Erratum: Identifying areas of animal welfare concern in different production stages in Danish pig herds using the Danish Animal Welfare Index (DAWIN) - CORRIGENDUM.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1017/awf.2023.37.].

Identifying areas of animal welfare concern in different production stages in Danish pig herds using the Danish Animal Welfare Index (DAWIN).

Animal welfare is of increasing public interest, and the pig industry in particular is subject to much attention. The aim of this study was to identify and compare areas of animal welfare concern for commercial pigs in four different production stages: (1) gestating sows and gilts; (2) lactating sows; (3) piglets; and (4) weaner-to-finisher pigs. One welfare assessment protocol was developed for each stage, comprising of between 20 and 29 animal welfare measures including resource-, management- and animal-based ones. Twenty-one Danish farms were visited once between January 2015 and February 2016 in a cross-sectional design. Experts (n = 26; advisors, scientists and animal welfare controllers) assessed the severity of the outcome measures. This was combined with the on-farm prevalence of each measure and the outcome was used to calculate areas of concern, defined as measures where the median of all farms fell below the value defined as 'acceptable welfare.' Between five and seven areas of concern were identified for each production stage. With the exception of carpal lesions in piglets, all areas of concern were resource- and management-based and mainly related to housing, with inadequate available space and the floor type in the resting area being overall concerns across all production stages. This means that animal-based measures were largely unaffected by perceived deficits in resource-based measures. Great variation existed for the majority of measures identified as areas of concern, demonstrating that achieving a high welfare score is possible in the Danish system.

Expert-based development of a generic HACCP-based risk management system to prevent critical negative energy balance in dairy herds.

The objective of this study was to develop a generic risk management system based on the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) principles for the prevention of critical negative energy balance (NEB) in dairy herds using an expert panel approach. In addition, we discuss the advantages and limitations of the system in terms of implementation in the individual dairy herd. For the expert panel, we invited 30 researchers and advisors with expertise in the field of dairy cow feeding and/or health management from eight European regions. They were invited to a Delphi-based set-up that included three inter-correlated questionnaires in which they were asked to suggest risk factors for critical NEB and to score these based on 'effect' and 'probability'. Finally, the experts were asked to suggest critical control points (CCPs) specified by alarm values, monitoring frequency and corrective actions related to the most relevant risk factors in an operational farm setting. A total of 12 experts (40 %) completed all three questionnaires. Of these 12 experts, seven were researchers and five were advisors and in total they represented seven out of the eight European regions addressed in the questionnaire study. When asking for suggestions on risk factors and CCPs, these were formulated as 'open questions', and the experts' suggestions were numerous and overlapping. The suggestions were merged via a process of linguistic editing in order to eliminate doublets. The editing process revealed that the experts provided a total of 34 CCPs for the 11 risk factors they scored as most important. The consensus among experts was relatively high when scoring the most important risk factors, while there were more diverse suggestions of CCPs with specification of alarm values and corrective actions. We therefore concluded that the expert panel approach only partly succeeded in developing a generic HACCP for critical NEB in dairy cows. We recommend that the output of this paper is used to inform key areas for implementation on the individual dairy farm by local farm teams including farmers and their advisors, who together can conduct herd-specific risk factor profiling, organise the ongoing monitoring of herd-specific CCPs, as well as implement corrective actions when CCP alarm values are exceeded.

Short communication: Are group size and pasteurization of whole milk associated with diarrhea and growth of pre-weaned organic dairy calves?

The objective of our study was to assess effects of pasteurization of milk and group size on the prevalence of diarrhea and daily growth in organic pre-weaned calves. Our study was conducted in six organic dairy herds where 353 pre-weaned calves were randomly placed in groups of two or four calves from one week of age. Three herds used pasteurized milk in a first five-month period and un-pasteurized milk in a second five-month period and three herds used unpasteurized in the first and pasteurized in the second period. The number of colony forming units (CFU)/mL was measured from samples of pasteurized and un-pasteurized milk fed to the calves. Diarrhea was measured as fecal smear under and/or at the tail and hind legs and as liquid feces. Heart girth growth was estimated using inflexible measuring tape. Group size and pasteurization were not significantly associated with either diarrhea or daily growth.

Influence of Professional Affiliation on Expert's View on Welfare Measures.

The present study seeks to investigate the influence of expert affiliation in the weighing procedures within animal welfare assessments. Experts are often gathered with different backgrounds with differing approaches to animal welfare posing a potential pitfall if affiliation groups are not balanced in numbers of experts. At two time points (2012 and 2016), dairy cattle and swine experts from four different stakeholder groups, namely researchers (RES), production advisors (CONS), practicing veterinarians (VET) and animal welfare control officers (AWC) were asked to weigh eight different welfare criteria: Hunger, Thirst, Resting comfort, Ease of movement, Injuries, Disease, Human-animal bond and Emotional state. A total of 54 dairy cattle experts (RES = 15%, CONS = 22%, VET = 35%, AWC = 28%) and 34 swine experts (RES = 24%, CONS = 35%, AWC = 41%) participated. Between-and within-group differences in the prioritization of criteria were assessed. AWC cattle experts differed consistently from the other cattle expert groups but only significantly for the criteria Hunger (p = 0.04), and tendencies towards significance within the criteria Thirst (p = 0.06). No significant differences were found between expert groups among swine experts. Inter-expert differences were more pronounced for both species. The results highlight the challenges of using expert weightings in aggregated welfare assessment models, as the choice of expert affiliation may play a confounding role in the final aggregation due to different prioritization of criteria.

Do umbilical outpouchings affect the behaviour or clinical condition of pigs during 6 h housing in a pre-transport pick-up facility?

This study focused on behavioural and clinical effects of umbilical outpouchings (UOs) in pigs. Matched pairs of pigs with UOs (diameter 12 cm; range 4-20; diagnosed p.m. as hernia or non-hernia) and controls (N=28) were compared during a 6-h stay in a pick-up facility. Overall, skin lesion scores were increased after the 6-h stay. Behaviour of the UO-pigs differed from the controls (a shorter latency to lie down (P<0.05) and decreased aggression (P<0.05)). Pigs with umbilical hernia showed e.g. increased sitting (P<0.05) and decreased lying (P<0.05) compared to pigs with non-hernia UOs. No effects of the size of the OUs were found. These results are among the first to establish knowledge about UO-pigs and suggest that a stay in a pick-up facility can be challenging for pig welfare. The behavioural findings suggest that UO-pigs, and especially pigs with hernia, may be less fit for mixing and housing in barren environments.