Why are piglets tails docked

The objectives of this research were to 1 determine if tail docking prevents tail biting behavior in pigs, 2 determine if different methods of tail docking influence the prevalence of tail biting and reduce the stress caused by tail docking, 3 evaluate different methods of analgesia on the pain response in pigs to tail docking. In experiment 1, tail biting lesion scores were similar among docked and non-docked at 3 and 5 weeks of age, however at 7 weeks of age lesion scores were greater among non-docked compared with tail docked pigs.

Body weights were lower among non-docked compared docked pigs and C-Reactive protein CRP levels an indirect measure of inflammation was elevated among non-docked compared with tail docked pigs at 7 weeks of age.

In experiment 2, piglets were tail docked at a length of 2 cm Short or 5 cm Long. Tail biting lesion scores were greater among Long compared with Short pigs. In experiment 3, pigs were tail docked using conventional cutting CUT , cautery CAUT , conventional cutting while the pig was anesthetized with carbon dioxide gas CO2 , conventional cutting with local anesthetic administered immediately prior to cutting LA , conventional cutting with short acting topical anesthetic administered immediately after cutting SHORT , conventional cutting with long acting topical anesthetic administered immediately after cutting LONG , or sham docked CON.

None of the other methods of analgesia were effective at reducing the cortisol response to tail docking in pigs, including using carbon dioxide as a form of general anesthesia. Tail docking also caused an increase in the duration of vocalisations, the number of escape attempts during treatment and the duration of standing with head lowered in the first 60 min after treatment.

However, the impact on stress physiology and behaviour of these procedures diminished by 23—24 h post-treatment. Furthermore, based on cortisol concentrations, cauterisation appeared to be less aversive than the clipper procedure.

Both authors contributed to writing the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Journal List Animals Basel v. Animals Basel. Published online Sep Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. Received Aug 14; Accepted Sep This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract Simple Summary Tail docking is a common industry practice in pork production to reduce tail biting in groups of pigs.

Abstract This experiment compared the stress responses of piglets to tail docking. Keywords: pigs, tail docking, pain, stress, welfare. Introduction Tail biting is potentially a serious welfare problem for the recipient pig. Cortisol Concentrations Blood samples were collected by jugular venipuncture. Behaviour During the imposition of treatment, an escape attempt was defined as a body movement carried out to effect an escape [ 10 ].

Table 1 Descriptions of the piglet behaviours observed modified from Hay et al. Behaviours Description Standing Upright position with bodyweight supported by all four legs. Standing with head lowered Upright position with bodyweight supported by all four legs.

Head lower than shoulders. Sitting Body weight supported by the hind-quarters and front legs. Lying with sow contact Maintaining a recumbent position in contact with a part of the sow. Lying without sow contact Maintaining a recumbent position not in contact with a part of the sow. Idle Not performing any behaviour. Walking Relatively low speed locomotion in which propulsive force derives from action of legs. Vigorous and rhythmic suckling movements. Asleep Eyes closed while lying down.

Scooting Causal part of body being dragged across ground. Scratching Scratching the rump against the floor or walls of the pen. Shivering Shivering as with cold. Open in a separate window. Tail Lesion Scoring The tail lesion score was measured on the clipper and cauterisation treatments as described by Marchant-Forde et al.

Growth Performance and the Total Number of Piglets that Died Due to Illness, were Euthanised or were Removed Due To Illness The piglets were weighed immediately prior to the treatment and then at 7 d post-treatment and at weaning average of 26 d of age. Results 3. Table 2 Effect of treatment on cortisol concentrations at 15 and 30 min and 24 h post-treatment. Behaviour Scooting and shivering were not observed during the observation period.

Table 3 Effect of treatments on duration of vocalisations and number of escape attempts during imposition of treatments and durations of behaviours of piglets for the first 60 min after treatment.

Table 5 Effect of treatment on growth performance of piglets. Discussion This experiment used a broad examination of physiological and behavioural responses of piglets to examine their stress responses to tail docking and surgical castration. Conclusions In conclusion, tail docking two-day-old piglets using clippers or a cauterisation procedure caused an increased cortisol response at 15 and 30 min post-treatment in comparison to handling alone. Author Contributions R. Conflicts of Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References 1. Tail biting in pigs. Taylor N. Tail-biting: A new perspective. Valros A. Advances in Pig Welfare. Elsevier; Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Tail biting; pp.

Sutherland M. The long and short of it: A review of tail docking in farm animals. Bracke M. The risks associated with tail biting in pigs and possible means to reduce the need for tail docking; pp.

Giuliotti L. Effect of different environment enrichments on behaviour and social interactions in growing pigs. Simonsen H. Histopathology of intact and docked pigtails. Prunier A. Effects of castration, tooth resection, or tail docking on plasma metabolites and stress hormones in young pigs. Tail docking in pigs: Acute physiological and behavioural responses. The effect of method of tail docking on tail-biting behaviour and welfare of pigs. Marchant-Forde J. Postnatal piglet husbandry practices and well-being: The effects of alternative techniques delivered in combination.

Hay M. Assessment of pain induced by castration in piglets: Behavioral and physiological responses over the subsequent 5 days.

Taylor A. Vocal responses of piglets to castration: Identifying procedural sources of pain. Behavioural responses of piglets to castration: The effect of piglet age. Shutt D. Stress responses in lambs docked and castrated surgically or by the application of rubber rings.

Identifying and monitoring pain in farm animals: A review. Hemsworth P. Scientific assessment of animal welfare. Tilbrook A. Although teeth clipping and tail docking can reduce the frequency of tail biting, it does not completely eliminate the problem because it does not address the underlying causes.

In the European Union, tail docking and teeth clipping on a routine basis has been prohibited, and there is further legislation limiting its use in countries including Denmark, Sweden, and Finland [ 4 ].

In Australia, the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals: Pigs, suggests that where these procedures are performed that teeth clipping should be done within three days after birth and tail docking within seven days after birth [ 5 ].

The cause of tail biting is multifactorial, but one of the main factors which contributes is a barren environment and the inability for pigs to perform exploration and foraging behaviour. Risks for tail biting behaviour include an absence of straw bedding and enrichment, low space allowance, poor shed ventilation, inadequate or sudden changes in diet, competition for resources, poor health status, and stress.

In order to reduce the incidence of tail biting, pigs should be provided with an environment that offers appropriate stimulation and satisfies their motivation to explore and forage with the provision of straw or other enrichment. Good stockpersonship positive handling and a good pig-to-stockperson ratio allowing close monitoring are essential to identify changes in pig behaviour for early detection and intervention to prevent a tail biting outbreak.

In addition to optimising the environment and management of pigs, the heritability of tail biting is high enough that genetic selection against the behaviour could provide a promising route to addressing the tail biting [ 6 ]. Ear notching is one of the most common methods utilised on farm for the identification of pigs, particularly future breeding pigs. The ear and the position of the notch is meant to allow producers to identify what litter a piglet belongs to and the litter number [ 1 ].

Like teeth clipping and tail docking, ear notching is performed without anaesthesia or pain relief. After ear notching piglets can attempt to escape, squeal and head shake, all behaviours indicating piglets find the procedure stressful and painful. Unlike other forms of identification, ear notching is not legally required and is instead a voluntary on-farm management choice.

Whereas other forms of identification which are also painful procedures such as ear tagging or tattooing are legally required under the mandatory National Livestock Identification System NLIS for pig traceability [ 7 ]. Male piglets may be castrated when they are young to reduce the risk of aggressive behaviour and undesirable meat characteristics such as boar taint. Piglets may be castrated using physical or immunological methods immunocastration.

Immunocastration works by chemically delaying the onset of puberty in piglets which requires two doses of a vaccine. Physical castration when used is usually performed without anaesthesia or pain relief, resulting in significant pain and distress for the piglet. Alternative methods such as immunocastration provide a more humane option to physical castration. To read more about boar taint and castration in pigs, click here.