ArticlePloS one2025
Retrospective exploratory evaluation of individual pigs' behaviour involved in tail biting during rearing and fattening.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tail biting is one of the biggest welfare problems in pigs. However, depending on the individuals involved (e.g., tail biter/victim), pigs seem to change their behaviour prior to tail biting events, which raises the possibility of early detection and thus prediction and prevention of tail biting. In this retrospective explorative study, we used datasets from four different studies with 9 trials of rearing (4 pens/trial with 24 pigs/pen) and fattening (8 pens/trial with 12 pigs/pen) that focused on the exploration behaviour of undocked pigs towards plant-based enrichment materials. From this dataset, we identified 8 pens from rearing (n = 192 pigs) and 6 pens from fattening (n = 72 pigs) in which individual tail biters were identified. From this dataset, we investigated whether any a priori behavioural changes in exploration or feeding could be identified with respect to tail biting. Furthermore, the effects of weight parameters from suckling to fattening were examined. Using linear mixed effects models, we found that exploration duration was linked to days prior to tail biting in rearing, depending on CatPig (category of pigs: biter, victim, neutral pig) (P = 0.001), in fattening independent of CatPig (P<0.0001), and by duration, amount and frequency of feed consumption in fattening (P<0.0001). Some weight parameters covaried with CatPig in rearing (weight-gain suckling: P = 0.0018; weaning weight: P = 0.019) and fattening (weaning weight: P = 0.07; start weight at fattening: P = 0.03; weight-gain rearing: P = 0.02). Suitable indicators for future early detection trials of tail biting could be exploration duration in rearing and fattening and feeding data in fattening. Moreover, weight parameters in rearing and fattening and exploration duration in rearing may be used to identify individual pigs that might become tail biters in an upcoming tail biting event. The retrospective explorative nature of our analysis revealed interesting patterns; however, further studies are needed to confirm our findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.