Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters

Database
Language
Journal
Affiliation country
Publication year range
1.
Animal ; 7(7): 1158-62, 2013 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23388116

ABSTRACT

Behavioural responses and the effect of lidocaine and meloxicam on behaviour of piglets after castration were studied. A total of 144 piglets of 2 to 5 days of age were allocated to one of six treatments: castration (CAST), castration with lidocaine (LIDO), castration with meloxicam (MELO), castration with lidocaine and meloxicam (L + M), handling (SHAM) and no handling (NONE). Behaviour was observed for 5 days after the procedure, growth until weaning was recorded and characteristics of the castration wound noted. MELO piglets showed significantly (P < 0.05) more no pain-related behaviour than CAST and LIDO at the afternoon after castration, and were not significantly different from SHAM and NONE. LIDO piglets showed an increase (P < 0.001) in tail wagging, lasting for 3 days. This increase was not seen in L + M piglets. The occurrence of several behaviours changed with age, independent of treatment. A treatment effect on growth was not found. Wound healing was rapid in all treatments, but thickening of the heal was observed in several piglets, suggesting perturbation in the cicatrization process. Our study showed a pain-relieving effect of meloxicam after castration. Local anaesthesia resulted in piglets performing more tail wagging during the first few days after castration, which was prevented by administering meloxicam in combination with local anaesthesia.


Subject(s)
Anesthetics, Local/therapeutic use , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/therapeutic use , Lidocaine/therapeutic use , Orchiectomy/veterinary , Pain, Postoperative/veterinary , Sus scrofa/physiology , Thiazines/therapeutic use , Thiazoles/therapeutic use , Animal Welfare , Animals , Behavior, Animal/drug effects , Injections, Intramuscular/veterinary , Injections, Subcutaneous/veterinary , Male , Meloxicam , Pain, Postoperative/drug therapy , Postoperative Period , Sus scrofa/growth & development , Wound Healing/drug effects
2.
Animal ; 5(4): 601-7, 2011 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22439956

ABSTRACT

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 pen.

3.
Animal ; 5(5): 767-75, 2011 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22439999

ABSTRACT

Little is known about the characteristics of biters and victims before the appearance of a tail-biting outbreak in groups of pigs. This study aimed to characterise biters and victims (according to gender and performance) and to quantify their behavioural development during the 6 days preceding the tail-biting outbreak. The hypotheses tested were: (a) biters are more often female, are the lighter pigs in the group, are more restless and perform more aggressive behaviour; and (b) victims are more often male, heavier and less active. Using video recordings we carried out a detailed study of 14 pens with a tail-biting outbreak among the weaned piglets. All piglets were individually marked and we observed the behaviour of biters, victims and control piglets (piglet types). In every pen, each piglet type was observed every other day from 6 days before (D-6) to the day of the first visible tail damage (i.e. day of tail biting outbreak; D0). While the number of male biters (6 of the 14 biters) and male victims (11 of the 14 victims) was not significantly different (P = 0.13), this numerical contrast was considerable. The start weight of victims was significantly (P = 0.03) higher (8.6 kg) than those of biters (7.5 kg) and control piglets (8.0 kg). Biters tended (P = 0.08) to spend longer sitting/kneeling (3.1 min/h) than controls (1.7 min/h), but no differences were seen in the time spent lying or standing. Victims tended (P = 0.07) to change posture more often (restlessness) than controls and chased penmates more (P = 0.04) than biters. Victims also performed more (P = 0.04) aggressive behaviour than biters and controls. In contrast, biters tended (P = 0.08) to be chased by penmates more often and tended (P = 0.06) to receive more aggressive behaviour than controls. Furthermore, biters spent longer manipulating the enrichment device (P = 0.01) and the posterior/tail (P = 0.02) of their penmates than controls and tended (P = 0.06) to perform more tail bites than victims. Victims received more posterior/tail manipulation (P = 0.02) and tail bites (P = 0.04) than controls. It was also noticed that, independent of piglet type, restlessness (P = 0.03) increased and the frequency of performed tail bites tended (P = 0.08) to increase in the 6 days preceding a tail-biting outbreak. These findings may contribute to the early identification of biters or victims and support the development of strategies to minimise the occurrence of tail biting.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL