Exploring individual responses to welfare issues in growing-finishing pig feeding behaviour.

The feeding behaviour of individual growing-finishing pigs can be continuously monitored using sensors such as electronic feeding stations (EFSs), and this could be further used to monitor pig welfare. To make accurate conclusions about individual pig welfare, however, it is important to know whether deviations in feeding behaviour in response to welfare issues are shown only on average or by each individual pig. Therefore, this study aimed (1) to quantify the individual variation in feeding behaviour changes in response to a range of welfare issues, and (2) to explain this individual variation by quantifying the responses to welfare issues for specific subgroups of pigs. We monitored four rounds of 110 growing-finishing pigs each (3-4 months per round). We collected feeding behaviour data using IVOG® EFSs and identified health issues and heat stress using climate sensors and twice-weekly health observations. For each pig, a generalised additive model was fitted, which modelled feeding behaviour through time and estimated the effect of each welfare issue that the pig had suffered from. The range of these effect estimates was compared between pigs to study the individual variation in responses. Subsequently, pigs were repeatedly grouped using physical and feeding characteristics, and, with meta-subset analysis, it was determined for each group whether a deviation in response to the welfare issue (i.e. their combined effect estimates) was present. We found that the range in effect estimates was very large, approaching normal distributions for most combinations of welfare issues and feeding variables. This indicates that most pigs did not show feeding behaviour deviations during the welfare issue, while those that did could show both increases and reductions. One exception was heat stress, for which almost all pigs showed reductions in their feed intake, feeding duration and feeding frequency. When looking at subgroups of pigs, it was seen that especially for lameness and tail damage pigs with certain physical characteristics or feeding strategies did consistently deviate on some feeding components during welfare issues (e.g. only relatively heavier pigs reduced their feeding frequency during lameness). In conclusion, while detection of individual pigs suffering from heat stress using feeding variables should be feasible, detection of (mild) health issues would be difficult due to pigs responding differently, if at all, to a given health issue. For some pigs with specific physical or behavioural characteristics, nevertheless, detection of some health issues, such as lameness or tail damage, may be possible.

Invited review: Abomasal damage in veal calves.

Within all cattle production systems, veal calves are the most severely affected by abomasal damage, with current prevalence at slaughter ranging from 70 to 93% of all animals affected. Although most damage is found in the pyloric region of the abomasum, fundic lesions are also found. Despite past research into the etiology of abomasal damage and the many risk factors that have been proposed, consensus on the causal factors of abomasal damage in veal calves has not yet been reached. The aim of this review was to integrate and analyze available information on the etiology of, and possible risk factors for, abomasal damage in veal calves. We describe various proposed pathways through which risk factors may contribute to damage formation and conclude that the etiology of abomasal damage is most likely multifactorial, with diet being a main contributor. Pyloric lesions, the most common type of damage in veal calves, are likely the result of large and infrequent milk and solid feed meals, whereas fundic lesions may be caused by stress, although the evidence for this is inconclusive. Providing calves with multiple smaller milk and solid feed meals (or ad libitum provision) may decrease abomasal damage. In future research, ulcers, erosions, and scars as well as fundic and pyloric lesions should be recorded separately, because etiologies of these may differ. Further research is required to understand the exact pathway(s) by which milk replacer causes abomasal damage in veal calves; that is, whether low abomasal pH, overloading, or composition are important. Further research is also required to elucidate whether rapid intake of milk replacer and solid feed, which is influenced by restricted amounts fed, inter-calf competition, and calf breed, increases abomasal damage. Research is also needed into the effect of medication and nutrient deficiencies other than iron. The types of experimental designs that can be used for future research could be enhanced if a means to assess abomasal damage antemortem is developed. We conclude that it is unlikely that abomasal or ruminal hairballs, iron deficiency, water provision, and various infections and diseases are significant contributors to abomasal damage in veal calves.