Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T02:43:46.960Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of rearing system and mixing at loading on transport and lairage behaviour and meat quality: comparison of outdoor and conventionally raised pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 May 2008

P. Barton Gade
P. Barton Gade*
Affiliation:
Danish Meat Research Institute, Maglegaardsvej, 2, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The effect of raising pigs outdoors or conventionally in a barren environment was investigated with respect to behaviour during a 3 to 4 h journey and a 2 h lairage, blood chemistry at slaughter and meat quality characteristics. Pigs were either kept in farm pen groups or were mixed at loading and kept in the groups, so formed, until slaughter. Non-mixed outdoor pigs settled more quickly during transport and lay down to a greater extent at the end of the journey and lairage period compared with conventionally raised pigs. Mixing led to fewer pigs sitting and lying during transport for conventionally raised pigs, where nearly 80% were still standing at the end of the journey. Mixing had no effect on pig posture in the lairage. Outdoor pigs were less aggressive than conventionally raised pigs especially during lairage and had a lower frequency of unacceptable skin damage in the rear and shoulder area. Aggressive interactions were almost exclusively confined to mixed groups and occurred mainly between pigs from different farm pens, i.e. between unfamiliar animals. Mixing at loading led therefore to higher levels of unacceptable skin damage. Cortisol concentrations in slaughter blood were not affected by rearing system or mixing, but mixed, conventionally raised pigs had higher plasma creatine kinase (CK) activities than non-mixed ones (1132 v. 761 U/l, respectively, P < 0.05). Outdoor pigs had similar CK activities, irrespective of mixing (682 and 771 U/l for mixed and non-mixed, respectively). Muscle pH early post mortem was highest in outdoor pigs and muscle temperature lower, but no pig showed pH values below 6.0. Ultimate pH values were both higher (Semimembranosus (S)) and lower (Semispinalis capitis (SC)) than in conventionally raised pigs, and outdoor pigs tended to have a lower frequency of higher than normal pH values. Internal reflectance (MQM) values in Biceps femoris (BF) were highest in outdoor pigs but the incidence of pale, soft and exudative (PSE) meat was low, varying between 0% and 1% for experimental groups. In general, the effects of rearing system and mixing on meat quality measurements taken early post mortem or the day after slaughter were slight, but the trends seen support the CK results, and show that conventionally raised pigs may have found mixing pre-slaughter to be more physically stressful than outdoor pigs did.

Keywords

behaviourmixingpigsrearing systemwelfare
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 2 , Issue 6 , June 2008 , pp. 902 - 911
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barton Gade P 2000. The effect of different stocking densities during transport on pig welfare. Proceedings of the 46th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, vol. 1, Buenos Aires, Argentina, pp. 134–135.Google Scholar
Barton Gade P and Blaabjerg L 1989. Preliminary observations on the behaviour and meat quality of free range pigs. Proceedings of the 35th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, vol. III, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 1002–1005.Google Scholar
Barton Gade, P, Christensen, L 1998. Effect of different stocking densities during transport on welfare and meat quality in slaughter pigs. Meat Science 48, 237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barton Gade P, Blaabjerg L and Christensen L 1992. New lairage system for slaughter pigs – effect on behaviour and quality characteristics. Proceedings of the 38th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, vol. II, Clermont Ferrand, France, pp. 161–164.Google Scholar
Barton Gade P, Blaabjerg L, Christensen L and Möller BM 1995. New low stress system for pig slaughter – Effect on pig behaviour and meat quality. Proceedings of the 41st International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, vol. II, San Antonio, Texas, pp. 98–99.Google Scholar
Barton Gade PA, Warriss PD, Brown SN and Lambooij E 1996. Methods of improving pig welfare and meat quality by reducing stress and discomfort before slaughter – methods of measuring meat quality. Proceedings of an EU-Seminar. New information on welfare and meat quality in pigs as related to handling, transport and lairage conditions. Sonderheft 166, Mariensee, Germany, pp. 23–34.Google Scholar
Beattie, VE, O’Connell, NE, Moss, BW 2000. Influence of environmental enrichment on the behaviour, performance and meat quality of domestic pigs. Livestock Production Science 65, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borgaard C, Rud Andersen J and Barton Gade P 1989. Further development of the MQM-equipment for measuring water holding capacity and intramuscular fat on-line. Proceedings of the 35th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, vol. 1, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 212–219.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, RH, Parrott, RF, Goode, JA, Lloyd, DM, Rodway, RG, Broome, DB 1996. Behavioural and hormonal responses of pigs during transport: effect of mixing and duration of journey. Animal Science 62, 547–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, SN, Knowles, TG, Edwards, JE, Warriss, P 1999. Relationship between food deprivation before transport and aggression in pigs held in lairage before slaughter. The Veterinary Record 145, 630–634.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christensen, L, Barton Gade, P 1997. Neue Entwicklungen beim Handling von Schweinen in Schlachtbetrieben. Fleischwirtschaft 7, 604–607.Google Scholar
Cox, LN, Cooper, JJ 2001. Observations on the pre- and post weaning behaviour of piglets reared in commercial indoor and outdoor environments. Animal Science 71, 75–86.Google Scholar
De Jong, IC, Prelle, IT, van de Burgwal, JA, Lambooij, E, Korte, SM, Blokhuis, HJ, Koolhaas, JM 2000. Effects of rearing conditions on behavioural and physiological responses of pigs to pre-slaughter handling and mixing at transport. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 80, 451–458.Google Scholar
D’Souza, DN, Dunshea, FR, Leury, BJ, Warner, RD 1999. Effect of mixing boars during lairage and pre-slaughter handling on pork quality. Australian Journal Agricultural Research 50, 109–113.Google Scholar
Gentry, JG, McClone, JJ, Miller, MF, Blanton, JR Jr 2004. Environmental enrichment effects on pig performance, meat quality and muscle characteristics. Journal of Animal Science 82, 209–217.Google Scholar
Geverink, NA, Bradshaw, RH, Lambooij, E, Wiegant, VM, Broom, DB 1998. Effects of simulated lairage conditions on the physiology and behaviour of pigs. The Veterinary Record 143, 241–244.Google Scholar
Geverink, NA, de Jong, IC, Lambooij, E, Blokhuis, HJ, Wiegant, VM 1999. Influence of housing conditions on responses of pigs to preslaughter treatment and consequences for meat quality. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 79, 285–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guise, HJ, Penny, RHC 1989. Factors influencing the welfare and carcass and meat quality in pigs 2. Mixing unfamiliar pigs. Animal Production 49, 517–521.Google Scholar
Hill, JD, McGlone, JJ, Fullwood, SD, Miller, MF 1998. Environmental enrichment influences on pig behaviour, performance and meat quality. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 57, 51–68.Google Scholar
Karlsson, A, Lundström, K 1992. Meat quality in pigs reared in groups kept as a unit during the fattening period and slaughter. Animal Production 54, 421–426.Google Scholar
Klont, RE, Husegge, B, Hoving-Bolink, AH, Gerritzen, MA, Kurt, E, Winkelman-Goedhart, HA, de Jong, IC, Kranen, RW 2001. Relationships between behavioural and meat quality characteristics of pigs raised under barren and enriched housing conditions. Journal of Animal Science 79, 2835–2843.Google Scholar
Lambooij, E, Hulsegge, B, Klont, RE, Winkelman-Goedhart, HA, Reimert, HGM, Kranen, RW 2004. Effect of housing conditions of slaughter pigs on some post mortem muscle metabolites and pork quality characteristics. Meat Science 66, 855–862.Google Scholar
Maribo, H, Olsen, EV, Barton Gade, P, Møller, AJ, Karlsson, A 1998. Effect of early post mortem cooling on temperature, pH fall and meat quality in pigs. Meat Science 50, 115–129.Google Scholar
O’Connell, NE, Beattie, VE 1999. Influence of environmental enrichment on aggressive behaviour and dominance relationships in growing pigs. Animal Welfare 8, 269–279.Google Scholar
SAS 2002–2003. SAS Inc., Cary, NC, USA, (r) 9.1.Google Scholar
Sather, AP, Jones, SDM, Squires, EJ, Schaefer, AL, Robertson, WM, Tong, AKW, Zawadski, S 1995. Antemortem handling effects on the behaviour, carcass yield and meat quality of market weight entire male pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 75, 45–56.Google Scholar
Terlouw, EMC, Porcher, J, Fernandez, X 2005. Repeated handling of pigs during rearing. II. Effect of reactivity to humans on aggression during mixing and on meat quality. Journal of Animal Science 83, 1664–1672.Google Scholar
Vautier, A, Bataille, G, Bouyssiere, M, Minivielle, B, Chevillon, P 2003. Qualité technologique des viandes de porcs élevés en plein-air. Techni Porc 26, 25–28.Google Scholar
Warriss, PD 1996. The consequences of fighting between mixed groups of unfamiliar pigs before slaughter. Meat Focus International 4, 89–92.Google Scholar
Warriss, PD, Brown, SN 1985. The physiological responses to fighting in pigs and the consequences for meat quality. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 36, 87–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warriss, PD, Brown, SN, Knowles, TG, Edwards, JE, Kettlewell, PJ, Guise, HJ 1998. The effect of stocking density in transit on the carcass quality and welfare of slaughter pigs: 2. Results from the analysis of blood and meat samples. Meat Science 50, 447–456.Google Scholar
Webster, S, Dawkins, M 2000. The post-weaning behaviour of indoor-bred and outdoor-bred pigs. Animal Science 71, 265–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar