Innovations pour améliorer le bien-être des porcs et volailles en élevages à bas-intrants de plein air et biologiques

Geographical location	France
Main geographical location (NUTS3)	Indre-et-Loire
Keywords	Animal husbandry and welfare Farming practice
Main funding source	Horizon 2020 (EU Research & Innovation programme)
Project Identification	Multi-actor project
Project type	Research project
Starting date	2019
End date	2024
Project status	Ongoing
Website	https://www.ppilow.eu/

Title (in English):

Poultry and PIg Low-input and Organic production systems’ Welfare

Objective of the project (native language):

Le projet PPILOW vise à coconstruire, grâce à une approche multiacteurs, des innovations améliorant le bien-être des volailles et porcs élevés en systèmes biologiques et de plein air à bas-intrants. Le projet crée avec les utilisateurs finaux des outils d'auto-évaluation du bien-être, des stratégies innovantes d'élevage améliorant la santé et la robustesse des animaux, favorisant les comportements positifs, évitant la castration des porcelets et l’élimination des poussins mâles de souche ponte. Il fournira des outils de décision et guides de bonnes pratiques suivant le concept Un seul Bien-être contribuant à la normalisation des règles des systèmes biologiques et de plein air dans l'UE.

Objective of the project (in English):

The PPILOW project aims to co-construct through a multiactor approach innovations to improve the welfare of poultry and pigs reared in organic and low-input outdoor production systems. The project co-creates with end-users welfare self-assessment tools, innovative breeding and rearing strategies improving animal welfare, health and robustness, favouring positive behaviours, and avoiding piglet castration and the killing of day-old layer male chicks. A major output of the PPILOW project for end-users will be the provision of decision tools and guidelines for best practices following the One Welfare concept helping the standardisation of organic and outdoor system rules in the European Union.

Description of activities (native language):

PPILOW:
1) dresse un inventaire des pratiques améliorant le bien-être et évalue les attentes des citoyens/consommateurs et professionnels
2) met en place avec les éleveurs des outils d'auto-évaluation du bien-être
3) co-crée et teste expérimentalement des pratiques de production innovantes
4) évalue par des analyses multicritères le potentiel d'application des leviers proposés.
Le projet PPILOW évaluera la contribution des leviers à un nouveau consensus social sur les pratiques d'élevage qui sera reconnu par les régulateurs en Europe. Il proposera une évaluation économique approfondie en productions porcine et avicole des leviers prometteurs et les modèles économiques associés.

Description of activities (in English):

PPILOW:
1) Develops an inventory of welfare-improving practices and assess the citizen/consumer and production chain expectations
2) Builds up shared welfare self-assessment & benchmarking tools for and with farmers.
3) Co-creates and experimentally test innovative and/or bottom-up production practices
4) Evaluates through multi-criteria analyses the potential of proposed levers for application.
The PPILOW project will evaluate the contribution of the levers to a new social consensus on rearing practices to be recognized by regulators in Europe. It will propose a deep economic assessment in pig and poultry productions for promising levers and economically viable business models.

Project coordinator

Contact person:

Anne Collin - INRAE

Address:

147 rue de l'université, 75008 Paris

E-mail:

anne.collin@inrae.fr

Phone:

0033247427929

Partner category:

Researcher

Project partners

Contact person:

Anne Collin - INRAE

Address:

147 rue de l'université, 75008 Paris

E-mail:

anne.collin@inrae.fr

Phone:

0033247427929

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Bas Rodenburg - UU

Address:

Yalelaan 2, 3584 CM, Utrecht, The Netherlands

E-mail:

t.b.rodenburg@uu.nl

Phone:

31302532967

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Sanna Steenfeldt - AU

E-mail:

sanna.steenfeldt@anis.au.dk

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Adrien Guichaoua - ACTA

E-mail:

adrien.guichaoua@acta.asso.fr

Partner category:

SME

Contact person:

Frank Tuyttens - EV ILVO

Address:

ILVO, Flanders Research Institute for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Livestock Husbandry, Scheldeweg 68, 9090 Melle, Belgium

E-mail:

frank.tuyttens@ilvo.vlaanderen.be

Phone:

32 9 272 2605

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Cristina Micheloni - AIAB

E-mail:

c.micheloni@aiab.it

Partner category:

Representative of an NGO

Contact person:

Jarkko Niemi - Luke

Address:

Latokartanonkaari 9, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland

E-mail:

Jarkko.Niemi@Luke.Fi

Phone:

295326392

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Petra Thobe - Thuenen Institute

E-mail:

petra.thobe@thuenen.de

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Riccardo Carelli - EAAP

E-mail:

riccardo@eaap.org

Partner category:

Representative of an NGO

Contact person:

Henry van den Brand - WU

E-mail:

henry.vandenbrand@wur.nl

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Cesare Castellini - UNIPG

E-mail:

cesare.castellini@unipg.it

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Daniel Guémené - Sysaaf

E-mail:

daniel.guemene@inrae.fr

Partner category:

SME

Contact person:

Virginie Decruyenaere - CRAW

E-mail:

v.decruyenaere@cra.wallonie.be

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Grete Brunsgaard - FEXP

E-mail:

grb@fexp.eu

Partner category:

SME

Contact person:

Laura Van Vooren - Bioforum

E-mail:

laura.vanvooren@bioforumvl.be

Partner category:

Representative of an NGO

Contact person:

Keith Walley - HAU

E-mail:

kwalley@harper-adams.ac.uk

Partner category:

Other

Contact person:

Raffaella Ponzio - SlowFood

E-mail:

r.ponzio@slowfood.it

Partner category:

Representative of an NGO

Contact person:

Vanessa Guesdon - Yncrea-HDF

E-mail:

vanessa.guesdon@yncrea.fr

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Katia Grenier - CNRS

E-mail:

grenier@laas.fr

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Vasile Cozma - USAMV CLUJ

Address:

Str. Manastur 3-5, Cluj-Napoca, Romania

E-mail:

cozmavasile.prof@gmail.com

Phone:

00 40742015391

Partner category:

Researcher

Contact person:

Pia Lykke Vanggård - Vanggaard

E-mail:

Vanggaardstald@mail.dk

Partner category:

SME

Contact person:

Stefaan Depraetere - Circular Organics

E-mail:

stefaan.depraetere@circularorganics.com

Partner category:

SME

Contact person:

Anthony Vermue - IT

E-mail:

anthony.vermue@inrae.fr

Partner category:

Other

Practice summary

Practice abstract 1

Short title (in English):

PIGLOW - a welfare self-assessment & benchmarking tool for outdoor and organic pig farms

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

With PIGLOW, a new mobile application was developed by which outdoor and organic pig farmers can assess the welfare of their own animals. The app focuses on animal-based indicators, covering all four Welfare Quality principles of Good Feeding, Good Health, Good Housing and Appropriate Behaviour. During the step-by-step assessment (that takes approximately one hour and requires no internet connection), the app provides useful information and pictures that guide the farmer through the process. After completing the welfare assessment with the app and uploading the answers, farmers can immediately view their results on the PIGLOW website. These results include a (completely anonymous) comparison of his/her own scores for each welfare indicator with the scores of other farmers using the app. When using the app multiple times over a prolonged period, it also shows the change of scores within the farm over time, making it easy to see if a certain score has improved since the previous assessment. For each welfare indicator, the results contain automated feedback, explaining its meaning and importance as well as risk factors that could explain a possible low score. If relevant, this information can be discussed with a veterinarian or other advisors in order to investigate the feasibility of actions to continuously improve animal welfare status. Besides the direct advantages of using the app, pig production systems could also use it as a marketing tool to let the consumer know that they value animal welfare highly. The PIGLOW app is now freely available in three languages (English, French, Dutch) in the Google Play Store and the Apple Store. More European languages will be added in 2021.

Short title (native language):

PIGLOW - een welzijns-zelfscan & benchmarking applicatie voor biologische-en vrije uitloop varkensbedrijven

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

Dankzij de nieuwe mobiele applicatie PIGLOW, kunnen varkenshouders in biologische en vrije uitloop systemen zelf het welzijn van hun dieren monitoren. De app focust op diergebonden welzijnsindicatoren, binnen de vier principes van Goede Voeding, Goede Gezondheid, Goede Huisvesting en Normaal Gedrag. Gedurende de stapsgewijze evaluatie (duurt ongeveer een uur en vereist geen internetconnectie), voorziet de app toelichtingen (informatie en foto's), dewelke de veehouders kunnen helpen bij het invullen van de vragen. Na het voltooien van de zelfscan en het uploaden van de antwoorden, kunnen veehouders onmiddellijk hun resultaten raadplegen op de PIGLOW website. Hieronder valt ook een (volledig anonieme) vergelijking van de behaalde scores voor de welzijnsindicatoren met de resultaten van andere veehouders. Door de app meermaals te gebruiken over een langere periode, kan de veehouder evalueren hoe de welzijnsscores veranderen doorheen de tijd. De resultaten voorzien geautomatiseerde feedback waarin de betekenis en het belang van de verschillende welzijnsindicatoren aan bod komen, alsook bepaalde risicofactoren die een eventuele lage score zouden kunnen verklaren. Deze informatie kan dan, indien nodig, besproken worden met een dierenarts of andere adviseur om zo te kijken hoe het welzijn van de dieren kan blijven verbeteren. Naast de directe voordelen van het gebruik van de app, kan deze ook gebruikt worden als marketing instrument voor de varkensindustrie, om de consument te laten weten dat dierenwelzijn hoog in het vaandel gedragen wordt. De PIGLOW app is gratis beschikbaar in drie talen (Engels, Frans, Nederlands) in de Google Play Store en de Apple Store. In 2021 zullen er nog extra Europese talen aan de app toegevoegd worden.

Practice abstract 2

Short title (in English):

EBENE® - a welfare self-assessment tool for poultry farms

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

The mobile application EBENE® was refined and now enables outdoor and organic poultry farmers to assess the welfare of their own animals (broilers, hens). The app focuses on animal-based indicators, covering all four Welfare Quality principles of Good Feeding, Good Health, Good Housing and Appropriate Behaviour. During the step-by-step assessment (that takes approximately one hour and requires no internet connection), the app provides useful information and pictures that guide the farmer through the process. After completing the welfare assessment with the app and uploading the answers, farmers can immediately view their results on the app through a radar chart. When using the app multiple times, all the results are visible in the app and allow the farmers to see if a certain score has improved since the previous assessment. For each welfare indicator, the results contain automated feedback, explaining risk factors that could explain a possible low score. If relevant, this information can be discussed with a veterinarian or other advisors in order to investigate the feasibility of actions to continuously improve animal welfare status. Besides the direct advantages of using the app, the poultry sector could also use it as a marketing tool to let the consumer know that they value animal welfare highly. The EBENE® app is freely available in three languages (English, French, Dutch) in the Google Play Store and the Apple Store. More European languages will be added in 2021.

Short title (native language):

EBENE® – une application pour évaluer soi-même le bien-être des volailles

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

L'application EBENE® a été perfectionnée et permet désormais aux éleveurs de volailles en plein-air et biologiques d'évaluer le bien-être de leurs propres animaux (poulets de chair, poules). L'application se focalise sur des indicateurs centrés sur l’animal, en lien avec les quatre principes du bien-être : bonne alimentation, bonne santé, bon environnement et comportement approprié. Au cours d’une évaluation (qui dure environ une heure et ne nécessite pas de connexion internet), des écrans d’aide (textes, photos) permettent de guider l'éleveur tout au long de l’évaluation. A l’issue d’une évaluation, les résultats sont affichés immédiatement sur l’application sous la forme d’un radar. Si plusieurs évaluations sont réalisées avec un même compte, tous les résultats sont sauvegardés dans l’application et accessibles facilement pour permettre aux éleveurs de visualiser les éventuels progrès réalisés au fil des évaluations. Pour chaque indicateur, des leviers d’amélioraton sont proposés à l’issue d’une évaluation, pour aider l’éleveur à améliorer les scores les plus faibles. Ces informations constituent une base de discussion avec le vétérinaire ou d’autres conseillers afin d’affiner un plan de progrès adapté avec l’éleveur pour améliorer le niveau de bien-être des volailles. L’utilisation de l’application montre l’intérêt des éleveurs à progresser et à rendre compte de la prise en compte du bien-être de leurs animaux auprès des consommateurs. L'application EBENE® est disponible gratuitement en trois langues (anglais, français, néerlandais) sur le Google Play Store et l'Apple Store. D'autres langues européennes seront ajoutées en 2021.

Practice abstract 3

Short title (in English):

Economic aspects of range and outdoor run management in outdoor and organic broiler and pig production systems

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

Based on feedback obtained from national practitioners, the PPILOW project has identified a set of welfare-improving practices in low-input outdoor and organic broiler and pig production systems. An in-depth qualitative and quantitative analysis was carried out to shortlist economically viable ways to improve animal welfare, health and performance in these systems.
Improvements in the quality and usage of outdoor run enable the expression of natural behaviors and improvements in several welfare and performance indicators. Measures of improving outdoor run quality, such as enriching range with vegetation and grazing management and crop rotation, mobile houses and measures reducing the risk of parasitism and diseases, are recommended for both broilers and pigs.
Providing proper fences and guard animals help to limit contacts with predators and other wildlife that may transmit pathogens. The costs of labor, land and materials needed to enhance the outdoor run quality, include the costs of trees, plants, fences, shelters, shall be kept under control as they can increase the costs of production substantially.
Despite being labour-intensive, the relatively high labour costs of mobile housing systems might be compensated by lower veterinary costs and higher revenues per kilogram of poultry meat.
In outdoor paddocks and straw yards, pigs have less adventitious bursitis, injuries, stomach ulceration, mortality and morbidity and lung damage compared to slatted pens. Costs incurred with the implementation of such practices can be compensated by lower mortality and infections, or by market revenues and product branding in some cases.

Short title (native language):

Wirtschaftliche Aspekte der Auslauf- und Freilandhaltung in der Freiland- und Bio-Masthähnchen- und Schweineproduktion

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

Auf Basis von Rückmeldungen aus der Praxis hat das PPILOW-Projekt eine Reihe von Praktiken zur Verbesserung des Tierschutzes in der Low-Input Freiland- und Bio-Haltung von Masthähnchen und Schweinen ermittelt. In einer qualitativen und quantitativen Analyse wurden wirtschaftlich tragfähige Möglichkeiten zur Verbesserung des Tierschutzes, der Gesundheit und der Leistung in diesen Systemen analysiert.
Die Verbesserung der Auslaufqualität und -nutzung ermöglicht das Ausleben natürlicher Verhaltensweisen und die Verbesserung verschiedener Tierschutz- und Leistungsindikatoren. Maßnahmen wie die Anreicherung des Auslaufs mit Vegetation, Weidemanagement und Fruchtfolge, mobile Ställe sowie Maßnahmen zur Reduktion von Parasitenbefall und Krankheiten, werden sowohl für Masthähnchen als auch für Schweine empfohlen.
Geeignete Zäune und Schutztiere tragen dazu bei, den Kontakt mit Raubtieren und anderen Wildtieren, die Krankheitserreger übertragen können, zu begrenzen. Die Kosten für Arbeit, Land und Materialien zur Verbesserung der Auslaufqualität, wie Bäume, Pflanzen, Zäune und Unterstände, müssen beachtet werden, da sie die Produktionskosten erheblich erhöhen können.
Obwohl sie arbeitsintensiv sind, können die relativ hohen Arbeitskosten mobiler Haltungssysteme durch niedrigere Tierarztkosten und höhere Einnahmen €/kg Geflügelfleisch ausgeglichen werden.
In Auslauf- und Strohbuchten haben Schweine im Vergleich zu Spaltenbuchten weniger Schleimbeutelentzündungen, Verletzungen, Magengeschwüre und Lungenschäden. Die zusätzlichen Kosten können durch eine geringere Sterblichkeit und weniger Infektionen oder in einigen Fällen durch Markteinnahmen und Produktbranding ausgeglichen werden.

Practice abstract 4

Short title (in English):

Ensuring balanced diet is one of key factors to successful organic and low-input poultry

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

PPILOW focus group discussions organized with supply side specialists in Finland, France, Italy, Romania and United Kingdom indicated several challenges which require specific attention in organic and low-input poultry farming.
One of the main challenges is to provide the birds with a balanced diet. The relative feed intake in organic production systems is often high in comparison to other systems. Feeding has a substantial impact on the cost of production of organic poultry as organic feed is more expensive than conventional feed. Ensuring that essential amino acids and minerals are available in the diet is challenging in fully organic feed. New regulations which require feed to be 100% organic would prove to be problematical for producers to provide a balanced, high quality organic diet, and thus require careful planning of the diet and sourcing of appropriate feed materials.
Cannibalism and feather-pecking usually occur as a result of birds experiencing stress. A balanced diet is one of the main factors, although not the only factor, that helps to alleviate feather pecking. The addition of amino acids could improve the balance of feed ration, but it is not allowed in organic production. Sodium chloride added to the drinking water can also have a calming effect on the birds. It is also essential to ensure that there are enough feed and water access points for birds. Controlling these factors helps to prevent feather pecking.

Short title (native language):

Tasapainoisen rehustuksen varmistaminen on yksi luomu- ja ulkosiipikarjatuotannon onnistumisen edellytyksistä

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

PPILOW-hankkeen Suomessa, Ranskassa, Italiassa, Romaniassa ja Yhdistyneessä kuningaskunnassa asiantuntijoiden kanssa järjestämien fokusryhmäkeskusteluissa tunnistettiin useita haasteita, joihin on kiinnitettävä huomiota siipikarjan luomu- ja ulkokasvatuksessa.
Yksi keskeisimmistä haasteista on tarjota linnuille tasapainoinen rehustus. Rehun syönti on luonnonmukaisessa tuotannossa usein suuri verrattuna muihin tuotantotapoihin. Ruokinta vaikuttaa merkittävästi luomusiipikarjan tuotantokustannuksiin, koska luonnonmukainen rehu on kalliimpaa kuin tavanomainen rehu. On haastavaa varmistaa, että kokonaan luonnonmukaisessa rehussa on riittävästi linnuille välttämättömiä animohappoja ja kivennäisiä. Uudet säädökset, joiden mukaan rehun on oltava 100 % luonnonmukaista, osoittautuisivat ongelmallisiksi tuottajille. Tasapainoisen ja laadukkaan luomurehun, mikä edellyttää ruokavalion huolellista suunnittelua ja asianmukaisten rehuaineiden hankintaa.
Kannibalismi ja höyhenpeitteen nokkiminen tapahtuvat usein lintujen kokeman stressin seurauksena. Tasapainoinen rehu on yksi tärkeimmistä tekijöistä, vaikkakaan ei ainoa tekijä, joka auttaa vähentämään höyhenpeitteen nokkimista. Aminohappojen lisääminen rehuun voisi parantaa rehuannoksen tasapainoa, mutta se ei ole sallittua luonnonmukaisessa tuotannossa. Juomaveteen lisätyllä natriumkloridilla voi olla myös rauhoittava vaikutus lintuihin. On myös tärkeää varmistaa, että linnuille on riittävästi rehu- ja juomapisteitä. Näiden tekijöiden hallinta auttaa vähentämään höyhenpeitteen nokkimista.

Practice abstract 5

Short title (in English):

Stakeholders’ views regarding the key challenges in organic and low-input pig farming

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

PPILOW focus group discussions indicated several challenges which require specific attention in organic and low-input pig production.
In pig meat production, the choice of design and location of site was identified as instrumental to the success of the organic or low-input production. Appropriate levels of access to water and feed stations must be provided, along with sufficient space to enable the animals to exhibit natural behaviors. Sufficient space needs to be given upon farrowing to protect the piglets and prevent crushing in both indoor and outdoor production systems.
In outdoor production, other factors such as soil type, drainage, accessibility, shelter design and pasture management were regarded as important factors. Range areas need to be constantly monitored and re-assessed. Strict pasture management is required to maintain the ground conditions and accessibility.

Accessibility of the outdoor areas can be a particular problem, especially during winter months. It was perceived that access problems are alleviated if an outdoor area yard is provided rather than pasture, however, this would not enable the pigs’ natural instinct to root.

Castration of male pigs was regarded as an important factor irrespective of production system and further research is required to provide a reliable alternative to surgical castration. Some of the identified benefits achieved by castrating males are; less aggressiveness, fighting and mounting of other pigs and it reducing the incidence of boar taint to the meat which can seriously affect the marketability. Surgical castration without an anaesthetic is not allowed in all countries, which leads to contrasting perceptions.

Short title (native language):

Sidosryhmien näkemykset sikojen luomu- ja ulkokasvatuksen haasteista

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

PPILOW-hankkeen järjestämissä fokusryhmäkeskusteluissa tunnistettiin useita haasteita, joihin on kiinnitettävä huomiota siipikarjan luomu- ja ulkokasvatuksessa.
Sianlihan tuotannossa, sikalan suunnittelun ja sijaintipaikan valinnan todettiin vaikuttavan luomu- ja ulkotuotannon onnistumiseen. Sikojen pääsy vesi- ja ruokintapisteille on varmistettava ja sioilla on oltava riittävästi tilaa, jotta ne voivat toteuttaa luontaista käyttäytymistään. Porsivalle emakolle on annettava riittävästi tilaa porsaiden suojaamiseksi ja emän alle jäämisen estämiseksi.
Ulkotuotannossa tärkeinä tekijöinä pidettiin mm. ulkoalueen salaojitusta, maalajia, esteettömyyttä, tuotantotilan suunnittelua ja laitumen hoitoa. Laidunalueita on seurattava ja hoidettava jatkuvasti. Laitumen kunnosta ja sikojen pääsystä laitumelle on huolehdittava.
Ulkoaluelle pääsy voi olla erityinen ongelma etenkin talvikuukausina. Ongelmia voidaan vähentää, jos ulkoalueena on laitumen sijasta jaloittelutarha. Tämä ei kuitenkaan mahdollistaisi kunnolla sikojen luontaisen tonkimiskäyttäytymisen toteutumista.
Urossikojen kastraatiota pidettiin tärkeänä tekijänä tuotantojärjestelmästä riippumatta, ja lisätutkimuksia tarvitaan luotettavan vaihtoehdon aikaansaamiseksi kirurgiselle kastraatiolle. Kastraatiolla kuitenkin saavutetaan hyötyjä, kuten sikojen vähentynyt aggressiivisuus, tappeluiden ja toisten sikojen koskettelun väheneminen, ja karjunhajun riskin pieneminen lihassa, joka vaikuttaa sianlihan markkinointiin. Kirurginen kastraatio ilman anestesiaa ei ole sallittu kaikissa maissa, mikä johtaa eroihin eri maissa vallitsevissa käsityksissä.

Practice abstract 6

Short title (in English):

Perceived usefulness and feasibility of measures to enhance animal welfare in organic and outdoor-reared pigs and poultry

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

Farmers and other supply chain experts may perceive measures to enhance animal welfare in low-input outdoor and organic pig and poultry production beneficial but unapplicable. PPILOW survey aimed at identifying such measures to see, how the adoption of beneficial measures could be promoted.
In pigs, the use of mobile shelters to enhance pasture use and health and well-being of outdoor-bred pigs and the use of using special pens to maximize piglet viability and health with loose-housed sows were considered substantially more frequently as beneficial than applicable.
In poultry, several measures were considered substantially more often as beneficial than applicable. In laying hens these measures included feeding that supports natural behaviours (e.g. grains, insects or vegetables for pecking), restricting maximum number of birds per flock to enhance bird welfare and reduce disease risk, provision of dustbathing areas and efficient control of temperature, humidity and air quality in the house. In broilers, these measures included the use of mobile housing, provision of trees, bushes and other natural elements and hides on a pasture, and adjusting nutrition to ensure animal health and growth.
As these measures were considered beneficial by the great majority of practitioners, the most common reasons for inapplicability were related to the costs of their adoption and to practical challenges of adoption. Practitioners are recommended to consider alternative ways of implementing beneficial measures if they are considered inapplicable in their standard form.

Short title (native language):

Eläinten hyvinvointia parantavien toimenpiteiden hyödyllisyys ja toteutettavuus sikojen ja siipikarjan luomu- ja ulkokasvatuksessa

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

Viljelijät ja muut tuotantoketjun asiantuntijat voivat pitää eläinten hyvinvointia parantavia toimenpiteitä samalla sekä hyödyllisinä että toteuttamiskelvottomina. PPILOW-tutkimuksen tarkoituksena oli tunnistaa, millaisiksi eri toimenpiteet koetaan.
Siirreltävillä eläinsuojilla voidaan tehostaa laitumen käyttöä sekä lisätä ulkona kasvatettujen sikojen terveyttä ja hyvinvointia. Oikein suunnitelluilla emakoiden porsimiskarsinoilla puolestaan voidaan lisätä porsaiden selviytymismahdollisuuksia ja terveyttä. Sikatuotannossa näitä toimenpiteitä pidettiin huomattavasti useammin hyödyllisenä kuin käyttökelpoisina.
Siipikarjatuotannossa moni toimenpide koettiin useammin hyödyllisenä kuin käyttökelpoisena. Kananmunatuotannossa näitä olivat mm. lintujen luontaista käyttäytymistä tukeva ruokinta (esim. jyvät, hyönteiset tai kasvikset), lintujen enimmäismäärän rajoittaminen niiden hyvinvoinnin parantamiseksi ja tautiriskin vähentämiseksi, hiekkakylpypaikan tarjoaminen ja lämpötilan, kosteuden ja ilmanvaihdon tehokas hallinta kanalassa. Broilereilla näihin toimenpiteisiin sisältyivät siirrettävien eläinsuojien käyttö, puiden, pensaiden ja muiden luonnonelementtien tuominen laitumelle sekä ruokinnan säätäminen lintujen terveyden ja kasvun varmistamiseksi.
Suurin osa toimijoista piti näitä toimenpiteitä hyödyllisinä. Yleisimmät syyt niiden käyttöönotosta luopumiseen olivat käyttöönoton kustannukset ja käytännön haasteisiin. Tuottajien olisi suositeltavaa harkita vaihtoehtoisia tapoja ottaa käyttöön toimenpiteitä, jotka ovat koetaan hyödyllisiksi, mutta joita pidetään käytännössä vaikeina toteuttaa.

Practice abstract 7

Short title (in English):

Tools for data collection and criteria for multicriteria assessment according to the OneWelfare concept

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

The PPILOW project adopts the One Welfare concept in order to assess different rearing strategies tested both in experimental facilities and commercial farms. The ‘One Welfare’ concept recognizes the interconnections between animal welfare, human wellbeing and environment (including biodiversity). Although multiple welfare assessment methods exist, a ‘One Welfare’ assessment tool - for evaluating the progress gained for animals and humans but also for broadening the impact-assessment on all three pillars of sustainability (environmental, social and economic) - has not yet been developed. PPILOW aims to fill this gap by developing specific tools for data collection and by identifying useful criteria to make the concept of One Welfare measurable and more concrete. The tools consist of four widespread sheets, one for each production type considered in the PPILOW project (broilers; laying hens; pigs and sows), which include economic, social, environmental and animal welfare variables. The data collection will enable the computation of the different criteria of the One Welfare Assessment Framework as identified with the National Practitioner Group using a participatory approach.

Short title (native language):

Strumenti per la raccolta dei dati e criteri per la valutazione multicriteriale secondo il concetto OneWelfare.

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

Il progetto PPILOW adotta il concetto di One Welfare per valutare le diverse strategie di allevamento testate sia nelle strutture sperimentali che negli allevamenti reali. Il concetto di "One Welfare" riconosce le interconnessioni tra benessere animale, benessere umano e ambiente (includendo la biodiversità). Sebbene esistano diversi metodi di valutazione del benessere, non è stato ancora sviluppato uno strumento di valutazione in grado di utilizzare il concetto di "One Welfare" per valutare i progressi compiuti per gli animali e per l'uomo, ma anche per includere nella valutazione altri impatti relativi ai tre pilastri della sostenibilità (ambientale, sociale ed economica ). Il progetto PPILOW vuole colmare questa lacuna sviluppando specifici strumenti per la raccolta dei dati e individuando i criteri utili a rendere misurabile e più concreto il concetto di “One Welfare”. Gli strumenti sono quattro schede diffuse, una per ciascuna tipologia produttiva coinvolta nel progetto PPILOW (polli da carne; galline ovaiole; maiali e scrofe), e comprendenti variabili economiche, sociali, ambientali e di benessere animale. La raccolta dei dati consentirà di calcolare i diversi criteri componenti il One Welfare Assessment Framework, individuati grazie ai Gruppi Nazionali di Esperti (National Practitioner Groups) utilizzando un approccio partecipativo.

Practice abstract 8

Short title (in English):

Methodology and process facilitating the National Practitioner Groups during Covid-19

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

In PPILOW project participatory approach is crucial to ensure that project outcomes are broadly supported and respond to the needs of society. ‘National Practitioner Groups’ (NPGs) are organized, consisting of broad range of actors, representing the whole value chain, from farmers to retailers. In the original project frequent live meetings were planned. However, they were limited by Covid-19 breakout. NPG facilitators had to be creative and flexible in order to perpetuate the functionality of the NPG.
Involving actors and engage them online was particularly challenging. In particular, it was difficult to create online a collaborative group, without leaving any space for informal interaction, crucial when forming new groups. Especially farmers from marginal areas had a lower interest to participate. Additionally, during these online meetings more intervention from the facilitators was needed to ensure that all actors participate in the debate.
Choosing an easy platform is important for guaranteeing meeting quality and participation.
Otherwise, online meetings were often more accessible, as participation did not require transport. Methods for making online meetings more interactive are: 1 the use of polls or other voting systems, as this requires everybody to participate; 2. the chat function helps to involve actors who are not comfortable to take the word in the discussion; 3. the use of breakout rooms can help interaction in smaller groups.
We found that following these tips, while encouraging phone calls with actors, has led to good results.
In conclusion, it is important for next years and future projects to rethink participatory methodologies as a whole, by evaluating a combination of ONLINE and IN PERSON meeting.

Short title (native language):

Metodologia e processo di facilitazione dei gruppi nazionali di professionisti, durante l'emergenza Covid 19

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

Il progetto PPILOW è basato sull'approccio partecipativo. Dei "National Practitioner Groups" (NPG), gruppi di professionisti nazionali, sono stati costituiti coinvolgendo gli attori dell'intera filiera: dagli agricoltori ai rivenditori. Nel progetto originario i gruppi si sarebbero dovuti incontrare dal vivo, tuttavia l'epidemia di Covid-19 ha cambiato gli schemi. I facilitatori hanno quindi dovuto essere creativi per perpetuare la funzionalità degli NPG.
Coinvolgere gli attori online e mantenerli interessati al progetto è stato particolarmente impegnativo. La sfida maggiore è stata creare online un gruppo collaborativo in assenza di spazio per l'interazione informale, fondamentale nella creazione di nuovi gruppi. Soprattutto gli agricoltori di aree marginali hanno dimostrato minore interesse. Inoltre, i facilitatori hanno dovuto intervenire di più per garantire la partecipazione di tutti.
Scegliere una piattaforma facile da usare è importante per garantire la qualità e la partecipazione.
Nonostante ciò, le riunioni online hanno permesso di avere un pubblico più ampio, evitando il viaggio.
Gli strumenti utili negli incontri online sono: 1 i sondaggi o altri sistemi di voto, che stimolano la partecipazione di tutti; 2. l'uso della chat: per gli attori che non si sentono a proprio agio nel prendere la parola nella discussione ; 3. l'uso di breakoutroom per favorire l'interazione in gruppi più piccoli.
Seguendo questi suggerimenti e incoraggiando la partecipazione con telefonate singole si può arrivare a buoni risultati.
In conclusione, per i prossimi anni e i progetti futuri, è importante ripensare alle metodologie partecipative, probabilmente una combinazione di incontri online e dal vivo è la miglior soluzione.

Practice abstract 9

Short title (in English):

Dual-purpose genotypes in organic egg production and effect on egg quality

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

Laying hens of different genotypes have been selected for generations for high yield and egg quality.This has resulted in efficient feed conversion and low body weight; whereby they are not suitable for meat production. Male chickens of egg-laying genotypes are therefore killed as day old. Due to the ethical dilemma and for better resource utilization, there is now more focus on other genotypes, the dual-purpose breeds, in order to be able to use the male chickens for meat production. The purpose of the study was to evaluate potential dual-purpose genotypes for the quality of their eggs compared to an efficient layer genotype. Two dual-purpose genotypes with divergent characteristics were evaluated: genotype A represented an experimental crossbreed based on a broiler type male and an egg layer female, and genotype C was a crossbreed of a layer type. These were compared to a rustic genotype B and a control genotype D, which was an egg layer. Eggs were collected from 21-54 weeks of age and a total of 990 eggs were analyzed. Parameters for egg weight, proportions of shell, yolk and albumen, along with quality parameters were measured. The layer genotype D produced the smallest eggs with the lowest frequency of blood and meat stains, compared to eggs from the two dual-purpose genotypes. The shell quality was best for layer genotype D. However, genotype A laid eggs of comparable shell quality, dry matter content in the albumen and yolk weight, and with the darkest and most reddish-yellow yolk. Genotype C, the second dual-purpose genotype, as well as the rustic genotype B, produced eggs of low-medium quality. In conclusion, genotype A can serve as a dual-purpose genotype from an egg quality perspective and male chickens can be used for sustainable meat production.

Short title (native language):

Genotyper med dobbelt formål - dual purpose - i økologisk ægproduktion og effekt på ægkvalitet

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

Æglæggende høner af forskellige genotyper er igennem generationer selekteret for høj ægydelse og ægkvalitet. Dette har resulteret i en effektiv foderudnyttelse og lav kropsvægt; hvorved de ikke egner sig til kødproduktion. Hanekyllinger af æglægger racer bliver derfor aflivet som daggamle. På grund af det etiske dilemma og for en bedre ressourceudnyttelse er der nu et større fokus på andre genotyper, de såkaldte to-formåls racer (dual-purpose) for derved at kunne anvende hanekyllingerne til kødproduktion. Formålet med studiet var at evaluere potentielle dual-purpose genotyper for deres ægs kvalitet sammenlignet med en effektiv æglægger genotype. To dual-purpose genotyper med forskellige karakteristika blev evalueret, hvor genotype A var en krydsning mellem en slagtekyllingetype (hane) og en æglæggerhøne, mens genotype C var en hybrid æglæggerrace. Disse blev sammenlignet med en landrace genotype (B) og en kontrol æglæggerhøne genotype (D). Æg blev indsamlet fra 21-54 ugers alderen og i alt blev 990 æg analyseret.Parametre for ægvægt, andele af skal, blomme og æggehvide, sammen med kvalitetsparametre blev målt. Den traditionelle æglæggerhøne producerede de mindste æg med lavest frekvens af blod- og kødpletter, sammenlignet med æg fra de to dual-purpose genotyper. Skalkvaliteten var bedst for æglægger genotypen D. Genotype A lagde dog æg af sammenlignelig skalkvalitet, tørstofindhold i æggehviden og blommevægt, og med den mørkeste og mest rødgule blomme. Genotype C, den anden dual-purpose genotype, samt landracehønen (B) producerede æg af lav-medium kvalitet. Som konklusion kan genotype A tjene som dual-purpose genotype ud fra et ægkvalitets-perspektiv og hanekyllingerne kan anvendes til bæredygtig kødproduktion.

Practice abstract 10

Short title (in English):

Personality traits and exploratory behavior in slow-growing broilers

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

Free-range system provides an outdoor range for broilers in order to allow them to express their natural behaviour. Nevertheless, we observe high variability of outdoor range usage by broilers due to large number of factors. Broiler’s range usage can be individually quantified thanks to a distance index and qualified as his exploratory behaviour. It has been highlighted that range use is stable over time (early and late access), defining exploratory behaviour as a personality trait. On top, foraging behaviour, locomotion and social motivation were linked to the exploratory behaviour. However, this work was only performed on one strain, thus the genetic factor could not be excluded. To precisely define broilers’ exploratory behaviour and its components, we investigated among four different slow growing breeds. We noticed a strong correlation between the exploratory behaviour at 37 to 46 days old and at 56 to 67 days old in all 4 strains. Thus, we confirmed that exploratory behaviour is a personality trait. Regarding, foraging and locomotion, we found no steady links with range use. However, we only observed foraging and locomotion before range access when broilers were 14 to 19 days old and animals’ growth could influence their personality. Indeed, social motivation was noticed at not stable in time since no correlation was detected between the first social motivation test performed at 22 to 25 days old and the second round of test performed at 50 to 53 days old. Our results suggest that in very young animals, when personality traits are probably not yet established, early behavioural patterns may be poor indicators of later range use.

Short title (native language):

Personnalité et comportement exploratoire du poulet de chair

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

Le système d'élevage en plein air fournit un espace extérieur aux poulets de chair afin de leur permettre d'exprimer leur comportement naturel. Néanmoins, il existe une grande variabilité dans l'utilisation de l'espace extérieur, qui peut être quantifiée individuellement grâce à un indice de distance et qualifiée de comportement exploratoire. Il a été mis en évidence que l'utilisation du parcours est stable dans le temps (accès précoce et tardif), définissant le comportement exploratoire comme un trait de personnalité.Cependant, ces travaux n'ont été réalisés que sur une seule souche, ce qui ne permet pas d'exclure le facteur génétique. Pour définir précisément le comportement exploratoire des poulets de chair et ses composantes, nous avons étudié quatre races à croissance lente. Nous avons remarqué une forte corrélation entre le comportement exploratoire à l'âge de 37 à 46 jours et à l'âge de 56 à 67 jours dans les 4 souches, confirmant que le comportement exploratoire est un trait de personnalité. En ce qui concerne la recherche de nourriture et la locomotion, nous n'avons trouvé aucun lien constant avec l'utilisation de l'espace extérieur. Cependant, ces comportements ont été mesurés sur des poulets de chair âgés de 14 à 19 jours et on ne peut exclure une interaction entre stade de développement des animaux et personnalité. En effet, la motivation sociale évolue avec le temps puisqu'aucune corrélation n'a été détectée entre le premier test de motivation sociale réalisé à l'âge de 22 à 25 jours et la deuxième série de tests réalisés à l'âge de 50 à 53 jours. Nos résultats suggèrent donc que les tests de personnalité très précoces ne sont pas des indicateurs fiables du comportement exploratoire des poulets de chair.

Practice abstract 11

Short title (in English):

Artificial digestion to detect T. spiralis larvae in pork

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

Trichinella spiralisis widespread in wild animals and often can be found in domestic pigs. This parasite species is also the most important etiological agent in human trichinosis.
This study aimed to compare the detection capability (for Trichinella spiralis larvae) of artificial digestion to an experimental microfluidic device.
A total of 10 positive domestic pigs for T. spiralis were tested (5g/animal) in both methods. Artificial digestion is the gold standard method for the direct detection of Trichinella larvae in meat samples. The microfluidic method is a new approach regarding the detection of Trichinella spp. This method was done by an experimental device from Hungary (Bionics Biomicrofuidics lab, Budapesta).
Out of the 10 positive samples, only two animals were negative in the microfluidic method, but they were positive (2, 21 larvae) in artificial digestion. Samples with high (500, 100, 75, 68) and medium (58, 20) number of larvae in artificial digestion, had a medium (200, 19, 40, 51) and small (4, 1) larvae count in the microfluidic method. In two cases, the number of larvae found in the microfluidic method was higher (35, 18) than in artificial digestion (32, 12).

Short title (native language):

Digestia artificiala pentru detectarea larvelor de T. Spiralis in carnea de porc

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

Acest studiu și-a propus să compare capacitatea de detectare a larvelelor de Trichinella spiralis prin metoda digestiei artificiale cu metoda microfluidicǎ care utilizeazǎ un dispozitiv microfluidic experimental.
Au fost testaţi, prin ambele metode, un numǎr total de 10 porci domestici pozitivi pentru T. spiralis (5 g/animal).
Digestia artificială este metoda gold standard pentru detectarea directă a larvelor de Trichinella din probele de carne. Metoda microfluidică este o nouă abordare în ceea ce privește detectarea larvelor de Trichinella spp. Această metodă a fost realizată cu ajutorul unui dispozitiv experimental din Ungaria (laboratorul Biomicrofuidics, Budapesta).
Din cele 10 probe pozitive, doar două au fost negative prin metoda microfluidică, dar au fost pozitive (2, 21 larve) la digestia artificială. Probele cu un număr mare (500, 100, 75, 68) și mediu (58, 20) de larve prin digestie artificială, au avut un număr mediu (200, 19, 40, 51) și mic (4, 1) de larve prin metoda microfluidicǎ. În două cazuri, numărul de larve găsite prin metoda microfluidică a fost mai mare (35, 18) decât la digestia artificială (32, 12).
Rezultatele indică faptul că metoda microfluidică poate fi utilizată pentru detectarea directă și numerotarea larvelor de T. spiralis, dar nu este la fel de eficientǎ ca digestia artificială. Sunt necesare mai multe studii și îmbunătățiri pentru această nouă metodă (microfluidică).

Practice abstract 12

Short title (in English):

Anti-Ascaris suum effect of Arthemisia absinthium and Allium sativum

Short summary for practitioners (in English):

Ascaris suum is present in traditionally managed indoor herds and on industrialized farms, especially in old fatteners and sows. Increasing resistance against antihelmintics redirected the research towards alternative, traditional therapies, medicinal plants included.
This study comparatively evaluated the in vitro effects of Allium sativum and Artemisia absinthium L., on inhibition of A. suum egg hatching and larval development.
A. suum eggs were collected from randomly sampled of traditionally maintained swine faeces. The egg suspension was divided in two control and two experimental groups. In the experimental groups the egg suspensions were treated with alcoholic plant extract of various concentrations. A. suum eggs were examined at L1, L2 and L3 stages.
Anti-embryogenic effects on the A. suum eggs were expressed by both plants at all tested concentrations. A. sativum and A. absinthium extracts showed a strong antihelmintic activity; still, in-depth phytochemical studies are required to identify the compounds responsible for the antihelmintic properties of these species.

Short title (native language):

Activitatea anti-Ascaris suum a pelinului si usturoiului

Short summary for practitioners (native language):

Ascaris suum este prezent atât în efectivele de suine crescute în mod traditional cât și în fermele industrializate, în special la grǎsuni și scroafe. Creșterea rezistenței împotriva antihelminticelor a redirecționat cercetarea către terapii alternative, tradiționale, inclusiv plante medicinale.
Acest studiu a evaluat comparativ efectele in vitro ale lui Allium sativum şi Artemisia absinthium L., privind inhibarea eclozǎrii ouălor și dezvoltarii larvelor de A. suum.
Ouăle de A. suum au fost colectate si concentrate din probele de fecale pozitive, provenite de la suine crescute in ferme cu aport redus (mod tradiţional). Suspensia de ouă a fost împărțită în două loturi martor și douǎ loturi experimentale. În cazul loturilor experimentale eșantioane din suspensia de ouă au fost tratate cu extracte alcoolice vegetale de diferite concentrații. Ouǎle de A. suum au fost examinate în stadiile L1, L2 și L3.
Efectele de inhibare a embriogenezei asupra ouălor A. suum au fost exprimate de ambele plante, la toate concentrațiile testate.
Extractele de A. sativum și A. absinthium au arătat o puternică activitate antihelmintică, totuși, sunt necesare studii fitochimice aprofundate pentru a identifica compușii responsabili pentru proprietățile antihelmintice ale acestor specii.

Further details

Description of the context of the project:

The sustainability of animal production depends on economic, environmental and social criteria, implying to consider animal welfare and the well-being of practitioners and consumers. Among farm species, laying hens, followed by broilers and pigs are the species or strains for which rearing conditions in the EU are judged to need the highest improvement in terms of welfare. Consumers show an increasing demand for fresh and processed pig and poultry meat and eggs originating in organic and low-input outdoor production systems. PPILOW project is focusing on non-conventional rearing systems notably characterized by low (including drug) inputs that benefit from a high-quality image and reputation and have considerably spread recently. Nonetheless, there are still several challenging questions unsolved concerning these productions, and especially in relation to animal health and mortality problems. Some health concerns may be specific to organic housing systems, but some others will also be shared with low-input outdoor systems. For example, no use of synthetic additives and only very limited use of veterinary inputs is allowed in organic farming. Morbidity and mortality may also partly be due to a lack of robustness and disease susceptibility of poultry and pig flocks when kept in challenging outdoor conditions or with compromised nutrition. Besides, European citizens expect guarantees about improved animal welfare, safety and quality of poultry and pork meats as well as eggs. Consumers and practitioners of these production systems particularly disapprove of damage to animal integrity (beak trimming, piglet castration...) and of the killing of male layer chicks, practices questioning the ethics of poultry and pig production systems.