Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between:

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (3)

Search Parameters:
Authors = Sam Millet ORCID = 0000-0003-2311-9381

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
Open AccessReview
Sustainability of Pork Production with Immunocastration in Europe
Sustainability 2019, 11(12), 3335; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11123335 - 17 Jun 2019
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1328
Abstract
Immunocastration, a technique to replace surgical castration of piglets, consists of two consecutive vaccinations to induce antibodies which transiently suppress testicular functions and avoid boar taint. It is a method to ensure both a high product quality and a high level of animal [...] Read more.
Immunocastration, a technique to replace surgical castration of piglets, consists of two consecutive vaccinations to induce antibodies which transiently suppress testicular functions and avoid boar taint. It is a method to ensure both a high product quality and a high level of animal welfare. The impact of immunocastration on the three pillars of sustainability has been studied extensively. While all aspects of sustainability have been studied separately, however, a contemporary global overview of different aspects is missing. In immunocastrates, performance results are better than in barrows, but worse than in boars. The environmental impact of pork production with immunocastrates is lower than with barrows, but higher than with boars. The level of aggression is considerably lower in immunocastrates compared to boars. Societal concerns are mainly related to food safety, and are not supported by scientific evidence. After second vaccination, immunocastrates switch from a boar- to a barrow-like status. Therefore, the timing of second vaccination is a fine-tuning tool to balance advantages of boars with environmental and economic benefits against increased risk of welfare problems and boar taint. Nevertheless, both synergic and conflicting relationships between the pillars of sustainability must be communicated along the value chain to produce tailored pork products. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Pig Production)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
On-Farm Claw Scoring in Sows Using a Novel Mobile Device
Sensors 2019, 19(6), 1473; https://doi.org/10.3390/s19061473 - 26 Mar 2019
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 800
Abstract
Claw lesions and lameness in sows are important problems in the industry as they impair sow welfare and result in economic losses. Available scoring techniques to detect claw lesions are all limited in terms of collecting data during all reproductive phases and recording [...] Read more.
Claw lesions and lameness in sows are important problems in the industry as they impair sow welfare and result in economic losses. Available scoring techniques to detect claw lesions are all limited in terms of collecting data during all reproductive phases and recording all claws. The Mobile Claw Scoring Device (MCSD) was designed to address these limitations. After considering different practical situations and a design phase, two prototypes were constructed and tested. Improvements were incorporated into a final aluminium apparatus, consisting of two cameras with light-emitting diode (LED) lights mounted in a two-segment aluminium box and covered with laminated tempered glass plates. The operating system slides underneath the claws and takes video images. This final prototype was optimised and validated in an experiment with 20 hybrid sows, comparing scores for soiled claws using the MCSD against scores for clean claws using the Feet First© sow chute (as gold standard). Fifty percent of the scores differed between both scoring tools, with mainly medial claw digits deviating, but this seemed biologically irrelevant. The MCSD seems to be an appropriate alternative for on-farm claw scoring and is distinguishable from other claw scoring techniques; however, it needs further optimisation to improve the similarity between the two techniques. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Intelligent Sensors)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle
The Interaction Between Dietary Valine and Tryptophan Content and Their Effect on the Performance of Piglets
Animals 2012, 2(1), 76-84; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani2010076 - 22 Feb 2012
Viewed by 3919
Abstract
Four experimental diets for newly weaned pigs were formulated: (1) low valine and low tryptophan; (2) low valine and high tryptophan; (3) high valine and low tryptophan and (4) high valine and high tryptophan. Dietary standardized ileal digestible (SID) lysine content was 1.06 [...] Read more.
Four experimental diets for newly weaned pigs were formulated: (1) low valine and low tryptophan; (2) low valine and high tryptophan; (3) high valine and low tryptophan and (4) high valine and high tryptophan. Dietary standardized ileal digestible (SID) lysine content was 1.06 g/kg. The SID valine to SID lysine ratio was 0.58 and 0.67 for the low and high valine diets, respectively, and SID tryptophan to SID lysine ratios were 0.19 and 0.22 for the low and high tryptophan diets, respectively. In total, 64 pens of 6 pigs (3 barrows and 3 gilts) were divided over the four experimental treatments. No interaction between dietary supply of valine and tryptophan was observed (P > 0.1 for all parameters). Increasing the dietary valine content increased the daily feed intake, daily gain and gain:feed (P < 0.001 for all three parameters). Increasing the dietary tryptophan content improved gain:feed during the first 2 weeks (P < 0.05) and overall (P < 0.05). Valine supply had a greater effect on performance results than tryptophan supply. It may thus be beneficial to provide a diet with an optimal dietary concentration of valine even if other amino acids are at suboptimal dietary levels. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Monogastric Animal Nutrition and Metabolism)
Back to TopTop