2.1. Animal and Housing Conditions

NC Nicolau Casal
MF Maria Font-i-Furnols
MG Marina Gispert
XM Xavier Manteca
EF Emma Fàbrega
request Request a Protocol
ask Ask a question
Favorite

The housing, husbandry, and use of the animals for the procedures described in this manuscript were carried out according to the European legislation for animals used for scientific purposes (Directive 2010/63/EU of the EU Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes). The project, including this experimental procedure, was approved by IRTA’s (Institute of Agrifood Research and Technology) Ethical Committee. According to Directive 2010/63/EU, “any restrictions on the extent to which an animal can satisfy its physiological and ethological needs have to be kept to a minimum”. In the present experiment, no environmental enrichment was provided to the control group, because the authors aimed at investigating the effects of the provision of enrichment on behavioural and physiological performance, and meat and carcass quality traits. For that reason, the Ethical Committee had to decide according to Article 38 of European Union (EU) legislation on whether “the harm to the animals in terms of suffering, pain, and distress is justified by the expected outcome taking into account ethical considerations, and may ultimately benefit human beings, animals, or the environment”. The Ethical Committee provided its approval to the procedure considering that the data obtained regarding the provision of enrichment would yield important outcomes to be implemented on commercial farms, for which, according to EU legislation (EU Council directive on pig welfare 2008/120/EC), enrichment material is mandatory. In order to minimise the possible effects of non-provision of enrichment to the control group, other risk factors that can influence the fulfilment of pig behavioral needs and, as a consequence, the occurrence of tail biting, were cared for: space allowance per pig was 1.95 m2/animal; climatic conditions were automatically controlled, and daily supervision was carried out according to the Ethical Committee recommendations, in order to apply correction measures if necessary.

Fifty-six entire male pigs [(Landrace × Large white) × Pietrain] were used in the present experiment. The average live weight of pigs at arrival at the experimental farm was 25 ± 0.27 kg (mean ± SE) with 10 weeks of age. Pigs were kept together until the experiment started at the age of 16 weeks (and average weight of 49.8 ± 0.56 kg). Pigs were randomly assigned to one of the four different treatments (14 pigs/treatment in total): (a) pigs supplemented with both enrichment material and herbal compound (EEHC); (b) pigs supplemented with enrichment material (EE); (c) pigs supplemented with the herbal compound (HC); and d) control group (CG). Two identical rooms were used; thus, there was one replicate of seven pigs per treatment in each of the two rooms.

Pens had the same size (13.67 m2), and visual contact between pigs of adjacent pens was allowed by using metallic fences. The space availability per pig was 1.95 m2, and food and water were provided ad libitum by means of one drinker and two hoppers. Natural hemp ropes, sawdust, and rubber balls were provided altogether during all of the experiments as enrichment materials in the EE treatment. More precisely, the hemp ropes (two) that were hung in the walls of the environmentally enriched pens had 80 cm of length and were replaced when the length was lower than 30 cm. The provision of sawdust required that the 1/3 of the slats of EE and EEHC pens were covered with polypropylene sticks (Click-in®, Rotenca, Agramunt, Spain). Two full buckets (50 × 60 cm) were added every two days. The EE treatment also included a single rubber ball with a diameter of 15 cm provided at the beginning of the experiment and cleaned regularly to avoid soiling. The conventional environment consisted of a fully slatted floor with no enrichment material provided. The herbal compound used (Sedafit ESC, Phytosynthèse, Saint-Bonnet de Rochefort, France) contained Valeriana officinalis and Passiflora incarnata, and was manually added to the food concentrate of the HC and EEHC treatments in a concentration of 2000 mg/kg. Pigs were fed ad libitum following a phase feeding regime with a commercial concentrate (Esporc, Riudarenes, Spain, containing 17.02% crude protein and 3.91 Kcal EM at mid fattening).

As part of a broader study, behavioural observations, body weights, and skin lesions were periodically registered, and blood, saliva, and hair samples were collected [14]. As presented in Casal et al. [14]., body weight at 16 weeks was not significantly different between treatments (50.22 ± 1.17; 49.61 ± 1.05; 49.64 ± 1.26; 49.81 ± 1.22, for CG, HC, EE, and EEHC, respectively), whereas at 24 weeks of age, the control group presented a significantly lower weight compared with the EE, HC, and EEHC pigs (104.5; 110.35; 111.79 or 112.35 SEM = 0.69, respectively, p < 0.05, for more details see Casal et al. [14].

Do you have any questions about this protocol?

Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.

0/150

tip Tips for asking effective questions

+ Description

Write a detailed description. Include all information that will help others answer your question including experimental processes, conditions, and relevant images.

post Post a Question
0 Q&A