Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Jul 16;9(7):449.
doi: 10.3390/ani9070449.

Are Tail and Ear Movements Indicators of Emotions in Tail-Docked Pigs in Response to Environmental Enrichment?

Affiliations

Are Tail and Ear Movements Indicators of Emotions in Tail-Docked Pigs in Response to Environmental Enrichment?

Míriam Marcet-Rius et al. Animals (Basel). .

Abstract

The inclusion of emotional indicators in farm monitoring methods can improve welfare assessments. Studies in controlled conditions have suggested that increased tail movement is an indicator of positive emotions in pigs, while others have proposed that increased ear movements are linked to negative emotions. This study aimed to investigate these indicators in pig farm conditions to analyze their validity and the effect of enrichment on welfare. Thirty-six pigs received one of the following enrichment materials: straw in a rack, wooden logs, or chains. Behavioral observations were performed by focal sampling. The results showed that tail movement duration was significantly higher when pigs exhibited "high use" (three or more pigs in a pen interacting with the enrichment) than when they exhibited "low use" (fewer than three) of enrichment (p = 0.04). A positive correlation was found between tail movement frequency and duration (r = 0.88; p = 0.02). The increase in tail movement could be considered an indicator of positive emotions in pigs when measured with other categories of indicators. Regarding ear movements, no significant difference was found. Future studies should further investigate these indicators thoroughly, as the results could be useful for improving the assessment of emotions in pigs.

Keywords: animal welfare; enrichment material; negative emotions; pig assessment; positive emotions.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Distribution of different types of enrichment material.

References

    1. Mellor D. Animal emotions, behaviour and the promotion of positive welfare states. N. Z. Vet. J. 2012;60:1–8. doi: 10.1080/00480169.2011.619047. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Boissy A., Lee C. How assessing relationships between emotions and cognition can improve farm animal welfare. Rev. Sci. Tech. OIE. 2014;33:103–110. doi: 10.20506/rst.33.1.2260. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Boissy A., Manteuffel G., Jensen M.B., Moe R.O., Spruijt B., Keeling L.J., Winckler C., Forkman B., Dimitrov I., Langbein J., et al. Assessment of positive emotions in animals to improve their welfare. Physiol. Behav. 2007;92:375–397. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.02.003. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Welfare Quality . Welfare Quality® Assessment Protocol for Pigs. Volume 122 Welfare Quality; Cardiff, UK: 2009.
    1. Wemelsfelder F., Millard F., De Rosa G., Napolitano F. Qualitative behaviour assessment. Assessment of animal welfare measures for layers and broilers. Welf. Qual. Rep. 2009;9:113–119.

LinkOut - more resources