de Roest K, Montanari C, Fowler T, Baltussen W
1Research Centre on Animal Production (CRPA), Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Animal. 2009 Nov;3(11):1522-31. doi: 10.1017/S1751731109990516.
This paper presents an analysis of the economic implications of alternative methods to surgical castration without anaesthesia. Detailed research results on the economic implications of four different alternatives are reported: castration with local anaesthesia, castration with general anaesthesia, immunocastration and raising entire males. The first three alternatives have been assessed for their impact on pig production costs in the most important pig-producing Member States of the EU. The findings on castration with anaesthesia show that cost differences among farms increase if the anaesthesia cannot be administered by farmers and when the veterinarian has to be called to perform it. The cost of veterinarian service largely affects the total average costs, making this solution economically less feasible in small-scale pig farms. In all other farms, the impact on production costs of local anaesthesia is however limited and does not exceed 1 €ct per kg. General anaesthesia administered by inhalation or injection of Ketamin in combination with a sedative (Azaperone, Midazolan) is more expensive. These costs depend heavily on farm size, as the inhalation equipment has to be depreciated on the largest number of pigs possible. The overall costs of immunocastration - including the cost of the work load for the farmer - has to be evaluated against the potential benefits derived from higher daily weight gain and feed efficiency in comparison with surgical castrates. The economic feasibility of this practice will finally depend on the price of the vaccine and on consumer acceptance of immunocastration. The improvement in feed efficiency may compensate almost entirely for the cost of vaccination. The main advantages linked to raising entire males are due to the higher efficiency of feed conversion, to the better growth rate and to the higher leanness of carcass. A higher risk of boar taint on the slaughter line has to be accounted for. Raising entire males should not generate more than 2.5% of boar taint among slaughter pigs, in order to maintain the considerable economic benefits of better feed efficiency of entire males with respect to castrates.
本文分析了非麻醉手术去势替代方法的经济影响。报告了四种不同替代方法经济影响的详细研究结果：局部麻醉去势、全身麻醉去势、免疫去势和饲养完整公猪。前三种替代方法已针对其对欧盟最重要养猪成员国生猪生产成本的影响进行了评估。麻醉去势的研究结果表明，如果农民无法实施麻醉而必须请兽医来进行，各农场之间的成本差异就会增加。兽医服务成本在很大程度上影响总平均成本，这使得该解决方案在小规模养猪场的经济可行性较低。然而，在所有其他农场中，局部麻醉对生产成本的影响有限，每公斤不超过1欧分。通过吸入或注射氯胺酮并结合镇静剂（阿扎哌隆、咪达唑仑）进行全身麻醉成本更高。这些成本在很大程度上取决于农场规模，因为吸入设备必须尽可能多地分摊到猪的数量上进行折旧。免疫去势的总成本——包括农民的工作量成本——必须与与手术去势猪相比更高的日增重和饲料效率所带来的潜在收益进行权衡。这种做法的经济可行性最终将取决于疫苗价格和消费者对免疫去势的接受程度。饲料效率的提高几乎可以完全抵消疫苗接种成本。饲养完整公猪的主要优势在于饲料转化率更高、生长速度更快以及胴体瘦肉率更高。必须考虑屠宰线上公猪异味风险更高的问题。为了保持完整公猪相对于去势猪更好的饲料效率所带来的可观经济效益，饲养完整公猪的屠宰猪中公猪异味发生率不应超过2.5%。
