Ramped piglet housing in the nursery

Increasing speed of loading at transportation to market

By Mary L. Kasakamu, Jennifer M. Young, Ryan S. Samuel, Sarah A. Wagner and Christopher J. ByrdTransporting pigs to market is an essential component of swine production. However, the entire transport process, including pig loading onto the semi-trailer and unloading at the processing plant, presents animal welfare challenges such as increased stress and likelihood of injury (Johnson et al., 2013). In turn, potential losses due to the transport process can have a major effect on production economics (Ritter et al., 2020). Prior to transportation at marketing, pigs often have little or no exposure to the ramps they are required to ascend to the semi-trailer. This makes the trailer loading process difficult for the animals and their handlers. Therefore, strategies are needed to reduce the novelty of the loading ramp and increase the ease of pig loading at market weight.The objective of this study was to determine whether exposing pigs to a ramp in their pens during the nursery period improves the speed of trailer loading at time of marketing. A similar study conducted at North Dakota State University with 72 pigs found that the presence of a large ramp (10.5 ft. long x 1.3 ft. wide) leading to an elevated platform (3.0 x 1.6 ft.) with a feeder within the nursery pen reduced the time required for market weight pigs to load onto the trailer by approximately 52% (Novak et al., 2020). This current study builds upon those results by reducing the length of the ramp within the pen, removing the feeder from the ramp platform, and conducting the study in a commercial-style facility (South Dakota State University’s wean-to-finish facility).A total of 560 weaned pigs, approximately 17 to 21 days of age, were penned in groups of 25-28 pigs per pen and assigned to either ramped housing (RAMP; n = 10 pens; Fig. 1) or standard housing (CONTROL; n = 10 pens; Fig. 1). The ramps (Ramp: 5.6 ft. long x 1.7 ft. wide, 20° incline; Platform: 3.8 x 5.3 ft.; Fig. 1) remained in the RAMP pens for six weeks after pig placement before being removed. Pigs in the CONTROL treatment did not have access to a ramp for the entire wean-to-finish period. Following ramp removal, all pigs, regardless of treatment, were cared for under standard commercial conditions until they reached market weight at approximately 5 months of age.At marketing, pigs were loaded onto a standard, pot-belly semi-truck trailer in groups of four pen mates (i.e. all pigs in each group were from the same pen and the same treatment). This portion of the study was carried out over six loading days. Each group of four pigs was required to ascend a load-out ramp (19.9 ft. long; 11.1° incline angle) to reach the trailer. The experimental personnel in charge of handling the groups was able to use a standard plastic sorting board and their voice to encourage the pigs to ascend the ramp. A second experimental personnel collected the total time it took for each group to reach the trailer from the bottom of the ramp. While loading, if the handler could not get a pig to move for a period of 60 s, an electric prod was applied by the second experimental personnel according to PQA Plus guidelines. This ensured pig movement up the ramp to reduce the likelihood of pigs turning around and causing injury to the remaining pigs in the group or handler.During the loading period, our results show that RAMP pigs required a shorter period of time to navigate the ramp leading to the semi-truck compared to CONTROL pigs (69.1 ± 5.4 vs. 95.1 ± 5.3 s; Fig. 2; P = 0.002). If extrapolated to a full trailer load (170 pigs) of RAMP pigs, the loading time saved would be approximately 18 minutes per load. There was no overall difference in electric prod use between treatments (14 RAMP groups vs. 21 CONTROL groups where at least 1 pig required electric prod use; P = 0.16), which indicates that the difference in time to ascend the ramp was not due to a certain treatment receiving a greater number of electric prod applications. There was a loading day effect (Fig. 3; P = 0.004), where, total loading time was greater on loading day 1 compared to loading days 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Fig. 3). Additionally, loading time was greater on loading day 2 compared to loading day 6 (Fig. 3). This result may be due to the handler’s own acclimation to the experimental procedure over time, which may have resulted in more effective animal movement as the experiment went on. There was no interaction between treatment and loading day (P = 0.41).Ongoing analyses from this study will investigate whether the incidence of tripping and turning around on the ramp is reduced for RAMP pigs.Finally, we will investigate whether nursery ramp access affects pig behavior and performance during the nursery period, as well as ease of unloading at the processing plant.References:
Johnson, A. K., L. M. Gesing, M. Ellis, J. J. McGlone, E. Berg, S. M. Lonergan, R. Fitzgerald, L. A. Karriker, A. Ramirez, K. J. Stalder, A. Sapkota, R. Kephart, J. T. Selsby, L. J. Sadler, and M. J. Ritter. 2013. 2011 AND 2012 EARLY CAREERS ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS: Farm and pig factors affecting welfare during the marketing process. Journal of Animal Science. 91:2481–2491. doi:10.2527/jas.2012-6114.Novak, B. L., J. M. Young, D. J. Newman, A. K. Johnson, and S. A. Wagner. 2020. A ramp in nursery housing affects nursery pig behavior and speeds loading of market hogs. Applied Animal Science. 36:574–581. doi:10.15232/aas.2019-01974.Ritter, M. J., C. L. Yoder, C. L. Jones, S. N. Carr, and M. S. Calvo-Lorenzo. 2020. Transport losses in market weight pigs: II. U.S. incidence and economic impact. Translational Animal Science. 4:1103–1112. doi:10.1093/tas/txaa041.

Fig. 1. Pigs in the RAMP treatment (left photo) had access to a ramp and platform for a period of six weeks immediately after pen placement. Ramps were then removed for the remainder of the grow-finish period. Pigs in the CONTROL treatment (right photo) were housed under commercial conditions without access to a ramp and platform for the entire wean-to-finish period.

Fig. 2. The amount of time (LS-means ± SE) taken for pigs (in groups of 4 pen mates) to ascend the load-out ramp to a conventional swine semi-trailer organized by experimental treatment. Pigs in the RAMP treatment had access to a ramp and platform structure within their home pen for 6 weeks during the nursery period while CONTROL pigs were raised under commercial conditions for the entire wean-to-finish period. Different superscripts indicate differences (P = 0.002) between treatments.

Fig. 3. The amount of time (LS-means ± SE) taken for pigs (in groups of 4 pen mates) to ascend the load-out ramp to a conventional swine semi-trailer organized by loading day (1-6). Different superscripts indicate differences (P < 0.05) between loading days.

Kasakamu is a graduate research student, Young is a swine research technician and Byrd is an associate professor, all in the Department of Animal Science, North Dakota State University. Samuel is an assistant professor and Extension swine specialist in the Department of Animal Science, South Dakota State University. Wagner is assistant dean and professor of pharmacology in the School of Veterinary Medicine, Texas Tech University.