Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Characteristics of biter and victim piglets apparent before a tail-biting outbreak

  • J. J. Zonderland (a1), F. Schepers (a1), M. B. M. Bracke (a1), L. A. den Hartog (a2), B. Kemp (a3) and H. A. M. Spoolder (a1)...
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.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Characteristics of biter and victim piglets apparent before a tail-biting outbreak
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Characteristics of biter and victim piglets apparent before a tail-biting outbreak
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Characteristics of biter and victim piglets apparent before a tail-biting outbreak
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
E-mail: Johan.Zonderland@wur.nl
References
Hide All
Blackshaw, JK 1981. Some behavioural deviations in weaned domestic pigs: persistent inguinal nose thrusting, and tail and ear biting. Animal Production 33, 325332.
Bolhuis, JE, Schouten, WGP, Schrama, JW, Wiegant, VM 2005. Behavioural development of pigs with different coping characteristics in barren and substrate-enriched housing conditions. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 93, 213228.
Bracke, MBM, Hulsegge, B, Keeling, L, Blokhuis, HJ 2004. Decision support system with semantic model to assess the risk of tail biting in pigs: 1. Modelling. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 87, 3144.
Breuer, K, Sutcliffe, MEM, Mercer, JT, Rance, KA, O'Connell, NE, Sneddon, IA, Edwards, SA 2005. Heritability of clinical tail-biting and its relation to performance traits. Livestock Production Science 93, 8794.
Breuer, KB, Beattie, VE, Dunne, LM, Slade, EC, Davies, Z, Mercer, JT, Rance, KA, Sneddon, IA, Sutcliffe, MEM, Edwards, SA 2001. Validation and development of a behavioural test to predict the predisposition of growing pigs to perform harmful social behaviour such as tail biting. In Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, New York, USA, p. 50.
Edwards, SA 2006. Tail biting in pigs: understanding the intractable problem. Veterinary Journal 171, 198199.
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 2007. Scientific report on the risks associated with tail biting in pigs and possible means to reduce the need for tail docking considering the different housing and husbandry systems. The EFSA Journal 611, 198.
Feddes, JJ, Fraser, D, Buckley, DJ, Poirier, P 1993. Electronic sensing of non- destructive chewing by growing pigs. Transactions of the ASAE 36, 955958.
Ford, JJ 1990. Differentiation of sexual behaviour in pigs. Journal of Reproduction Fertility Supplement 40, 311321.
Fraser, D 1987. Attraction to blood as a factor in tail-biting by pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 17, 12.
Fritschen, R, Hogg, A 1983. Preventing tail biting in swine (anti-comfort syndrome). In NebGuide G 75-246, revised. Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 61801.
Hansen, LL, Hagelsø, AM 1980. A general survey of environmental influence on the social hierarchy function in pigs. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 30, 388392.
Harris, MJ, Gonyou, HW 1998. Increasing available space in a farrowing crate does not facilitate postural changes or maternal responses in gilts. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 59, 285296.
Hunter, EJ, Jones, TA, Guise, HJ, Penny, RHC, Hoste, S 1999. Tail biting in pigs 1: the prevalence at six UK abattoirs and the relationship of tail biting with docking, sex and other carcass damage. Pig Journal 43, 1832.
Kritas, SK, Morrison, RS 2007. Relationships between tail biting in pigs and disease lesions and condemnations at slaughter. Veterinary Record 160, 149152.
Martin, P, Bateson, P 1986. Measuring behaviour: an introductory guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Morrison, RS, Johnston, LJ, Hilbrands, AM 2007. A note on the effects of two versus one feeder locations on the feeding behaviour and growth performance of pigs in a deep-litter, large group housing system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 107, 157161.
Penny, RHC, Walters, JR, Tredget, SJ 1981. Tail-biting in pigs: a sex frequency between boars and gilts. Veterinary Record 108, 35.
Penny, RHC, Hill, FWG, Field, JE, Plush, JT 1972. Tail-biting in pigs: a possible sex incidence. Veterinary Record 91, 482483.
Sambraus, HH 1985. Mouth-based anomalous syndromes. World Animal Sciences, A5, Ethology of Farm Animals. A Comprehensive Study of the Behavioural Features of Common Farm Animals, 391472.
Schrøder-Petersen, DL, Heiskanen, T, Ersbøll, AK 2004. Tail-in-mouth behaviour in slaughter pigs, in relation to internal factors such as: age, size, gender, and motivational background. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 54, 159166.
Statham, P, Green, L, Bichard, M, Mendl, M 2009. Predicting tail-biting from behaviour of pigs prior to outbreaks. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 121, 157164.
Svendsen, J, Olsson, AC, Botermans, J 2006. Data on tail biting in pigs. In Proceedings of the 19th IPVS congress, Copenhagen, Denmark, p. 613.
Taylor, NR, Main, DCJ, Mendl, M, Edwards, SA 2010. Tail-biting: a new perspective. Veterinary Journal, doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2009.08.028.
Ushijima, R, Rodenburg, TB, Zonderland, JJ 2009. Who is biting tails? In Proceedings of the 4th Congress of Asian Pig Veterinary Society, Tsukuba, Japan, p. 449.
Valros, A, Ahlstrom, S, Rintala, H, Hakkinen, T, Saloniemi, H 2004. The prevalence of tail damage in slaughter pigs in Finland and associations to carcass condemnations. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 54, 213219.
Van de Weerd, HA, Docking, CM, Day, JEL, Edwards, SA 2005. The development of harmful social behaviour in pigs with intact tails and different enrichment backgrounds in two housing systems. Animal Science 80, 289298.
Van Putten, G 1969. An investigation into tail-biting among fattening pigs. British Veterinary Journal 125, 511517.
Van Putten, G 1980. Objective observations on the behaviour of fattening pigs. Animal Regulatory Studies 3, 105118.
Zonderland, JJ, Vermeer, HM, Vereijken, PFG, Spoolder, HAM 2003. Measuring a pig's preference for suspended toys by using an automated recording technique. CIGR Ejournal V, 111.
Zonderland, JJ, de Leeuw, JA, Nolten, C, Spoolder, HAM 2004. Assessing long-term behavioural effects of feeding motivation in group-housed pregnant sows; what, when and how to observe. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 87, 1530.
Zonderland, JJ, Bracke, MBM, Kemp, B, den Hartog, LA, Spoolder, HAM 2010a. Gender effects on tail damage development in single- or mixed-sex groups of weaned piglets. Livestock Science 129, 151158.
Zonderland, JJ, Kemp, B, Bracke, MBM, den Hartog, LA, Spoolder, HAM 2010b. Individual piglet's contribution to the development of tail biting. Animal (In press).
Zonderland, JJ, Wolthuis-Fillerup, M, van Reenen, CG, Bracke, MBM, Kemp, B, den Hartog, LA, Spoolder, HAM 2008. Prevention and treatment of tail biting in weaned piglets. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 110, 269281.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

animal
  • ISSN: 1751-7311
  • EISSN: 1751-732X
  • URL: /core/journals/animal
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 1
Total number of PDF views: 164 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 457 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 21st May 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.