 29.0 kg, SD=2.6 kg), housed in groups of ten, were subjected to a 2 x 4 factorial designed study. The factors were housing (two treatments) and mixing / moving (four treatments). The mixing treatments were applied at 55 and 75 kg average group weight, by either mixing half the group with half the pigs from another group in a pen unknown to both groups (MIX), or moving the pigs to a new pen (MOVE). The four mixing treatments therefore were: A (control). MOVE at 55 and 75 kg, B: MIX at 55 and MOVE at 75 kg, C: MOVE at 55 and MIX at 75 kg and D: MIX at 55 and 75 kg. The housing treatments were: scrape-through dunging area with strawed kennel (KEN) and strawed sloping floor without kennel (NO). Agonistic behaviour was recorded during the first two hours after MIX or MOVE, of four focal pigs in each group.

With the advent of the stall and tether ban in the UK it is now a requirement to house dry sows in groups throughout their pregnancy which necessitates their being mixed with other sows at some point after service. It is generally recommended that mixing sows during the embryo implantation period should be avoided as this is thought to effect embryo survival rates. The object of this experiment was to demonstrate the aggression that occurs between sows after mixing and determine the effect on reproductive performance when mixing sows at different times during the 42 days post-service.294 sows were mixed at six different times during early pregnancy: 0 to 7(T1), 8 to 14,(T2) 15 to 21(T3), 22 to 28(T4), 29 to 35(T5) and 36 to 42(T6) days post service. Six groups of sows from six consecutive weeks weanings were served at the first post-weaning oestrus and kept in stable weekly treatment groups until the sixth group was served.

Previous work has identified crushing to be the major cause of early piglet mortality (up to 80%) in a group farrowing system, with approximately half of the crushing deaths occurring when the sow lay down from a standing position (Marchant et al., 1996). The objectives of this study were to establish what other posture changes carried a high risk of piglet injury in a communal farrowing system during early lactation and also to determine what factors influenced the risk of piglet crushing during lying down.

Food restriction appears to be a contributory factor in the development of stereotypic behaviour in sows. The sustained feeding motivation following the ingestion of a small meal of concentrated food results in high levels of foraging in the post-prandial period. In the absence of a suitable foraging substrate to facilitate the expression of complex behaviours, foraging may be channelled into a limited number of highly repetitive behavioural sequences (Lawrence and Terlouw 1993). High fibre diets may mitigate the development of such behaviours (Brouns, Edwards and English 1994) by providing increased gut fill in the post-prandial period, thereby reducing foraging motivation and consequently the need for a foraging substrate. The aim of this study was to examine the interactive effects of a high fibre diet and the provision of straw on levels of stereotypic behaviour in sows.

The Welfare of Livestock Regulations 1994 specify a system of increasing space allowance for finishing pigs based on a series of weight bands (Figure 1). The width of the bands in the regulations, especially at the higher weights, impose a certain degree of inflexibility on the management of finishing pig accommodation. An alternative approach to specifying space allowance is to relate it to average pig live weight at any given time using an allometric equation (Petherick and Baxter, 1981). Based on this, Edwards et al. (1988) proposed A(m2)=0.030*M0.67(kg), to optimise performance on slats. The present study compares space allowance increments following this equation with the bands of the regulations, and its interactive effects with floor type and bedding on the welfare of finishing pigs.

Community lactating systems offer a number of potential welfare benefits to the sow and her litter. However, giving the sow greater freedom of movement and choice of environments also has potential risks. With less restriction, the maternal qualities of the sow will have a greater influence on the survival and growth of her litter. The objectives of this experiment were to determine what behaviours of the sow influenced piglet mortality in an open communal farrowing system

Ad libitum feeding of a high fibre diet may be instrumental in reducing the development of abnormal behaviours in group housed sows (Brouns et al.1994). However, although there may be welfare benefits associated with feeding sows in this way, such a feeding practice is unlikely to be adopted unless it is commercially viable. This study compared the reproductive performance of gilts fed a high fibre diet ad libitum throughout gestation, with gilts fed a commercial diet on a restricted level.

Public concern with intensive farming systems, particularly in the pig industry, has lead to legislation banning sow stalls and tethers and closer examination of the welfare aspects of confining the sow in a crate at parturition. In general, alternative systems have resulted in higher piglet mortality than farrowing crates. In any farrowing system, many different factors affect piglet mortality and in order for specific problems within the alternative systems to be identified and addressed, the exact causes and timings of piglet deaths need to be assessed. The objectives of this study were to determine which physical and performance characteristics of the sow and her litter influenced piglet mortality in a communal farrowing system during early lactation.

The regulations to phase out stall and tether systems by 1 January 1999 will result in UK sows being group housed. The formation of either small stable groups or large, dynamic groups by mixing unfamiliar sows results in aggression between sows. One consequence of aggression is damage to the skin which, if severe may compromise the welfare of the sow. To assess the level of damage resulting from aggression between sows, a simple, rapid scoring method is needed. The objective of this work was to establish which areas of the sow were the main target sites for attack and to use this information to devise an animal based method of scoring damage.

Evidence from trials elsewhere has indicated that the porcine gammaglobulin preparation of porcine blood origin (IMMUSURETM Porcine: a trademark of Cambridge Bionutritionals Ltd) was effective in providing passive protection for piglets deprived of colostrum. Passive protection is conferred soon after birth and a piglet which has not sucked would be “at risk”. The light-weight piglet is considered “at risk” as it may not compete effectively for a teat and suckle. Consequently it may have less energy reserves and lower passive protection against disease. The object of the experiment reported here was to assess the effect of porcine gammaglobulin supplement on the performance and survival of light-weight piglets from birth to ten weeks of age on a commercial farm.

As a part of a study investigating the extent to which ad libitum feeding of a high fibre diet could mitigate behavioural problems associated with food restriction, the performance of sows given food at restricted or ad libitum levels was compared. Ten subgroups of five were allocated to each of the restricted (R) and ad libitum (A) feeding regimes. Five weeks after service, subgroups were introduced into one of two dynamic groups of sows housed in adjacent straw-bedded pens. R sows received a fixed daily ration (parity 1: 2·2 kg; parity 2: 2·4 kg) of a conventional pregnancy diet (13·1 MJ digestible energy per kg) from an electronic sow feeder. Sows on the A regime had unrestricted access to five single-space hoppers dispensing a high fibre diet (containing 600 g unmolassed sugar beet pulp per kg). Subgroups were maintained on these gestation feeding regimes for two consecutive parities. During both parities, A sows were heavier by day 50 of gestation (parity 1: P < 0·05; parity 2: P < 0·01) and at farrowing (parity 1: P < 0·001; parity 2: P < 0·001) than R sows. No difference was found between feeding regime in sow weight at weaning, due to a greater weight loss during lactation of A (parity 1: P < 0·001; parity 2: P < 0·001) than R sows. No difference was found between feeding regime in sow backfat thickness, sow reproductive performance or litter performance in either parity. This suggests that unmolassed sugar beet pulp diets may be used to feed sows on an ad libitum basis during gestation without compromising productivity. However, food intakes may be too high (estimated at 4·1 kg per sow per day) to make ad libitum feeding of pregnant sows an attractive option for producers.

The objectives of this study were to establish what changes in posture by sows carried a high risk of piglet crushing in a group farrowing system during early lactation and also to determine what factors influenced the risk of crushing during lying down. A total of 24 Large White ✕ Landrace sows were studied during the first 7 days of lactation in a group farrowing system. Cross-fostering was not carried out so as not to influence behaviour. Dead piglets were removed and cause of death ascertained from external observation and post-mortem examination. Sow and piglet behaviour was video-recorded continuously. A total of 268 piglets were born alive, with 67 liveborn piglets subsequently dying during the 7-day experimental period, 50 as a result of crushing. A total of 7425 posture changes were analysed and 11 types of posture change were identified, the most dangerous being lying down from standing and those involving swapping sides, or rolling over, whilst lying.Dangerous events during lying down were more likely to occur (1) in the first 24 h after farrowing, (2) when the sow lay down in the middle of the pen, (3) when the sow lay down without carrying out much piglet-directed pre-lying behaviour and (4) when the piglets were spread out but near to the sow. The amount of pre-lying behaviour decreased over time and crushing mortality also decreased. The results confirm that the piglets are most vulnerable to crushing during the first 24 h of life, when they are spending much of their time near the udder and have relatively poor mobility. Co-ordination of behaviour between the sow and her litter is important to reduce the risk of crushing. It is also important that the design of open farrowing systems incorporates knowledge about how crushing deaths occur in order to improve piglet welfare.