Effects of multiple concurrent stressors on rectal temperature, blood acid-base status, and longissimus muscle glycolytic potential in market-weight pigs.

Sixty-four market-weight (130.0 +/- 0.65 kg) barrows (n = 16) and gilts (n = 48) were used in a split-plot design with a 2 x 2 x 2 factorial arrangement of treatments: 1) handling intensity (gentle vs. aggressive), 2) transport floor space (0.39 vs. 0.49 m(2)/pig), and 3) distance moved during handling (25 vs. 125 m) to determine the effects of multiple concurrent stressors on metabolic responses. For the handling intensity treatment, pigs were moved individually approximately 50 m through a handling course with either 0 (gentle) or 8 (aggressive) shocks from an electric goad. Pigs were loaded onto a trailer and transported for approximately 1 h at floor spaces of either 0.39 or 0.49 m(2)/pig. After transport, pigs were unloaded, and the distance moved treatment was applied; pigs were moved 25 or 125 m through a handling course using livestock paddles. Rectal temperature was measured, and blood samples (to measure blood acid-base status) were collected 2 h before the handling intensity treatment was applied and immediately after the distance moved treatment was applied. A LM sample to measure glycolytic potential was collected after the distance moved treatments on a subset of 32 pigs. There were handling intensity x distance moved interactions (P < 0.05) for several blood acid-base measurements. In general, there was no effect of distance moved on these traits when pigs were previously handled gently. However, when pigs were previously handled aggressively, pigs moved 125 compared with 25 m had greater (P < 0.05) blood lactate and less (P < 0.05) blood pH, bicarbonate, and base-excess. Pigs transported at 0.39 compared with 0.49 m(2)/pig had a greater (P < 0.01) increase in creatine kinase values; however, transport floor space did not affect any other measurements. Data were analyzed by the number of stressors (the aggressive handling, restricted transport floor space, and 125-m distance moved treatments) experienced by each pig (0, 1, 2, or 3). As the number of stressors experienced by the pig increased, rectal temperature, blood lactate, and LM lactate increased linearly (P

Effects of distance moved during loading and floor space on the trailer during transport on losses of market weight pigs on arrival at the packing plant.

Effects of distance moved during loading and floor space on the trailer during transport on the incidence of transport losses (dead and nonambulatory pigs) on arrival at the packing plant were evaluated in a study involving 42 loads of pigs (average BW = 131.2 kg, SD 5.05). A split-plot design was used with a 2 x 6 factorial arrangement of the following treatments: 1) distance moved from the pen to the exit of the building [short (0 to 30.5 m) vs. long (61.0 to 91.4 m)] and 2) transport floor space (0.396, 0.415, 0.437, 0.462, 0.489, or 0.520 m(2)/pig). Loading distance treatments (sub-plots) were compared within transport floor space treatments (main plot). Pigs were loaded at the farm using sorting boards and, if necessary, electric goads, transported approximately 3 h to a commercial packing plant and unloaded using livestock paddles. The number of nonambulatory pigs during loading and the number of dead and nonambulatory pigs at the plant were recorded. Nonambulatory pigs were classified as fatigued, injured, or injured and fatigued. In addition, the incidence of pigs exhibiting signs of stress (open-mouth breathing, skin discoloration, and muscle tremors) during loading and unloading was recorded. There were no interactions (P > 0.05) between distance moved and transport floor space treatments. Moving pigs long compared with short distances during loading increased (P < 0.001) the incidence of open-mouth breathing after loading (24.9 vs. 11.0 +/- 1.03%, respectively) and tended to increase the incidence of nonambulatory pigs during loading (0.32 vs. 0.08 +/- 0.09%, respectively; P = 0.09) and of nonambulatory, injured pigs at the plant (0.24 vs. 0.04 +/- 0.07%, respectively; P = 0.06). However, distance moved did not affect other losses at the plant. Total losses at the plant were greater (P < 0.05) for the 3 lowest floor spaces compared with the 2 highest floor spaces, and pigs provided 0.462 m(2)/pig during transport had similar transport losses to those provided 0.489 and 0.520 m(2)/pig (total losses at the plant = 2.84, 1.88, 1.87, 0.98, 0.13, and 0.98 +/- 0.43% of pigs transported, for 0.396, 0.415, 0.437, 0.462, 0.489, and 0.520 m(2)/pig, respectively). These data confirm previous findings that transport floor space has a major effect on transport losses and suggest that these losses are minimized at a floor space of 0.462 m(2)/pig or greater.

Effect of floor space during transport of market-weight pigs on the incidence of transport losses at the packing plant and the relationships between transport conditions and losses.

Data on 74 trailer loads of finishing pigs (mean BW = 129.0, SEM = 0.63 kg) from wean-to-finish buildings on 2 farms within 1 production system were collected to investigate the effect of amount of floor space on the trailer (0.39 or 0.48 m2/pig) during transport on the incidence of losses (dead and nonambulatory pigs) at the packing plant and to study the relationships between transport conditions and losses. Pigs were loaded using standard commercial procedures for pig handling and transportation. Two designs of flat-deck trailers with 2 decks were used. Floor space treatments were compared in 2 similarly sized compartments on each deck of each trailer type. Differences in floor space were created by varying the number of pigs in each compartment. The incidence of nonambulatory pigs at the farm during loading and at the plant after unloading, average load weight, load number within each day, event times, and temperature and relative humidity in the trailer from loading to unloading were recorded. Of the 12,511 pigs transported, 0.26% were non-ambulatory at the farm, 0.23% were dead on arrival, and 0.85% were nonambulatory at the plant. Increasing transport floor space from 0.39 to 0.48 m2/pig reduced the percentage of total nonambulatory pigs (0.62 vs. 0.27 +/- 0.13%, respectively; P < 0.05), nonambulatory, noninjured pigs (0.52 vs. 0.15 +/- 0.11%, respectively; P < 0.01), and total losses (dead and nonambulatory pigs) at the plant (0.88 vs. 0.36 +/- 0.16%, respectively; P < 0.05) and tended to reduce dead pigs (0.27 vs. 0.08 +/- 0.08%, respectively; P = 0.06). However, transport floor space did not affect the percentage of nonambulatory, injured pigs at the plant. Nonambulatory pigs at the farm were positively correlated with relative humidity during loading and load number within the day (r = 0.46 and 0.25, respectively; P < 0.05). The percentage of total losses at the plant was positively correlated to waiting time at the plant, unloading time, and total time from loading to unloading (r = 0.24, 0.51, and 0.36, respectively; P < 0.05). Average temperature during loading, waiting at the farm, transport, waiting at the plant, unloading, and average pig weight on the trailer were not correlated to losses. These results suggest that floor space per pig on the trailer and transport conditions can affect transport losses.