Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T01:28:52.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impact of general injection anaesthesia and analgesia on post-castration behaviour and teat order of piglets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2012

T. Schmidt ,
A. König  and
E. von Borell
T. Schmidt
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry and Ecology, Institute of Agricultural and Nutritional Sciences, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Theodor-Lieser Street 11, D-06120 Halle, Germany
A. König
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry and Ecology, Institute of Agricultural and Nutritional Sciences, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Theodor-Lieser Street 11, D-06120 Halle, Germany
E. von Borell*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry and Ecology, Institute of Agricultural and Nutritional Sciences, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Theodor-Lieser Street 11, D-06120 Halle, Germany
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Injection anaesthesia with a combination of ketamine and azaperone (K/A) is discussed as a painless alternative to commonly used non-anaesthetized castration. To protect anaesthetized piglets from being crushed, they have to be separated from the sow for 3 h following castration. The aim of this study was to test if this separation and the different treatments would affect short-term behaviour after castration (3 to 6 h after castration) as well as weight gain. Piglets were 5 to 7 days old. Treatment Group 1 received a combination of anaesthesia and analgesia (n = 29, ketamine: 25 mg/kg BW; azaperone: 2 mg/kg BW; meloxicam: 0.4 mg/kg BW), Group 2 received only analgesia (n = 24) and Group 3 received no medication (n = 29). Behaviour and suckling order were compared for a 3 h period the day before castration and after castration. A significantly higher number of teats used by anaesthetized piglets (P = 0.004) suggests a decrease in suckling order stability. There were significant treatment effects between all three groups in the time spent at the sow's teat, with an increase in Group 2 (+69%), decrease in Group 1 (−28%), whereas the control Group 3 (+2%) almost remained unchanged. The anaesthetized piglets showed an increase in the time spent active away from the sow after castration of almost 200% (Groups 2 and 3: ∼50%, P < 0.001). However, no significant treatment effect was seen for weight gain. The results suggest that analgesia has an effect on behaviour, perhaps due to less post-castration pain. This advantage is not apparent for animals receiving additional anaesthesia, probably because of impaired coordination. Although the behavioural changes did not affect weight gain significantly, a decrease in suckling order stability indicates a certain degree of stress due to fighting over teat positions as a consequence of separation. Thus, post-castration behaviour must be taken into account when evaluating alternative castration methods.

Keywords

anaesthesiaanalgesiateat orderpiglet castrationanimal welfare
Type
Behaviour, welfare and health
Information
animal , Volume 6 , Issue 12 , December 2012 , pp. 1998 - 2002
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2012

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

von Borell, E, Baumgartner, J, Giersing, M, Jäggin, N, Prunier, A, Tuyttens, FAM, Edwards, SA 2009. Animal welfare implications of surgical castration and its alternatives in pigs. Animal 3, 1488–1496.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Declaration on Alternatives to Surgical Castration of Pigs 2010. Brussels, December 15, 2010. Retrieved August 24, 2011, from http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/farm/docs/castration_pigs_declaration_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
De Passillé, AMB, Rushen, J, Hartsock, TG 1988. Ontogeny of teat fidelity in pigs and its relation to competition at suckling. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 68, 325–338.Google Scholar
European Commission 2011. Commission Implementing Decision of 19 August 2011 adopting a work programme for the financing of the activities of the Union on alternatives to surgical castration of pigs (2011/C 243/06). Official Journal of the European Union C 243 54, 5–11.Google Scholar
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 2004. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare on a request from the Commission related to welfare aspects of the castration of piglets. EFSA Journal 91, 1–18.Google Scholar
Ewbank, R 1976. Social hierarchy in suckling and fattening pigs: a review. Livestock Production Science 3, 363–372.Google Scholar
Fosse, TK, Haga, HA, Hormazabal, V, Haugejorden, G, Horsberg, TE, Ranheim, B 2008. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of meloxicam in piglets. Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics 31, 246–252.Google Scholar
Hay, M, Vulin, A, Génin, S, Sales, P, Prunier, A 2003. Assessment of pain induced by castration in piglets: behavioural and physiological responses over the subsequent 5 days. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 82, 201–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keita, A, Pagot, E, Prunier, A, Guidarini, C 2010. Pre-emptive meloxicam for postoperative analgesia in piglets undergoing surgical castration. Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia 37, 367–374.Google Scholar
Lahrmann, KH, Kmiec, M, Stecher, R 2006. Die Saugferkelkastration mit der Ketamin/Azaperon-Allgemeinanästhesie, tierschutzkonform, praktikabel, aber wirtschaftlich? (Early castration of piglets with Ketamine/Azaperone anaesthesia. Animal welfare, practicability, but economically feasible?). Der Praktische Tierarzt 87, 802–809.Google Scholar
Lahrmann, KH, Fink, H, Luy, J 2008. Die Ketamin-Azaperon-Allgemeinanästhesie: Eine tierschutzkonforme und praxistaugliche Betäubung für die Saugferkelkastration (Ketamine–Azaperone-general anaesthesia: a welfare conform and practically suited stunning method for the castration of suckling pigs). Deutsches Tierärzteblatt 56, 1028–1031.Google Scholar
Langhoff, R, Zöls, S, Barz, A, Palzer, A, Ritzmann, M, Heinritzi, K 2009. Untersuchungen über den Einsatz von Schmerzmitteln zur Reduktion kastrationsbedingter Schmerzen beim Saugferkel (Investigation about the use of analgesics for the reduction of castration induced pain in suckling piglets). Berliner und Münchener Tierärztliche Wochenschrift 122, 325–332.Google Scholar
Llamas Moya, S, Boyle, LA, Lynch, BP, Arkins, S 2008. Effect of surgical castration on the behavioural and acute phase responses of 5-day-old piglets. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 111, 133–145.Google Scholar
McGlone, JJ, Nicholson, RI, Hellman, JM, Herzog, DN 1993. The development of pain in young pigs associated with castration and attempts to prevent castration-induced behavioural changes. Journal of Animal Science 71, 1441–1446.Google Scholar
Newberry, RC, Wood-Gush, DFM 1985. The suckling behaviour of domestic pigs in a semi-natural environment. Animal Behaviour 95, 11–25.Google Scholar
PIGCAS Report 2009. Attitudes, practices and state of the art regarding piglet castration in Europe (coordinator: M Bonneau). Retrieved August 24, 2011, from http://w3.rennes.inra.fr/pigcas/index.htmGoogle Scholar
Prunier, A, Bonneau, M, von Borell, E, Cinotti, S, Gunn, M, Fredriksen, B, Giersing, M, Morton, DB, Tuyttens, FAM, Velarde, A 2006. A review of the welfare consequences of surgical castration in piglets and the evaluation of non-surgical methods. Animal Welfare 15, 277–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sambraus, HH, Porzig, E 1991. Nahrungsaufnahmeverhalten landwirtschaftlicher Nutztiere (Feeding behaviour of domestic animals in agriculture) (ed. E Porzig and HH Sambraus), pp. 290–339. Deutscher Landwirtschaftsverlag Berlin GmbH, Germany.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) 2006. User's guide: statistics, version 9.1. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Van Putten, G 1990. Schweinehaltung – modern und tiergerecht (Pig keeping – modern and animal-friendly). Deutsche Tierärztliche Wochenschrift 97, 146–148.Google Scholar
Wemelsfelder, F, van Putten, G 1985. Behaviour as a possible indicator for pain in piglets. Report B-260, Instituut voor Veeteeltkundig Onderzoek ‘Schoonoord’, Zeist, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Zonderland, J, Verbraak, J 2007. Effect of anaesthesia and analgesic on piglet behaviour during subsequent days. In Castration under anaesthesia and/or analgesia in commercial pig production (ed. M Kluivers-Poodt, H Hopster and HAM Spoolder), Report 85, pp. 17–39. Animal Science Group – Wageningen UR, The Netherlands.Google Scholar