IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v10y2020i4p130-d346171.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tail Lesions and Losses of Docked and Undocked Pigs in Different Farrowing and Rearing Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Gentz

    (Department of Animal Sciences, Livestock Systems, Georg-August-University, Albrecht-Thaer-Weg 3, 37075 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Anita Lange

    (Department of Animal Sciences, Livestock Systems, Georg-August-University, Albrecht-Thaer-Weg 3, 37075 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Sebastian Zeidler

    (Department of Animal Sciences, Breeding Informatics, Georg-August-University, Margarethe von Wrangell-Weg 7, 37075 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Christian Lambertz

    (Faculty of Science and Technology, Free University of Bolzano, Universitätsplatz 5, 39100 Bolzano, Italy
    Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Kasseler Strasse 1a, 60486 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.)

  • Matthias Gauly

    (Faculty of Science and Technology, Free University of Bolzano, Universitätsplatz 5, 39100 Bolzano, Italy)

  • Onno Burfeind

    (Chamber of Agriculture of Schleswig-Holstein, Gutshof 1, 24327 Blekendorf, Germany)

  • Imke Traulsen

    (Department of Animal Sciences, Livestock Systems, Georg-August-University, Albrecht-Thaer-Weg 3, 37075 Göttingen, Germany)

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the effects of farrowing and rearing systems on tail lesions and losses of docked and undocked pigs. Pigs from three farrowing systems: Conventional farrowing crate (FC), free farrowing (FF) and group housing of lactating sows (GH) were randomly allocated to different rearing systems: A conventional system (CONV), where the pigs were regrouped and transferred to conventional finishing pens at ten weeks of age or a wean-to-finish (W-F) system, where the pigs remained in their pens until slaughter with higher space allowance during rearing. Weekly, tail lesions and losses were assessed individually. The incidence of tail lesions was higher in undocked CONV pigs compared to undocked W-F pigs (maximum: CONV 58.01%, W-F 41.16%). The rearing system had a significant effect on tail losses at the end of finishing (CONV 67.63%, W-F 38.2%). The significant effect of the rearing system might be explained by higher space allowance during rearing and reduced regrouping stress for W-F pigs. In conclusion, farrowing systems showed no effects, but the W-F rearing system reduces the frequency of tail lesions and losses; the curves of tail lesions increased slower and stayed on a lower level, which resulted in lower losses as well.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Gentz & Anita Lange & Sebastian Zeidler & Christian Lambertz & Matthias Gauly & Onno Burfeind & Imke Traulsen, 2020. "Tail Lesions and Losses of Docked and Undocked Pigs in Different Farrowing and Rearing Systems," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-11, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:10:y:2020:i:4:p:130-:d:346171
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/10/4/130/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/10/4/130/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anita Lange & Maria Gentz & Michael Hahne & Christian Lambertz & Matthias Gauly & Onno Burfeind & Imke Traulsen, 2020. "Effects of Different Farrowing and Rearing Systems on Post-Weaning Stress in Piglets," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:10:y:2020:i:4:p:130-:d:346171. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.