Ad libitum feeding systems for lactating sows: effects on productivity and welfare of sows and piglets.

The nutritional requirements of sows change during lactation and thus require adapted and dynamic feeding regimes that consider the sows' behavioral needs and production traits. The present study evaluated the effect of four different feeding systems on productivity and aspects of the welfare of 61 sows and their piglets during lactation. A non-ad libitum system (CON) was compared with two computer-monitored (COMP, COMP + ) ad libitum feeding systems, that allowed sows to access feed via displacement of an electronic sensor, as well as a third purely mechanical ad libitum feeding system (MECH). Daily feed disappearance, piglet growth, piglet growth per feed disappearance as well as sows' weight and conception rate were recorded. Health indicators of sows and piglets were scored as well as sow behavior analyzed for a total of 96 hours/sow from video recordings taken on days 2-4 and 23 postfarrowing (n = 35 sows). Sows from all three ad libitum systems (COMP, COMP+, MECH) showed a lower feed disappearance than CON (P < 0.01). Additionally, average daily piglet growth tended to be higher (P = 0.05) and piglet growth per sow feed disappearance was significantly higher in all three ad libitum systems than in CON (P < 0.01). Piglet mortality, sow weight loss and subsequent conception rates did not differ between treatment groups. Piglets in COMP and COMP + had fewer head lesions (P = 0.01). Sows in all three ad libitum systems spent more time with their head in the trough than in the non-ad libitum system (P < 0.01). Occurrence of sow stereotypies (vacuum chewing, biting fixtures) was rare (typically < 2% of scans) and did not differ between treatments. Our data suggest that sows fed ad libitum eat what they need and can convert feed more efficiently into the piglets' growth without additional weight loss. Furthermore, the increased time sows spent in ad libitum systems with their head in the trough points toward longer feeding times, which might be beneficial in terms of meeting pigs' behavioral need to forage. Taken together, our initial studies on sow feeding behavior and feed efficiency will benefit the development of new lactation feeding systems that promise to improve animal welfare and productivity while reducing feed costs.

Welfare of pigs on farm.

This scientific opinion focuses on the welfare of pigs on farm, and is based on literature and expert opinion. All pig categories were assessed: gilts and dry sows, farrowing and lactating sows, suckling piglets, weaners, rearing pigs and boars. The most relevant husbandry systems used in Europe are described. For each system, highly relevant welfare consequences were identified, as well as related animal-based measures (ABMs), and hazards leading to the welfare consequences. Moreover, measures to prevent or correct the hazards and/or mitigate the welfare consequences are recommended. Recommendations are also provided on quantitative or qualitative criteria to answer specific questions on the welfare of pigs related to tail biting and related to the European Citizen's Initiative 'End the Cage Age'. For example, the AHAW Panel recommends how to mitigate group stress when dry sows and gilts are grouped immediately after weaning or in early pregnancy. Results of a comparative qualitative assessment suggested that long-stemmed or long-cut straw, hay or haylage is the most suitable material for nest-building. A period of time will be needed for staff and animals to adapt to housing lactating sows and their piglets in farrowing pens (as opposed to crates) before achieving stable welfare outcomes. The panel recommends a minimum available space to the lactating sow to ensure piglet welfare (measured by live-born piglet mortality). Among the main risk factors for tail biting are space allowance, types of flooring, air quality, health status and diet composition, while weaning age was not associated directly with tail biting in later life. The relationship between the availability of space and growth rate, lying behaviour and tail biting in rearing pigs is quantified and presented. Finally, the panel suggests a set of ABMs to use at slaughter for monitoring on-farm welfare of cull sows and rearing pigs.

Reduced Stocking Density and Provision of Straw in a Rack Improve Pig Welfare on Commercial Fattening Farms.

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of reduced stocking density in combination with provision of additional enrichment material on pig welfare on-farm. On three growing-finishing farms in Austria, in total 974, 413, and 70 pigs were kept at 1 m2/pig and straw or hay in a rack as additional enrichment material (improved pens, IP; n = 6-38 pens per farm) or in pens complying with the minimum legal requirements of 0.7 m2/pig (control pens, CP; n = 6-37 pens per farm). Behavior as well as skin, tail and ear lesions and pig soiling were assessed at the beginning and in the middle of the fattening period, while performance data were recorded at the end of the fattening period. Data analysis was performed for each farm separately using generalized linear and linear mixed models or Mann-Whitney U-Test. Pigs in IP less frequently manipulated pen mates' ears (Farm 1: P t r e a t m e n t * a s s e s s m e n t = 0.002; Farm 2: P = 0.002) and body (Farm 1: P = 0.021; Farm 2: P = 0.015) than in CP. Prevalence of skin, tail and ear lesions and soiled pigs did not differ between treatments. In only one farm, average daily weight gain was higher in IP than in CP (Farm 1: P = 0.003). Our findings indicate that increased space allowance and provision of substrate can improve aspects of animal welfare within existing pig fattening systems, without requiring irreversible constructional modifications to the system.

Assessment of Piglet Vitality by Farmers-Validation of A Scoring Scheme and Estimation of Associated Genetic Parameters.

Maternal breeds for sows have been bred for high prolificacy during recent decades. Although large litters may be beneficial for economic efficiency, pre-weaning mortality is increased. Thus, focus should instead be put on new traits such as piglet vitality (PV). Until now, no validated scoring scheme for piglet vitality exists, which is feasible to be applied for routine on-farm trait recording. The objective of this study was to validate a four-point vitality scoring scheme (1 = low vitality to 4 = high vitality) applied by farmers based on pre-weaning mortality and to estimate genetic parameters. A linear mixed model was fitted for piglet vitality for 3172 litters from Large White and Landrace sows on 23 farms and correlations were calculated for vitality score and piglet mortality. A subsample of 2900 records was used for genetic analysis. Pre-weaning mortality differed significantly between all vitality score categories except for 1 and 2, ranging between 7.98% (category 4) and 29.1% (category 1). PV was genetically negatively correlated to litter size (-0.68) and mortality rate (-0.65), whereas litter size was positively correlated with mortality rate (0.59). Including PV into breeding programs may, thus, improve animal welfare.

Animal health and welfare planning improves udder health and cleanliness but not leg health in Austrian dairy herds.

Animal health and welfare planning is considered an important tool for herd management; however, its effectiveness is less well known. The aim of this study was to conduct animal health and welfare planning on 34 Austrian dairy farms and to evaluate changes in health and welfare after 1 yr. After an initial assessment using the Welfare Quality protocol (Welfare Quality Consortium, Lelystad, the Netherlands), results were reported back to the farmers. Health and welfare area(s) in which both the farmer and the researcher regarded improvement as important were discussed. Management practices and husbandry measures were chosen according to the respective farm situation. One year after interventions had been initiated, farms were reassessed, and the degree of implementation of improvement measures was recorded. The average implementation rate was 57% and thus relatively high when compared with other studies. High degrees of implementation were achieved related to cleanliness and udder health, at 77 and 63%, respectively. Intervention measures addressing udder health were mostly easy to incorporate in the daily routine and led to a reduced somatic cell score, whereas this score increased in herds without implementation of measures. The decrease in cows with dirty teats was more pronounced when measures were implemented compared with control farms. The implementation rate regarding leg health (46%) was comparably low in the present study, and leg health did not improve even when measures were implemented. Lying comfort, social behavior, and human-animal relationship did not require interventions and were therefore seldom chosen by farmers as part of health and welfare plans. In conclusion, the structured, participatory process of animal health and welfare planning appears to be a promising way to improve at least some animal health and welfare issues.

The concept of animal welfare at the interface between producers and scientists: the example of organic pig farming.

In organic farming animal welfare is one important aspect included in the internationally agreed organic principles of health, ecology, fairness and care (IFOAM 2006), reflecting expectation of consumers and farmers. The definition of organic animal welfare includes-besides traditional terms of animal welfare-'regeneration' and 'naturalness'. Organic animal welfare assessment needs to reflect this and use complex parameters, include natural behaviour and a systemic view. Furthermore, various parties with seemingly conflicting interests are involved, causing ethical dilemmas, such as the use of nose rings for outdoor sows (impaired animal welfare vs. destruction of humus). Solutions can only be found when foundational concepts are translated and applied to practical situations. On-farm animal welfare assessment and implementation of improvement strategies are increasingly relevant scientific areas. They combine on-farm welfare assessment, identification of key problem areas and connected risk factors. Constant communication between all parties is crucial for success. Animal health and welfare planning is one application of this approach, which was carried out on Austrian organic pig farms as well as organic dairy farms in seven European countries. The projects included welfare assessment, feedback and benchmarking as a tool for communication between farmers, advisors and scientists. Finally goals were set by the farmer and improvement strategies applicable to organic farming were implemented. This included prevention of disease by management strategies instead of routine treatment with pharmaceutical products. It appeared that next to problem structuring, multidisciplinary problem solving demands good communications skills to relate animal welfare science to value reflections.