Hostname: page-component-669899f699-swprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T16:44:19.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Farm and management characteristics associated with boar taint

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2013

C. P. A. van Wagenberg ,
H. M. Snoek ,
J. B. van der Fels ,
C. M. C. van der Peet-Schwering ,
H. M. Vermeer  and
L. Heres
C. P. A. van Wagenberg*
Affiliation:
LEI Wageningen UR, PO Box 29703, 2502 LS, Den Haag, The Netherlands
H. M. Snoek
Affiliation:
LEI Wageningen UR, PO Box 29703, 2502 LS, Den Haag, The Netherlands
J. B. van der Fels
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB, Lelystad, The Netherlands
C. M. C. van der Peet-Schwering
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB, Lelystad, The Netherlands
H. M. Vermeer
Affiliation:
Wageningen UR Livestock Research, PO Box 65, 8200 AB, Lelystad, The Netherlands
L. Heres
Affiliation:
VION Food Group, Noord Brabantlaan 303-307, 5657 GB, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
*
†E-mail: coen.vanwagenberg@wur.nl
Get access

Abstract

Pig farms in the Netherlands producing boars have different levels of boar taint prevalence, as assessed by sensory evaluation with the human nose at the slaughter line. With a questionnaire to 152 Dutch pig producers (response rate 59%), farm and management characteristics were identified that are potentially associated with farm-level boar taint prevalence. Lower farm-level boar taint prevalence was associated with a smaller group size, a smaller pen surface per boar, newer housing equipment, not practicing restricted feeding in the last period before delivery, a longer fasting period before slaughter, a higher stocking weight and a lower fraction of boars from purebred dam line sows or from Pietrain terminal boars. These characteristics can be used to develop farm-level intervention strategies to control boar taint. More research effort is needed to establish causal relationships.

Keywords

entire male pigsboar taintfarm characteristics
Type
Behaviour, welfare and health
Information
animal , Volume 7 , Issue 11 , November 2013 , pp. 1841 - 1848
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2013 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allen, P, Joseph, R, Lynch, B 2001. Reducing the incidence of boar taint in Irish pigs. Final Report Project Armis No. 4404, The National Food Centre Teagasc, Dublin 15, Ireland.Google Scholar
Aluwé, M, Millet, S, Bekaert, KM, Tuyttens, FAM, Vanhaecke, L, De Smet, S, De Brabander, DL 2011. Influence of breed and slaughter weight on boar taint prevalence in entire male pigs. Animal 5, 1283–1289.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andersson, K, Schaub, A, Andersson, K, Lundstrijm, K, Thomke, S, Hansson, I 1997. The effects of feedings system, lysine level and gilt contact on performance, skatole levels and economy of entire male pigs. Livestock Production Science 51, 131–140.Google Scholar
Bikker, AM, Beldman, ACG, Van den Berkmortel, NWTH 2010. Houden van beren; Praktijkervaringen en cijfers De Hoeve. Report 2010-035, LEI, part of Wageningen UR, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Bonneau, M 1982. Compounds responsible for boar taint, with special emphasis on androstenone: a review. Livestock Production Science 9, 687–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EFSA 2005. The welfare of weaners and rearing pigs: effects of space allowances and floor types. EFSA Journal 268, 1–19.Google Scholar
EFSA 2007. Animal health and welfare in fattening pigs in relation to housing and husbandry. EFSA Journal 564, 1–14.Google Scholar
European Commission 2010. European Declaration on alternatives to surgical castration of pigs. Directorate General Health and Consumers, European Commission, Brussels. Retreived December 21, 2012, from http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/farm/initiatives_en.htm.Google Scholar
Fredriksen, B, Font i Furnols, M, Lundström, K, Migdal, W, Prunier, A, Tuyttens, FAM, Bonneau, M 2009. Practice on castration of piglets in Europe. Animal 3, 1480–1487.Google Scholar
Giersing, M, Lundström, K, Andersson, A 2000. Social effects and boar taint: significance for production of slaughter boars. Journal of Animal Science 78, 296–305.Google Scholar
Hansen, LL, Larsen, AE, Hansen-Møller, J 1995. Influence of keeping pigs heavily fouled with faeces and urine on skatole and indole concentration (boar taint) in subcutaneous fat. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A - Animal Science 45, 178–185.Google Scholar
Hansen, LL, Larsen, AE, Jensen, BB, Hansen-Møller, J, Bardon-Gade, P 1994. Influence of stocking rate and faeces deposition in the pen at different temperatures on skatole concentration (boar taint) in subcutaneous fat. Animal Production 59, 99–110.Google Scholar
Hunter, EJ, Jones, TA, Guise, HJ, Penny, RHC, Hoste, S 2001. The relationship between tail biting in pigs, docking procedure and other management practices. The Veterinary Journal 161, 72–79.Google Scholar
Juselius, K 1992. Domestic and foreign effects on prices in an open economy: the case of Denmark. Journal of Policy Modeling 14, 401–428.Google Scholar
Juselius, K 2006. The cointegrated VAR model: methodology and applications, 1st edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
Kjeldsen, N 1993. Practical experience with production and slaughter of entire male pigs. In Measurement and prevention of boar taint in entire male pigs (ed. M Bonneau), pp. 137–144. Institut National de la Recherche Agronornique (INRA), Paris, France.Google Scholar
Lundström, K, Matthews, KR, Haugen, J-E 2009. Pig meat quality from entire males. Animal 3, 1497–1507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mathur, PK, Ten Napel, J, Bloemhof, S, Heres, L, Knol, EF, Mulder, HA 2012. A human nose scoring system for boar taint and its relationship with androstenone and skatole. Meat Science 91, 414–422.Google Scholar
Pedhazur, EJ 1977. Coding subjects in repeated measures designs. Psychological Bulletin 84, 298–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pesaran, MH, Smith, RP 1998. Structural analysis of cointegrating VARs. Journal of Economic Surveys 12, 471–505.Google Scholar
Robic, A, Larzul, C, Bonneau, M 2008. Genetic and metabolic aspects of androstenone and skatole deposition in pig adipose tissue: a review. Genetics Selection Evolution 40, 129–143.Google Scholar
Simonsen, HB 1990. Behaviour and distribution of fattening pigs in the multi-activity pen. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 27, 311–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, AA, Turkkan, JS, Bachrach, CA, Jobe, JB, Kurtzman, HS, Cain, VS 2000. The science of self-report: implications for research and practice, 1st edition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
Van Wagenberg, CPA, van der Fels, B, van der Peet-Schwering, C, Snoek, H, Heres, L 2011. Management and farm characteristics associated with boar taint and aggressive behaviour on Dutch pig farms. Presentation at the Boars Heading for 2018 Conference, 30 November - 2 December 2011, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,.Google Scholar
Vargas, JV, Craig, JV, Hines, RH 1987. Effects of feeding systems on social and feeding behavior and performance of finishing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 65, 463–474.Google Scholar
Wijsman, H 2012. Land- en tuinbouwcijfers 2012. Report 2012-056, LEI Wageningen UR, The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Windig, JJ, Mulder, HA, ten Napel, J, Knol, EF, Mathur, PK, Crump, RE 2012. Genetic parameters for androstenone, skatole, indole, and human nose scores as measures of boar taint and their relationship with finishing traits. Journal of Animal Science 90, 2120–2129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zamaratskaia, G, Babol, J, Andersson, HK, Andersson, K, Lundström, K 2005a. Effect of live weight and dietary supplement of raw potato starch on the levels of skatole, androstenone, testosterone and oestrone sulphate in entire male pigs. Livestock Production Science 93, 235–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zamaratskaia, G, Rydhmer, L, Chen, G, Madej, A, Andersson, HK, Lundström, K 2005b. Boar taint is related to endocrine and anatomical changes at puberty but not to aggressive behaviour in entire male pigs. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 40, 500–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar