Cargando…
Application of the voluntary human approach test on commercial pig fattening farms: a meaningful tool?
BACKGROUND: A Voluntary Human Approach Test (VHAT) was performed in pig pens, and relationships between environmental conditions and welfare indicators were investigated. Five variables were measured in 1668 pens in 214 fattening pig herds in Germany: time until the first contact (touching) between...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7422426/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32832096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-020-00158-y |
_version_ | 1783570007460937728 |
---|---|
author | Wegner, Birte Spiekermeier, Ines Nienhoff, Hendrik Große-Kleimann, Julia Rohn, Karl Meyer, Henning Plate, Heiko Gerhardy, Hubert Kreienbrock, Lothar Beilage, Elisabeth Grosse Kemper, Nicole |
author_facet | Wegner, Birte Spiekermeier, Ines Nienhoff, Hendrik Große-Kleimann, Julia Rohn, Karl Meyer, Henning Plate, Heiko Gerhardy, Hubert Kreienbrock, Lothar Beilage, Elisabeth Grosse Kemper, Nicole |
author_sort | Wegner, Birte |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: A Voluntary Human Approach Test (VHAT) was performed in pig pens, and relationships between environmental conditions and welfare indicators were investigated. Five variables were measured in 1668 pens in 214 fattening pig herds in Germany: time until the first contact (touching) between a pig and the person in the pen (TUFC), time until the observer was surrounded by pigs within a radius of approximately two meters, percentage of pigs relative to group size [%] surrounding the observer after 1 min (PPSO), percentage of pigs relative to group size [%] that completely avoided contact with the observer during the entire test period, and how the pigs contacted the observer (Score 0 [no touching] - 3 [biting]). Furthermore, variables indicative of the pigs’ environment (e.g., feeding system, ventilation system), management (e.g., number of usable drinkers, number of usable manipulatable materials), and welfare (e.g., tail lesions, ear lesions) were documented. RESULTS: Pigs engaging in more forceful means of contact (nibbling, biting) approached the observer faster than those exhibiting more gentle types of contact (touching). A lower TUFC was associated with more manipulatable materials present, a higher number of drinkers, and with the control position of the caretaker located inside the pen. Pigs kept in larger groups showed a lower TUFC than those in smaller groups (P = 0.0191). However, PPSO was lower in pigs kept in smaller groups (1–12 pigs per pen) with more manipulatable materials available. In groups with low PPSOs, more tail lesions were observed (P = 0.0296). No relationship between contact type and tail or ear injuries was detected. In younger pigs, PPSO was higher (49.9 ± 23.2%) than for animals in the second half of the fattening period (45.1 ± 19.9%). CONCLUSIONS: In this on-farm study, the relationships between VHAT behavior and environmental factors revealed that external factors (e.g., management practices, housing conditions) impact animals’ responses to this behavioral test. Therefore, using the VHAT as an animal welfare indicator is valid only if these variables are studied as well. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7422426 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74224262020-08-21 Application of the voluntary human approach test on commercial pig fattening farms: a meaningful tool? Wegner, Birte Spiekermeier, Ines Nienhoff, Hendrik Große-Kleimann, Julia Rohn, Karl Meyer, Henning Plate, Heiko Gerhardy, Hubert Kreienbrock, Lothar Beilage, Elisabeth Grosse Kemper, Nicole Porcine Health Manag Research BACKGROUND: A Voluntary Human Approach Test (VHAT) was performed in pig pens, and relationships between environmental conditions and welfare indicators were investigated. Five variables were measured in 1668 pens in 214 fattening pig herds in Germany: time until the first contact (touching) between a pig and the person in the pen (TUFC), time until the observer was surrounded by pigs within a radius of approximately two meters, percentage of pigs relative to group size [%] surrounding the observer after 1 min (PPSO), percentage of pigs relative to group size [%] that completely avoided contact with the observer during the entire test period, and how the pigs contacted the observer (Score 0 [no touching] - 3 [biting]). Furthermore, variables indicative of the pigs’ environment (e.g., feeding system, ventilation system), management (e.g., number of usable drinkers, number of usable manipulatable materials), and welfare (e.g., tail lesions, ear lesions) were documented. RESULTS: Pigs engaging in more forceful means of contact (nibbling, biting) approached the observer faster than those exhibiting more gentle types of contact (touching). A lower TUFC was associated with more manipulatable materials present, a higher number of drinkers, and with the control position of the caretaker located inside the pen. Pigs kept in larger groups showed a lower TUFC than those in smaller groups (P = 0.0191). However, PPSO was lower in pigs kept in smaller groups (1–12 pigs per pen) with more manipulatable materials available. In groups with low PPSOs, more tail lesions were observed (P = 0.0296). No relationship between contact type and tail or ear injuries was detected. In younger pigs, PPSO was higher (49.9 ± 23.2%) than for animals in the second half of the fattening period (45.1 ± 19.9%). CONCLUSIONS: In this on-farm study, the relationships between VHAT behavior and environmental factors revealed that external factors (e.g., management practices, housing conditions) impact animals’ responses to this behavioral test. Therefore, using the VHAT as an animal welfare indicator is valid only if these variables are studied as well. BioMed Central 2020-08-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7422426/ /pubmed/32832096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-020-00158-y Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Wegner, Birte Spiekermeier, Ines Nienhoff, Hendrik Große-Kleimann, Julia Rohn, Karl Meyer, Henning Plate, Heiko Gerhardy, Hubert Kreienbrock, Lothar Beilage, Elisabeth Grosse Kemper, Nicole Application of the voluntary human approach test on commercial pig fattening farms: a meaningful tool? |
title | Application of the voluntary human approach test on commercial pig fattening farms: a meaningful tool? |
title_full | Application of the voluntary human approach test on commercial pig fattening farms: a meaningful tool? |
title_fullStr | Application of the voluntary human approach test on commercial pig fattening farms: a meaningful tool? |
title_full_unstemmed | Application of the voluntary human approach test on commercial pig fattening farms: a meaningful tool? |
title_short | Application of the voluntary human approach test on commercial pig fattening farms: a meaningful tool? |
title_sort | application of the voluntary human approach test on commercial pig fattening farms: a meaningful tool? |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7422426/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32832096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-020-00158-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wegnerbirte applicationofthevoluntaryhumanapproachtestoncommercialpigfatteningfarmsameaningfultool AT spiekermeierines applicationofthevoluntaryhumanapproachtestoncommercialpigfatteningfarmsameaningfultool AT nienhoffhendrik applicationofthevoluntaryhumanapproachtestoncommercialpigfatteningfarmsameaningfultool AT großekleimannjulia applicationofthevoluntaryhumanapproachtestoncommercialpigfatteningfarmsameaningfultool AT rohnkarl applicationofthevoluntaryhumanapproachtestoncommercialpigfatteningfarmsameaningfultool AT meyerhenning applicationofthevoluntaryhumanapproachtestoncommercialpigfatteningfarmsameaningfultool AT plateheiko applicationofthevoluntaryhumanapproachtestoncommercialpigfatteningfarmsameaningfultool AT gerhardyhubert applicationofthevoluntaryhumanapproachtestoncommercialpigfatteningfarmsameaningfultool AT kreienbrocklothar applicationofthevoluntaryhumanapproachtestoncommercialpigfatteningfarmsameaningfultool AT beilageelisabethgrosse applicationofthevoluntaryhumanapproachtestoncommercialpigfatteningfarmsameaningfultool AT kempernicole applicationofthevoluntaryhumanapproachtestoncommercialpigfatteningfarmsameaningfultool |