Effects of rearing conditions on behavioural and physiological responses of pigs to preslaughter handling and mixing at transport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The physiological and behavioural responses of slaughter pigs reared in either a barren environment or in an enriched environment (larger pens with straw bedding) to preslaughter handling and mixing at transport were studied. Enriched-reared pigs had higher salivary cortisol concentrations in the home pen before and after transport than barren housed pigs, but at the end of the lairage period salivary cortisol concentrations did not differ between enriched- and barren-housed pigs. In pigs reared in a barren environment, salivary cortisol concentrations increased significantly after transport and being in lairage, as compared to home pen salivary cortisol concentrations. In pigs reared in an enriched environment, salivary cortisol concentrations did not significantly change after any stage of preslaughter handling and transport as compared with home pen salivary cortisol concentrations. In the truck, pigs reared in a barren environment tended to spend more time walking, standing and manipulating other pigs than enriched-reared pigs. Moreover, pigs reared in a barren environment tended to spend more time walking and fighting in lairage than enriched-reared pigs. Results showed that rearing conditions may affect the behavioural and physiological responses of pigs to preslaughter handling and mixing at transport. The tendency for increased manipulation of pen mates and fighting, and the significant increases in salivary cortisol in response to mixing at transport and being in lairage in pigs reared in a barren environment indicate that pigs reared in a barren environment are likely to experience more stress during common preslaughter procedures than pigs reared in an enriched environment. Key words: Behaviour, cortisol, housing conditions, pigs, slaughter
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".