-
Tytuł:
-
Docking piglet tails: How much does it hurt and for how long?
-
Autorzy:
-
Di Giminiani P; School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, United Kingdom. Electronic address: .
Nasirahmadi A; Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, University of Kassel, D-37213 Witzenhausen, Germany.
Malcolm EM; School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, United Kingdom.
Leach MC; School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, United Kingdom.
Edwards SA; School of Natural and Environmental Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, United Kingdom.
-
Źródło:
-
Physiology & behavior [Physiol Behav] 2017 Dec 01; Vol. 182, pp. 69-76. Date of Electronic Publication: 2017 Sep 30.
-
Typ publikacji:
-
Journal Article
-
Język:
-
English
-
Imprint Name(s):
-
Publication: New York NY : Elsevier Science
Original Publication: Oxford, Eng., Long Island City, Pergamon Press.
-
MeSH Terms:
-
Pain/*physiopathology
Tail/*surgery
Vocalization, Animal/*physiology
Amputation, Surgical/methods ; Amputation, Surgical/veterinary ; Animals ; Cautery/adverse effects ; Cautery/veterinary ; Female ; Pain Threshold/physiology ; Swine ; Time Factors
-
Contributed Indexing:
-
Keywords: Behaviour; Nociception; Pain; Pig; Tail docking; Vocalisation
-
Entry Date(s):
-
Date Created: 20171005 Date Completed: 20180611 Latest Revision: 20221207
-
Update Code:
-
20240105
-
DOI:
-
10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.09.028
-
PMID:
-
28974458
-
Tail docking in pigs has the potential for evoking short- as well as long-term physiological and behavioural changes indicative of pain. Nonetheless, the existing scientific literature has thus far provided somewhat inconsistent data on the intensity and the duration of pain based on varying assessment methodologies and different post-procedural observation times. In this report we describe three response stages (immediate, short- and long-term) through the application of vocalisation, behavioural and nociceptive assessments in order to identify changes indicative of potential pain experienced by the piglets. Furthermore, we evaluated the following procedural differences: (1) cautery vs. non-cautery docking; (2) length of tail removal. Sound parameters showed a significantly greater call energy and intensity exhibited by docked vs. sham-docked piglets (P<0.05). Observations of general activity of the animals in a test situation failed to detect a difference among treatments (P>0.05) up to 48h post-tail docking. Similarly, no difference in mechanical nociceptive thresholds indicative of long term pain was observed at 17weeks following neonatal tail docking (P>0.05). The present results highlight the potential for the use of measures of vocalisation to detect peri-procedural changes possibly associated with evoked pain. Nonetheless, activity and nociceptive measures failed to identify post-docking anomalies, suggesting that alternative methodologies need to be implemented to clarify whether tail docking is associated with short- and long-term changes attributable to pain experienced by the piglets.
(Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)