Comparison of extensive and intensive pig production systems in Uruguay in terms of ethologic, physiologic and meat quality parameters

Abstract

-The objective of this work is to characterize two contrasting systems of fattening pigs in Uruguay. A total of 96 pigs (average 41.7 kg) were divided into eight groups of 12 animals, representing two production systems: (IN) pigs confined in pens of 12 m 2 or (OUT) kept in plots with field shelters and access to pasture. Behavioral observations were performed by scan sampling at 5-minute intervals, three times a day during weeks 6, 8, 10 and 12 of the experiment. Aggressions were also observed at the end of the experimental period. Blood samples were taken for cortisol analysis and other physiological parameters, during growth period and slaughter and meat quality characteristics were assessed after slaughter. Differences were found in carcass characteristics, wherein IN presented a higher dorsal fat. These animals presented an overall lower activity and spent less time resting, with a stable pattern throughout the day. In OUT, pigs usually rested at midday hours, more active in the morning and afternoon. The number of total reciprocal aggressions in the observation period was 4.2±3.7 for IN and 2.3±2.2 for OUT. Cortisol levels and biochemical profile did not show evidence of important problems in the animals. Welfare is not compromised in any of the systems, although higher levels of cortisol and aggressions could be indicating some stress problems in the confinement system. Meat characteristics in OUT were considered better than in IN from a nutritional point of view.

Evaluation of Stress Hormone (Cortisol) Levels and Some Biochemical Parameters of Pigs Kept Under Intensive Management Systems in Morogoro, Tanzania

“…Feeding of low concentrate diet to peri-urban might have also contributed to higher serum cortisol as a compensatory mechanism to low energy intake. As a regulator of metabolizable energy in the body, serum cortisol increases hepatic gluconeogenesis and the peripheral release of substrates, primarily from muscle, required for gluconeogenesis (Velazco et al, 2013;Maduka et al, 2015).…”

Animal Welfare and Production Challenges Associated with Pasture Pig Systems: A Review

“…Compared with other systems, pasture systems offer pigs a greater opportunity to carry out more physical activity [6], which would result in better animal welfare [35,108]. The impossibility of behaving naturally due to confinement, and the privation of environmental stimulation have been identified among the main causes of boredom and frustration in indoor managed pigs [24,39].…”

Effects of environmental enrichment on behaviour, physiology and performance of pigs — A review

“…There is a wide range of research that has compared the behavior and physiology of pigs both in outdoor and intensive production systems [8,14]. Blumetto Velazco et al [15] reported that more than 60% of pigs today are reared outdoors with variable access to pastures in the feed. This has been influenced by discourses on environmental sustainability, social benefits and affordability as small and medium farmers are able to keep pigs without having to worry about cost of production [16].…”

“…Mosia et al [17] reported that pigs produced outdoor showed different characteristics in terms of physiology, behavior and performance than those in indoor production system. Blumetto Velazco et al [15] reared pigs in both indoor and outdoor systems and reported that active behavior was greater in outdoor pigs than indoor. The pigs kept outdoors showed more levels of activity in the morning and afternoon than pigs reared indoors.…”

“…The difference in drinking time between these sows could be that outdoor sows have to walk further to obtain water whereas sows indoors have the drinkers available continuously to snout. Blumetto Velazco et al [15] reported that pigs reared indoor had greater serum cortisol levels than their counterparts in outdoor production. Tomohiro et al [13] reported that salivary cortisol levels of the outdoors piglets were lower than that of the indoor piglets.…”