Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31619014›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2019

Rearing Pigs with Intact Tails-Experiences and Practical Solutions in Sweden.

Torun Wallgren, Nils Lundeheim, Anna Wallenbeck, Rebecka Westin, Stefan Gunnarsson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Welfare of pigs on farm.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Pain Management in Farm Animals: Focus on Cattle, Sheep and Pigs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Torun WallgrenDepartment of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), P.O.B. 234, S-532 23 Skara, Sweden. torun.wallgren@slu.se.
Nils LundeheimDepartment of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), P.O.B 7023, S-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden. nils.lundeheim@slu.se.
Anna WallenbeckDepartment of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), P.O.B. 234, S-532 23 Skara, Sweden. anna.wallenbeck@slu.se.
Rebecka WestinDepartment of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), P.O.B. 234, S-532 23 Skara, Sweden. rebecka.westin@slu.se.
Stefan GunnarssonDepartment of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), P.O.B. 234, S-532 23 Skara, Sweden. stefan.gunnarsson@slu.se.

Funding

Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas 221-2013-1799
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tail biting is a common issue within commercial pig production. It is mainly an indicator of inadequate housing environment and results in reduced health welfare and production. To reduce the impact of tail biting, pigs are commonly tail docked, without pain relief, within the first week of life. EU Council Directive 2008/120/EC prohibits routine tail docking, but the practice is still widely used in many Member States. Sweden has banned tail docking since 1988 and all pigs have intact tails, yet tail biting is a minor problem. This paper summarises and synthesises experimental findings and practical expertise in production of undocked pigs in Sweden and describes solutions to facilitate a transition to producing pigs with intact tails within intensive pig production in the EU. Swedish pig housing conditions and management differ in many aspects from those in other EU Member States. Swedish experiences show that lower stocking density, provision of sufficient feeding space, no fully slatted flooring, strict maximum levels for noxious gases and regular provision of litter material are crucial for success when rearing pigs with intact tails. To prevent tail biting and to eliminate the need for tail docking, we strongly recommend that EU legislation should more clearly match the biological needs of pigs, as is done in Swedish legislation.

Indexed as

swinetail-bitingtail-dockingwelfare

Identifiers

PMID31619014
PMCPMC6826450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.