Talking tails : quantifying the development of tail biting in pigs

Tail biting is an adverse behaviour characterised by manipulation of a pig’s tail by another pig resulting in tail damage and a possible tail biting outbreak. Tail biting is a common problem in the pig husbandry causing economic losses and reduced animal welfare worldwide. To prevent tail biting, the majority of newborn piglets are tail docked, a procedure which is not only painful but generates more and more public concern. This emphasizes the need to prevent the occurrences of tail biting without having to dock a pig’s tail. So far, research focused mainly on the risk factors that can induce tail biting. However, the way a tail biting outbreak evolves in a group of pigs (the ‘aetiology’) is still poorly understood. For that reason, the main aim of this thesis was to gain more insight in the aetiology of a tail biting outbreak. This will not only enhance our understanding of the current preventive and curative treatments of tail biting, but can also generate more effective measures to prevent, predict and counteract a tail biting outbreak. Therefore, the development of tail biting behaviour and tail damage was studied in relation to preventive and curative measures, group composition and indicators for an upcoming tail biting outbreak. The results showed that the provision of twice daily a handful of long straw strongly reduced tail biting. Furthermore, this measure was also effective in counteracting an ongoing tail biting outbreak (an outbreak was defined as the first day with a minimum of one piglet with a tail wound or two piglets with bite marks in a pen), although this outbreak could not be totally eliminated. In pens without straw almost all pigs performed and received tail biting behaviour at low levels prior to a tail biting outbreak. However, considerable variation in tail biting behaviour between pigs was found. In most pens one or a few pigs could be identified as pronounced biters prior to the tail biting outbreak. Although less clear, often one or a few pigs could similarly be identified as pronounced victims. In mixed-sex pens male pigs developed tail damage most rapidly, while in single-sex pens the quickest tail damage development was found in all-female groups. These results indicate that female pigs are more likely to become biters and male pigs are more likely to become victims. More detailed study of pronounced biters and victims showed that prior to a tail biting outbreak, biters not only directed more of their biting behaviour to their penmates’ tail, but also to the enrichment device. Victims were the heavier pigs in the pen and tended to be more often male and more restless preceding an outbreak. Victims also performed more aggressive behaviour, while biters tended to receive more aggressive behaviour. Furthermore, it was found that tail posture is a predictor for tail damage. Pigs with their tail between the legs had a higher chance of tail damage 2-3 days later. Based on the results of this research an aetiology model of a tail biting outbreak was developed. Subsequently practical suggestions were given to prevent (e.g. providing effective environmental enrichment), predict (e.g. observing the pigs’ tail posture) and counteract (e.g. removing the biter) a tail biting outbreak. This provides opportunities to omit tail docking without the negative consequence of tail biting. <br/

The Pig Farm Manager for Modelling Pig Production Systems

Before setting up or changing a pig farm operation, the consequences of the farm set up must be explored and changes planned. To calculate technical and economic consequences a farm manager model for pig production systems, the Pig Farm Manager, has been developed. The Pig Farm Manager estimates the effects of various farm designs as well as farm management on production, environmental and economical parameters. The Pig Farm Manager includes simulations for sow farms and finisher pig farms. In the model the user enters farm data on e.g. farm size, housing system or farm management (e.g. feeding strategy), which the model uses to calculate output-parameters. The Pig Farm Manager estimates cost price, profits, gross margins, costs and income per farm, per sow or finisher place. To evaluate the analytical capacities of the model a comparison between a standard sow farm and a high-health-status farm was made. The high-health-farm (HHF) had better growth of piglets, lower mortality rate and better fertility traits for sows compared to a standard farm. However, the HHF had higher investment costs and required more labour. Overall, on the HHF, cost price per piglet was 3.19 lower and yearly farm income about 21,000,- higher compared to the standard sow farm.Livestock Production/Industries,

Snelle signalering van varkensziekten via internet

Sinds half februari 2009 is er op internet een tool beschikbaar om varkensziekten snel op te merken. Deze site, www.varkensziekte.nl, is voor iedereen toegankelijk en vooral bedoeld voor houders van varkens zodat zij ziekten sneller kunnen herkennen bij hun dieren. De tool is ontwikkeld voor de verbetering van de diergezondheid en het dierenwelzijn in de varkenshouderi

Terug naar de krulstaart

Ongeveer de helft van alle gangbare varkensbedrijven in Nederland heeft te maken met staartbijten bij gespeende biggen of vleesvarkens. Staartbijten is een complex probleem. Door het verstrekken van effectief hokverrijkingsmateriaal kan staartbijten sterk worden teruggedrongen en dus ook de noodzaak om de staarten van jonge biggen te couperen. Effectief verrijkingsmateriaal is echter in de praktijk vaak moeilijk in te passen

Influence of Entrepreneurship and Management on Sow Farm Labour Productivity

Labor and Human Capital, Livestock Production/Industries,

Hoe boert men in het buitenland

De Nederlandse varkenshouder krijgt in relatie tot zijn kostprijs een lage opbrengstprijs uitbetaald in vergelij-king met concurrerende landen binnen de EU. Kan onze huidige ketenstructuur efficiënter, waardoor de marges op het varkensbedrijf vergroot worden? Of zijn aanpassingen in die ketenstructuur nodig? Praktijkonderzoek is hiervoor een onderzoek gestart en verwacht voor eind 2005 hier meer inzicht in te geven

Helft varkensbedrijven kampt met staartbijten

Ongeveer de helft van alle gangbare en biologische varkenshouders hebben op hun bedrijf te maken met staartbijten bij gespeende biggen of vleesvarkens. Op fokbedrijven ligt dit percentage zelfs nog iets hoger. Dit blijkt uit de resultaten van een telefonische enquête van het LEI en Wageningen UR Livestock Research, in opdracht van het ministerie van LNV. De enquête maakt onderdeel uit van het onderzoekstraject met als doel om verantwoord om te gaan met varkens die gecoupeerde dan wel lange(re) staarten hebbe

Afleidingsmateriaal voor varkens breed gewogen = Practical aspects of environmental enrichment

Het verstrekken van afleidingsmateriaal dient om het welzijn van varkens te verbeteren, maar moet daarnaast ook voor een varkenshouder praktisch toepasbaar zijn. In deze rapportage worden de praktische aspecten van een tiental afleidingsmaterialen beschreve

Individual piglets' contribution to the development of tail biting

Conflicting hypotheses exist about the contribution of individual pigs to the development of a tail-biting outbreak, but there is limited quantitative information to support or dismiss them. This study aims to quantify the development of tail-biting behaviour at pen and individual piglet level, before and after the first visible tail damage. Video recordings of 14 pens with tail-biting outbreaks and individually marked weaned piglets were used to observe tail-biting incidents (TBIs; piglet biting a penmate’s tail). When visible tail damage was first observed in a pen (i.e. day of tail biting outbreak; D0), the video recordings of the previous 6 (till D-6) and the following 6 days (till D6) were analysed every other day for TBIs and the identities of the biter and bitten piglet were recorded. The average TBIs per individual piglet (within each pen) per observation day were analysed to quantify the development of tail-biting behaviour and to identify pronounced biters and/or bitten piglets. The (absence of) coherence for TBIs in a pen was used to test whether biters preferred a specific penmate. There was an exponential increase in the intensity (linear on log scale) of the TBIs from an average of 0.7 bites/h at D-6 to 2.3 bites/h at D6. An additional negative quadratic component suggests that a plateau for tail-biting behaviour was reached by the end of the observation period. Before any visible tail damage was observed (i.e. before D0), 82% of the piglets performed and 96% of them received tail bites. After D0, the figures were 99% and 100%, respectively. One or a few pronounced biters could be identified in almost all pens. These biters already showed more tail biting at D-6 than their penmates. Furthermore, these biters showed a greater increase in tail-biting behaviour during the observation period than the average scores of their penmates. In contrast, there was no apparent increase in the receipt of bites among the piglets that had already been bitten more than their penmates at D-6. Finally, there was no significant coherence between biters and bitten piglets, indicating that biters showed no preference for biting particular penmates, even when some of them had a damaged tail. These results show that, by using observations of TBIs, possible biters or bitten piglets can already be identified 6 days before tail damage is first apparent in a pe