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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wegner, Birte, Spiekermeier, Ines, Nienhoff, Hendrik, Große-Kleimann, Julia, Rohn, Karl, Meyer, Henning, Plate, Heiko, Gerhardy, Hubert, Kreienbrock, Lothar, Beilage, Elisabeth Grosse, Kemper, Nicole
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