Provision of straw by a foraging tower –effect on tail biting in weaners and fattening pigs

Abstract

BackgroundStraw is one of the most effective rooting materials to reduce tail biting in pigs. A so-called foraging-tower (FT) provides only small quantities of straw compatible with liquid manure systems. The focus of the present study was on the effect of providing straw by FT in order to prevent tail biting in tail docked pigs. Four consecutive batches of 160 pigs, randomly divided into a straw (SG) and a control group (CG) were followed up from weaning to slaughter.ResultsTail wounds (Score ≥ 2) were detected in 104 out of 12,032 single observations (SG n = 48; CG n = 56) in 9 pens (SG n = 4/32; CG n = 5/32) mainly focused on the fattening period of batch 2 due to a failure in the ventilation system. No significant differences concerning the distribution of Score ≥ 2 in pens of the SG and CG could be identified. Bite marks (Score 1) were documented in 395 observations at animal level (SG n = 197, CG n = 198) in all batches. In the nursery period, the air velocity significantly increased the chance that at least one pig per pen and week showed a tail lesion score ≥1 (p = 0.024). In the fattening period ammonia concentration was positively associated with tail lesions (p = 0.007).The investigation of blood samples revealed infections with Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae in all batches and a circulation of Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome Virus (NA-vaccine strain) and Porcine Circovirus Type 2 in two batches each. The average daily straw consumption was 3.5 g/pig (standard deviation (SD) = 1.1) during the rearing period and 31.9 g/pig (SD = 7.7) during the fattening period.ConclusionDue to the low prevalence of tail biting in all batches the effect of the FT tower could not be evaluated conclusively. The operation of the FT with an average daily straw consumption of 3.5 g/pig (SD = 1.1) during the rearing period and 31.9 g/pig (SD = 7.7) during the fattening period did not affect the weight gain. Exploratory behaviour seems to cause bite marks (score 1), which do not necessarily result in tail biting. The main outbreak of tail biting was probably triggered by a failure of the ventilation system, which resulted in a number of climatic and air quality changes including higher ammonia concentrations and sudden temperature changes.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40813-017-0052-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Rearing Undocked Pigs on Fully Slatted Floors Using Multiple Types and Variations of Enrichment

“…Fully slatted floors are, thus, considered a major risk factor for tail biting damage [9,10], at least in part because substrates are not usually placed on the floor as it could obstruct slurry storage systems [11]. Different organic enrichment materials that are not presented as litter and, therefore, more compatible with slatted systems have been investigated, mainly with docked pigs [12,13,14,15], but there has been limited evidence of efficacy where tail biting risk is high. Haigh et al found that compressed straw blocks were no more effective than hanging rubber toys at reducing levels of damaging behaviour or tail lesion scores in docked pigs [14].…”

“…Likewise, other studies found no benefits to wood, when compared with a rubber floor toy [16]. Holling et al also reported inconclusive effects on tail biting when using a straw dispenser due to its low occurrence [15], and Bulens et al did not record any tail lesion when comparing different straw dispensers in docked pigs [12]. In undocked pigs, Veit et al provided pigs with loose material (either corn silage or alfalfa hay) from the second week of life until 40 days post weaning and found that, although corn silage sustained pigs’ interest and reduced tail lesion prevalence, the percentage of pigs with some tail loss was over 50% in all treatments by the end of the experiment [17].…”

Update on Tail biting in pigs: An undesirable damaging behaviour

“…The three types could be prevented by the identification of the different factors that are more usually involved to each type. Not all tail bites result in a tail biting outbreak (Holling et al, 2017;Lahrmann et al, 2018b). In most cases however, finding the pathway of actions that each risk factor triggers the processes that control tail biting expression is very difficult (Brunberg et al, 2016;D'Eath et al, 2016).…”

“…The most serious problem about enrichment material given as a bedding is the possible blockage of the slurry system (Zonderland et al, 2008;D 'Eath et al, 2014;Lahrmann et al, 2018b) but also problems with availability (Wallgren et al, 2019b) mycotoxins ingestion (Nordkvist and Häggblom, 2014) and biosecurity in times of African Swine Fever have to be considered (Wallgren et al, 2019c). Straw effectiveness as environmental enrichment is decreased when given in other ways (Zonderland et al, 2008) or forms (Haigh et al, 2019) and when provided through dispensers doesn't totally prevent tail biting (Holling et al, 2017) but still remains better than toys (Bulens et al, 2018).…”

A High Enrichment Replenishment Rate Reduces Damaging Behaviors and Increases Growth Rate in Undocked Pigs Kept in Fully Slatted Pens

“…Provision of loose bedding materials such as straw satisfies these criteria and is considered effective in reducing tail biting (7)(8)(9), but on fully slatted floors straw can block slurry removal systems (10). Many studies have investigated alternative ways of supplying loose materials that are compatible with slatted floors: in elevated fittings (11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16), as a compressed form in solid blocks (16,17), or in floor feeders (18). However, simply providing loose materials in a fixed location for pigs to interact with has not been as effective in reducing tail biting in undocked pigs as provision of material on the pen floor (14,18); what is more effective when managing tail biting in undocked pigs, is combining the provision of loose materials in a smaller quantity with other point-source enrichment items (13,19).…”