Erratum: Aluwé, M. et al. Exploratory Survey on European Consumer and Stakeholder Attitudes towards Alternatives for Surgical Castration of Piglets. Animals 2020, 10, 1758.

The authors wish to make the following corrections to this paper [...].

Exploratory Survey on European Consumer and Stakeholder Attitudes towards Alternatives for Surgical Castration of Piglets.

Surgical castration of piglets without pain relief is still common practice in many countries. Possible alternatives for surgical castration are application of pain relief or anaesthesia or production of boars (entire males) and immunocastrates. Each of these alternatives faces advantages and disadvantages which may result in different citizen attitudes and consumers acceptability. Understanding which practice is acceptable to whom and why may further stimulate implementation. Consumer (n = 3251) and stakeholder (n = 1027) attitudes towards surgical castration without pain relief, surgical castration with anaesthesia, immunocastration, and production of boars were surveyed from April to June 2020 via an online questionnaire in 16 countries (>175 respondents per country). Surgical castration without pain relief was separated from each of the alternatives due to animal welfare and showed the lowest acceptability (32%). Within the alternatives, a further partitioning between the alternatives was based on perceived quality and food safety, with an acceptance of 85% for applying anaesthesia, 71% for immunocastration, and 49% for boar production. Differences depending on professional involvement and familiarity with agriculture could be observed, mainly for the acceptance of surgical castration without anaesthesia, immunocastration, and boars. Castration with anaesthesia was highly accepted by all types of respondents.

Developing and Understanding Olfactory Evaluation of Boar Taint.

Trained expert panels are used routinely in boar taint research, with varying protocols for training of panelists and scoring methods. We describe a standardized process for training and scoring, to contribute to standardize the olfactory detection of boar taint. Three experiments are described in which we (1) evaluate the importance of training and the effect of the previous sample, (2) determine detection thresholds on strips and in fat for our panel, and (3) test priming panelists before boar taint evaluation. For the final evaluation of boar taint, we propose a consistent three-person evaluation scoring on a 0-4 scale using a final mean score of 0.5 as the cut-off for boar taint. This gave an optimal sensitivity of 0.81 and a specificity of 0.56 compared to chemical cut-offs. Even limited training proved useful, but priming assessors with strips did not improve the evaluation of fat samples. Detection thresholds were higher in fat compared to strips, except for indole. We recommend panelists to always smell a non-tainted control sample after a tainted one as a 'reset' mechanism, before continuing. For longitudinal studies, we additionally advise to set up an expert panel with a fixed number of assessors performing each evaluation in duplicate.