Niemi Jarkko K, Edwards Sandra A, Papanastasiou Dimitris K, Piette Deborah, Stygar Anna H, Wallenbeck Anna, Valros Anna
Bioeconomy and Environment Unit, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Seinäjoki, Finland.
School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom.
Front Vet Sci. 2021 Sep 7;8:682330. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.682330. eCollection 2021.
Tail biting is an important animal welfare issue in the pig sector. Studies have identified various risk factors which can lead to biting incidents and proposed mitigation measures. This study focused on the following seven key measures which have been identified to affect the risk of tail biting lesions: improvements in straw provision, housing ventilation, genetics, stocking density, herd health, provision of point-source enrichment objects, and adoption of early warning systems. The aim of this study was to examine whether these selected measures to reduce the risk of tail biting lesions in pig fattening are cost-effective. The problem was analyzed by first summarizing the most prospective interventions, their costs and expected impacts on the prevalence of tail biting lesions, second, by using a stochastic bio-economic model to simulate the financial return per pig space unit and per pig at different levels of prevalence of tail biting lesions, and third by looking at how large a reduction in tail biting lesions would be needed at different levels of initial prevalence of lesions to cover the costs of interventions. Tail biting lesions of a severity which would require an action (medication, hospitalization of the pig or other care, or taking preventive measures) by the pig producer were considered in the model. The results provide guidance on the expected benefits and costs of the studied interventions. According to the results, if the average prevalence of tail biting lesions is at a level of 10%, the costs of this damaging behavior can be as high as €2.3 per slaughtered pig (~1.6% of carcass value). Measures which were considered the least expensive to apply, such as provision of point-source enrichment objects, or provided wider production benefits, such as improvements in ventilation and herd health, became profitable at a lower level of efficacy than measures which were considered the most expensive to apply (e.g., straw provision, increased space allowance, automated early warning systems). Measures which were considered most efficient in reducing the risk of tail biting lesions, such as straw provision, can be cost-effective in preventing tail biting, especially when the risk of tail biting is high. At lower risk levels, the provision of point-source objects and other less costly but relatively effective measures can play an important role. However, selection of measures appropriate to the individual farm problem is essential. For instance, if poor health or barren pens are causing the elevated risk of tail biting lesions, then improving health management or enriching the pens may resolve the tail biting problem cost-effectively.
咬尾是养猪业中一个重要的动物福利问题。研究已经确定了各种可能导致咬尾事件的风险因素，并提出了缓解措施。本研究聚焦于已确定的影响咬尾损伤风险的以下七个关键措施：改善垫草供应、猪舍通风、遗传因素、饲养密度、猪群健康、提供点源富集物品以及采用预警系统。本研究的目的是检验这些选定的降低育肥猪咬尾损伤风险的措施是否具有成本效益。通过以下方式分析该问题：首先总结最具前景的干预措施、其成本以及对咬尾损伤发生率的预期影响；其次，使用随机生物经济模型模拟在不同咬尾损伤发生率水平下每头猪空间单位和每头猪的财务回报；第三，研究在不同初始损伤发生率水平下，需要将咬尾损伤降低多少才能覆盖干预成本。模型中考虑了严重程度达到需要养猪生产者采取行动（用药、猪住院治疗或其他护理，或采取预防措施）的咬尾损伤。研究结果为所研究的干预措施的预期效益和成本提供了指导。根据研究结果，如果咬尾损伤的平均发生率为10%，这种有害行为的成本可能高达每头屠宰猪2.3欧元（约占胴体价值的1.6%）。被认为应用成本最低的措施，如提供点源富集物品，或能带来更广泛生产效益的措施，如改善通风和猪群健康，在较低的效果水平下就变得有利可图，而被认为应用成本最高的措施（如垫草供应、增加空间 allowance、自动化预警系统）则不然。被认为在降低咬尾损伤风险方面最有效的措施，如垫草供应，在预防咬尾方面可能具有成本效益，尤其是当咬尾风险较高时。在较低风险水平下，提供点源物品和其他成本较低但相对有效的措施可以发挥重要作用。然而，选择适合个别猪场问题的措施至关重要。例如，如果健康状况不佳或猪舍贫瘠导致咬尾损伤风险升高，那么改善健康管理或丰富猪舍环境可能以具有成本效益的方式解决咬尾问题。
