The Effect of Straw, Rope, and Bite-Rite Treatment in Weaner Pens with a Tail Biting Outbreak

Helle Pelant Lahrmann; Julie Fabricius Faustrup; Christian Fink Hansen; Rick B. D’Eath; Jens Peter Nielsen; Björn Forkman

doi:10.3390/ani9060365

The Effect of Straw, Rope, and Bite-Rite Treatment in Weaner Pens with a Tail Biting Outbreak

Animals ◽

10.3390/ani9060365 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (6) ◽

pp. 365 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Helle Pelant Lahrmann ◽

Julie Fabricius Faustrup ◽

Christian Fink Hansen ◽

Rick B. D’Eath ◽

Jens Peter Nielsen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Effective Treatment ◽

Tail Biting ◽

Tail Damage ◽

Allocation Strategies

Tail biting in pigs is an injurious behaviour that spreads rapidly in a group. We investigated three different treatments to stop ongoing tail biting outbreaks in 65 pens of 6–30 kg undocked pigs (30 pigs per pen; SD = 2): (1) straw (7 g/pig/day on the floor), (2) rope, and (3) Bite-Rite (a hanging plastic device with chewable rods). Pigs were tail scored three times weekly, until an outbreak occurred (four pigs with a tail wound; day 0) and subsequently once weekly. After an outbreak had occurred, a subsequent escalation in tail damage was defined if four pigs with a fresh tail wound were identified or if a biter had to be removed. Straw prevented an escalation better (75%) than Bite-Rite (35%; p < 0.05), and rope was intermediate (65%). Upon introduction of treatments (day 0), pigs interacted less with tails than before (day −1; p < 0.05). Behavioural observations showed that pigs engaged more with rope than Bite-Rite (p < 0.05). Bite-Rite pigs (but not straw or rope) increased their interaction with tails between day 0 and day 7 (p < 0.05). Straw was the most effective treatment. However, further investigations may identify materials or allocation strategies which are more effective still.

Download Full-text

Tail biting behaviour and tail damage in pigs and the relationship with general behaviour: Predicting the inevitable?

Applied Animal Behaviour Science ◽

10.1016/j.applanim.2014.04.001 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 156 ◽

pp. 22-36 ◽

Cited By ~ 40

Author(s):

Winanda W. Ursinus ◽

Cornelis G. Van Reenen ◽

Bas Kemp ◽

J. Elizabeth Bolhuis

Keyword(s):

General Behaviour ◽

Tail Biting ◽

The Relationship ◽

Tail Damage ◽

Biting Behaviour

Download Full-text

Changes in activity and object manipulation before tail damage in finisher pigs as an early detector of tail biting

animal ◽

10.1017/s1751731118002689 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 13 (5) ◽

pp. 1037-1044 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

M.L.V. Larsen ◽

H.M.-L. Andersen ◽

L.J. Pedersen

Keyword(s):

Object Manipulation ◽

Tail Biting ◽

Tail Damage

Download Full-text

Tail posture as a detector of tail damage and an early detector of tail biting in finishing pigs

Applied Animal Behaviour Science ◽

10.1016/j.applanim.2018.08.016 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 209 ◽

pp. 30-35 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Mona Lilian Vestbjerg Larsen ◽

Heidi Mai-Lis Andersen ◽

Lene Juul Pedersen

Keyword(s):

Finishing Pigs ◽

Tail Biting ◽

Tail Damage

Download Full-text

A Review of the Effects of Non-Straw Enrichment on Tail Biting in Pigs

Animals ◽

10.3390/ani9100824 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (10) ◽

pp. 824 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Stephanie Buijs ◽

Ramon Muns

Keyword(s):

Pig Production ◽

Tail Biting ◽

Factors Influencing ◽

Tail Docking ◽

Depth Study ◽

To Receive ◽

Tail Damage

Tail biting remains a common problem in pig production. As producers are reluctant to use straw to reduce this behaviour, we review studies on the effectiveness of other types of enrichment. Roughage, hessian sacks, compost, fresh wood, space dividers, rope, and providing new objects regularly can significantly reduce tail damage. These results should be interpreted with some caution, as often only one study per enrichment could be identified. No evidence was found that commonly applied enrichment objects (processed wood, plastic or metal) reduce tail biting significantly unless exchanged regularly, even though multiple studies per type of enrichment were identified. Many studies evaluated the duration of enrichment use, but few evaluated the manner of use. This hampers identification of combinations of enrichment that will satisfy the pig’s motivation to eat/smell, bite, root and change enrichments, which is suggested to reduce tail biting. New objects designed to satisfy specific motivations were shown to receive high levels of interaction, but their effectiveness at reducing tail damage remains unknown. More in-depth study of how pigs interact with non-straw enrichment, which motivations this satisfies and how this affects behaviour towards conspecifics, is necessary to optimize enrichment strategies. Optimization is necessary because ceasing tail docking in a way that improves pig welfare requires more effective enrichments than those described in this review, or alternatively, better control over other factors influencing tail biting.

Download Full-text

Tail Posture as an Indicator of Tail Biting in Undocked Finishing Pigs

Animals ◽

10.3390/ani9010018 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 18 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Torun Wallgren ◽

Anne Larsen ◽

Stefan Gunnarsson

Keyword(s):

Finishing Pigs ◽

Tail Biting ◽

Damage Indicator ◽

Curly Tail ◽

Tail Damage

Tail posture (i.e., hanging or curled) has been suggested to be an indicator of tail biting, and hanging tails predisposed to damage. The aim of this study was to investigate if tail posture was feasible as a tail damage indicator in a commercial setting. The study was carried out on one batch of 459 undocked finishing pigs (30–120 kg in weight). Weekly scoring of tail posture was combined with the scoring of tail lesions. Tail posture was observed at feeding to facilitate the usage of the method in commercial settings. A curly tail was observed in 94% of the observations. Pigs with tails scored with “wound” were 4.15 (p < 0.0001) times more likely to have hanging tails, and pigs scored with “inflamed wounds” were 14.24 (p < 0.0001) times more likely to have hanging tails, compared to pigs with nondamaged tails. Tail posture correctly classified tails with “wound” or “inflamed wound” 67.5% of the time, with 55.2% sensitivity and 79.7% specificity, respectively. The method of observing the tail position at feeding seems useful as a complement to normal inspection for detecting tail biting before tail wounds are visible to the caretaker.

Download Full-text

Qualitative Examination of Children's Naming Skills through Test Adaptations

Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools ◽

10.1044/0161-1461.1803.206 ◽

1987 ◽

Vol 18 (3) ◽

pp. 206-216 ◽

Cited By ~ 16

Author(s):

Melanie Fried-Oken

Keyword(s):

Effective Treatment ◽

Language Disorder ◽

Treatment Goals ◽

Expressive Vocabulary ◽

Qualitative Information ◽

Word Finding ◽

Confrontation Naming ◽

Naming Test

A new procedure entitled the Double Administration Naming Technique is proposed to assist the clinician in obtaining qualitative information about a client's visual confrontation naming skills. It involves the administration of the standard naming test followed by a readministration of the instrument. A series of naming cues then are presented. By examining the number and types of naming errors produced during the two test presentations, the clinician distinguishes word-finding problems from expressive vocabulary limitations and qualitatively describes the language disorder. The cues that facilitate correct naming are used to plan effective treatment goals.

Download Full-text