POWER Assurer le bien - être et la résilience des porcs biologiques

Améliorer le bien-être et la santé des animaux ainsi que les performances environnementales et économiques des élevages de porcs biologiques en Europe grâce à l’amélioration de la conduite et du logement

Why observers should train clinical scoring

Epidemiological studies often involve clinical scoring of animals by several observers due to the high number of farms to be visited. Detailed written procedures and intensive observer training minimize variation between observers. This, however, is still not common in international cooperation. We present data on clinical assessment of sows from an EU project on organic pig health (COREPIG) to illustrate the consequences. The clinical scoring system was based on procedures from the Welfare Quality ® project and included measures regarding body condition (5-level scale), injuries (number of lesions >3cm on shoulder, side and hindquarters), lameness (3-level scale), dirtiness (3-level scale) and skin problems (3-level scale). Nine observers from 6 EU countries trained clinical scoring during two days in two herds. Of the 9 observers, 4 had no or little, 2 had intermediate and 3 had extensive experience in working with pigs. Four observers each had little or intermediate experience in clinical scoring of sows and only 1 had extensive experience. Training comprised parameter discussions and joint scoring of animals. After training, each observer scored up to 30 pregnant sows per farm in 3 to 20 herds in six European countries as part of a larger epidemiological protocol. After completion of farm visits, observers scored up to 50 sows independently but at the same day and farm in order to assess inter-observer agreement. Parameters were collapsed into binary variables. We calculated Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance (W) across all observers and Prevalence Adjusted Bias Adjusted Kappas (PABAK) for observer pairs as measures of agreement. Agreement across observers was not acceptable for skin problems and lameness (W 0.60 (N = 26 sows for skin problems, and 31 to 34 sows for other parameters). Pairwise agreement was not acceptable for skin problems and dirtiness (mean PABAK <0.41) and acceptable for injuries shoulder and side (mean PABAK between 0.41 and 0.60). Agreement was good for hindquarter injuries and animal too thin (PABAK = 0.66 and 0.65, respectively), while obesity and lameness had mean PABAK of 0.84 and 0.95. Observer pairs scored 40 to 50 sows per parameter except for skin problems (36 to 49 sows). Results for lameness and obesity should be interpreted with care, as average prevalence across observers were only 3 and 8 %, respectively. Determination of whether a sow was too thin was the parameter with best agreement. The poor agreement for skin problems and dirtiness can be explained by misunderstandings regarding the parameter definition (e.g. inclusion of mud soiling). Extensive practical experience with pigs was of highest benefit for inter-observer agreement. Average PABAK was 0.70 (STD = 0.19, N = 24 scorings; 3 observer pairs, 8 parameters) for experienced observers but ranged between 0.49 and 0.56 (STD range 0.32 to 0.40) for all other combinations of experience level. The level of experience with clinical scoring of pigs did not have obvious positive effects. Average PABAK for all experience combinations ranged from 0.51 to 0.61 (STD range 0.32 to 0.40). By way of explanation, general experience with pigs helps to score an animal because observers will know a wider range of possible scenarios. By contrast, scores of observers who have already learned a scoring system will tend to be biased by their experience. As a conclusion, our data emphasize the importance of intensive observer training before data collection and the need for inter-observer agreement tests before and after data collection

Les alternatives à la castration chirurgicale chez le porcelet: Les implications pour le vétérinaire

Les alternatives à la castration chirurgicale chez le porcelet. Les implications pour le vétérinair

Organic Pig Production in Europe - Health Management in Common Organic Pig Farming

Organic farmers in Europe have developed different housing systems for pigs based on the availability of land, soil characteristics, climate, tradition and national organic certification schemes. This guide gives an overview of the typical housing systems used for pigs in organic farming. It lists advantages and disadvantages of the different systems and provides relevant recommendations to farmers for health managment

Nutritional characteristics of the diets in organic pig production

A better knowledge of the rations pigs receive, should help identify weaknesses and hence improve the efficiency of organic pig production. A research project was initiated in 8 EU countries (ProPIG from the ERANET CoreOrganic II) involving 72 farms: 59 with sows (53 farrow-to-finish = FF, 5 with and 1 without weaners), 11 fattening (F) and 2 with weaners and fatteners. Farmers were asked to describe their feeding practices and the nutrient content of feeds used was recorded, either from the manufacturer claim or calculated from ingredients. Four FF farms used a single diet for all pigs. For sows, 46% of the farms fed the same diet. For fatteners, 58% of the farms used a single diet, 38% used two diets and 5% used 3 diets. For weaners, 73% of the farms used a single diet and 27 % used two diets. Nutrient feed contents were 13.3 ± 1.0 MJ ME, 141 ± 19 g crude proteins (CP) and 5.0 ± 1.2 g total P (tP) /kg for pregnant sows, 12.8 ± 0.9 MJ ME, 159 ± 19 g CP and 5.2 g ± 1.2 tP/kg for lactating sows, 12.8 ± 1.0, 175 ± 23 g CP, 5.3 g tP/kg for weaners, 12.7 ± 0.1 MJ ME, 165 ± 23 g CP and 4.7 ± 1.1 g tP/kg for fatteners (means ± sd). Major ingredients were triticale (from18% in weaners to 27% in fatteners, 51% homegrown = HG), barley (from 22% in lactating sows to 28% in weaners, 48% HG), wheat (from 18% in weaners to 27% in fatteners, 23% HG), maize (from 13% in pregnant sows to 16% in fatteners, 52% HG), peas (from 8% in pregnant sows to 12% in fatteners, 38% HG), and fava beans (from 3.9% in fatteners to 10.4% in weaners, 67% HG). Results suggest using specific feeding for different types of pigs may improve feeding efficiency and reduce the environmental impact

Piglet mortality in organic herds

Productive performance of organic pig farms is lower compared to conventional farms, but only very few data exist. Better knowledge of the productivity of organic herds regarding litter size at birth, piglet losses around birth and during lactation, as well as housing and management conditions should help to identify critical points and hence to improve the situation. Therefore, a research project was initiated in 6 EU countries (Corepig). As part of this, farmers recorded production data during 3-11 months starting between January and July 2008. Farmers were asked to record the numbers of piglets born dead, born alive as well as the number of piglets at weaning. Taking into account the quality of the records and setting a threshold of ≥ 10 litters/farm, data from 38 farms in 4 countries (France: 14, Germany: 12, Austria: 7, Sweden: 5) were analyzed (mean: 69, 10 to 713 litters/farm). Most farmers were not present at farrowing, meaning the number of piglets that were classified as “born dead” was probably greatly overestimated. Therefore, mean total litter size at birth (born dead + born alive, MTLS), its standard deviation (SDLS), litter size at weaning and percentage of total losses (born dead + lactation losses, pLOSS) were calculated at the farm level. Overall, MTLS was 12.9 ± 1.6 piglets at birth, 9.2 ± 1.1 piglets at weaning and pLOSS was 26.7 ± 7.1 % with a lactation duration of 45.3 ± 5.9 days. Mortality of piglets increased with MTLS (2.1 ± 0.7% additional loss per piglet, p = 0.004) and with SDLS (3.9 ± 1.6% additional loss per unit of SDLS, mean ± SEM, P = 0.021). MTLS was correlated with SDLS (r = 0.44, p = 0.006). These data confirm the detrimental influence of large litter size at birth on piglet mortality. This is commonly observed in conventional pig production and related to a higher proportion of piglets with low birth weight and to increased competition for teats. High variability in litter size may exacerbate these problems, and in addition may be an indicator for other problems on the farm

Pain and husbandry practices, from theory to experimental applications : examples of AGRI animal welfare network actions

In agreement with the European movement towards recognition of animal sensitivity, a group of INRA scientists, from complementary fields, have focused their work on the issue of pain associated with certain farming practices. After a step devoted to define the concepts of sensitivity, nociception, pain and suffering, several practices were selected: castration, teeth clipping and tail docking in piglets, force feeding in Mulard ducks, and feeding practices designed to increase milk yields in small ruminants (goats). Various functional indices and behavioural signs, known for their association with stress, pain or inflammation, were studied. The data include endocrine parameters (cortisol or corticosterone, ACTH), glucose or lactate levels, a neuro-vegetative index such as the heart rate, neurogenic plasma extravasation, evidence of local inflammation, which can be demonstrated with a marker such as circulating haptoglobin. Behavioural signs associated with different practices were systematically analysed. This approach leads to the creation of a new field of research and to the accumulation of knowledge in order to i) understand the genesis of nociceptive signals of somesthetic or visceral origin, and ii) evaluate sensory or emotional experiences associated with such practices. Our data show that some husbandry practices that were studied generate pain and inflammatory responses.Dans le contexte européen d'une reconnaissance de la sensibilité des animaux, des chercheurs de l'INRA, issus de disciplines complémentaires, ont uni leurs efforts pour travailler sur la question de la douleur associée à certaines pratiques d'élevage. Les travaux ont été engagés après une réflexion approfondie sur les notions de sensibilité, nociception, douleur et souffrance. Plusieurs pratiques ont été sélectionnées : castration, épointage des dents et caudectomie du porcelet, gavage du canard Mulard, conduite alimentaire visant de hauts rendements laitiers chez le petit ruminant (chèvre). Divers index fonctionnels et signes comportementaux, connus pour leur association avec le stress, la douleur ou l'inflammation ont été étudiés. Les données concernent des paramètres endocriniens (cortisol ou corticostérone, ACTH), les taux de glucose ou de lactate, un indice neurovégétatif comme le rythme cardiaque, la réaction neurogène d'extravasation plasmatique qui se manifeste, au niveau local, par une inflammation, et dont la présence peut être validée par un marqueur tel que l'haptoglobine circulante. Les manifestations comportementales associées aux différentes pratiques sont systématiquement analysées. Cette démarche aboutit à construire un champ de recherche et de connaissances permettant i) de comprendre la genèse de signaux nociceptifs d'origine somesthésique ou viscérale, ii) d'évaluer le «vécu sensoriel ou émotionnel » associé à ces pratiques. Nos données permettent d'identifier que certains actes sont générateurs de douleur et associés au déclenchement d'un processus inflammatoire

Bioschweinehaltung in Europa - Tierhaltungssysteme und Gesundheitsmanagement

Basierend auf der Betriebsfläche, den vorherrschenden Bodentypen, dem Klima, Traditionen und nationalen Gesetzgebungen für den Biolandbau sind in Europa verschiedene Haltungssysteme für Bioschweine entstanden. Dieses Merkblatt bietet eine Übersicht über die Systeme und zeigt deren Vor- und Nachteile auf. Empfehlungen für das Management in den Systemen ergänzen die Profile

ProPIG - Farm specific strategies to reduce environmental impact by improving health, welfare and nutrition of organic pigs - Final project report

ProPIG consists of 9 partners in 8 countries (AT, CH, CZ, DE, DK, FR, IT, UK) with the aim to assess and improve animal welfare and environmental impact of organic pig farming: • Three husbandry systems: indoor with outside run (IN) / partly outdoor (POUT) / outdoor (OUT) were defined and compared. • Standard Operating Procedures (‘SOPs’) were created for Feed- and Soil Sampling and the process of assessment and feedback (‘Health and welfare planning’). • Animal welfare assessment protocols were developed based on WelfareQuality® and CorePIG. Together with questions regarding environmental impact, nutrition and economy these were integrated into an • Automated Recording and Feedback Software Tool (‘PigSurfer’= PIG SURveillance, FEedback and Reporting), a software tool enabling on-farm data collection and immediate feedback (including presentation of data as benchmarking) using a tablet computer. • Farm visits: After repeated observer training, three visits were carried out, in AT (16 farms), DE (16), DK (11) CH (9), CZ (1), FR (4), IT (9) and UK (8). During the first visit the farmer was interviewed, animals assessed, medicine and productivity records collected and feed and soil samples taken. Results were discussed with each farmer and farm specific goals and measures were agreed during the second visit. Using ‘PigSurfer’ during the final visit, it was possible to assess animal health, welfare, nutrition and feed the results back immediately to farmers as ‘farm plans’ including benchmarking across all 74 pig farms. As a result two practical tools for further use by farmers and advisors were created: • A ‘Catalogue of improvement strategies’ (COIS) for animal welfare challenges was developed based on expert opinion as well as farmers strategies. This was transferred into a ‘Handbook for Farmers’, a hard cover ring-binder, allowing practical application on farm. • Furthermore a ‘Decision support tool for environmental impact’ (‘EDST’) was created in the form of an interactive spreadsheet, which identifies areas of possible improvement regarding environmental impact through a structured questionnaire, suggests measures which might be beneficial and provides information on where to find more detailed resources. Generally based on the parameters assessed, it was shown, that a high level of animal health and welfare was found in most farms, with a few parameters which should be improved across all systems (e.g. vulva deformation from previous injury in sows). When comparing the three husbandry systems, OUT weaners and fatteners had better health regarding respiratory problems and diarrhoea and OUT sows less MMA and lameness, with POUT having some advantages as well over IN (e.g. lameness of sows). Regarding productivity, losses of piglets did not differ across systems; mortality of IN fattening pigs was lower than in POUT and their feed conversion rate was better. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of global warming potential (GWP) was influenced mainly by feeding of fattening pigs and variation within a husbandry system was higher than between systems, indicating that good values can be achieved in all systems. Regarding acidification potential (AP) POUT were better than IN and regarding eutrophication potential (EP) POUT were better than OUT. Three clusters were identified on the basis of environmental impact, a ‘high, ‘medium’ and ‘lower’ with similar numbers of each husbandry system in all three of them. The three systems did not differ regarding N balances. After clustering, N import from feed purchase was identified as main influencing factor. IN were significantly lower than POUT/OUT regarding P balances. No significant relationship between health, welfare and environmental impacts was found when comparing the LCA clusters with an ‘animal health and welfare score’ (‘%GOOD’), individual animal based parameters or correlations between AP/EP/GWP and the ‘%GOOD. Farm specific strategies were evaluated by farmers’ opinion and assessing within-farm improvement in measured criteria over 12 months. The median number of aims per farm was 2 (1 to 4), with fertility, nutrition, health and lesions most commonly addressed. In total 74.8 % of measures were partly/completely implemented and 81.6 % of goals were partly/completely achieved

Trough or bowl? Observers need training for assessing resource as well as clinical parameters

While the need for training on-farm assessors in clinical animal assessment has been widely recognised, assessment of husbandry resources is still often regarded as self-explanatory. Within the scope of the international project ProPIG, 7 observers from seven countries were trained by an experienced observer (gold standard) to assess 15 clinical and 11 resource parameters in organic pigs in eight countries. The initial plan was to train and test observers before farm visit 1 and then again after one year before farm visit 2. Both trainings were repeated with all observers due to unsatisfactory agreement, resulting in T1a+b and one year later T2a+b. Agreement with the gold standard was calculated as exact agreement for categorical parameters (e.g. drinker type; mean n=11 pens per test and parameter, range 1 - 34) and Spearman rank correlation for numerical parameters (e.g. number of animals; mean n=9 pens, range 4 - 28). Median (IQR) pairwise agreements [%] were T1a=83 (40), T1b=90 (29), T2a=92 (43), T2b=100 (11) for clinical parameters, and T1a=100 (25), T1b=100 (40), T2a=100 (23), T2b=90 (33) for resource parameters. Mean Spearman r for clinical parameters were T1a=0.52, T1b=0.76, T2a=0.42 and T2b=0.84 with ranges of -0.69, -0.33, -0.79 and 0.34, respectively, to 1.00. Mean Spearman r for resource parameters were T1a=0.59 (range 0 to 1), T1b=0.71 (-1 to 1), T2a=0.40 (0.30 to 0.49) and T2b=0.25 (-1 to 1). Initial training discussions showed that naïve observers differed in their assessment of resource as well as clinical parameters, and real life assessment together with training materials were needed to successfully train on both sets of parameters. We therefore recommend the inclusion of resource parameters in observer trainings for on-farm assessment in order to assure sufficient observer agreement