Biosecurity is one of the main factors affecting disease occurrence and antimicrobial use, and it is associated with performance in pig production. However, the importance of specific measures could vary depending on the (national) context. The aim of this study was to describe the biosecurity status in a cohort of Irish pig farms, to investigate which of those biosecurity aspects are more relevant by using the Biocheck.UGent™ scoring system, and to study the impact of such aspects on farm performance. External biosecurity score was high compared to most countries due to the characteristics of the Irish pig sector (i.e. purchasing only semen and breeding gilts on farm). The internal biosecurity score was lower and had greater variability among farms than other EU countries. Using multivariable linear regression, the biosecurity practices explained 8, 23, and 16% of variability in piglet mortality, finisher mortality, and average daily gain, respectively. Three clusters of farms were defined based on their biosecurity scores (0 to 100) using principal components and hierarchical clustering analysis. Scores for clusters 1, 2 and 3 were (mean ± SD) 38 ± 7.6, 61 ± 7.0 and 66 ± 9.8 for internal and 73 ± 5.1, 74 ± 5.3 and 86 ± 4.5 for external biosecurity. Cluster 3 had lower piglet mortality (P = 0.022) and higher average daily gain (P = 0.037) when compared to cluster 2. Irish farms follow European tendencies with internal biosecurity posing as the biggest liability. Our results suggest that practices related to the environment and region, feed, water and equipment supply, and the management of the different stages, need to be addressed in lower performing farms to improve productive performance. Further studies on the economic impact of these biosecurity practices including complementary data on herd health, gilt rearing, piglet management, vaccination and feeding strategies are needed.

Disease prevention, including biosecurity, surveillance, and traceability are key aspects to minimize the risk of animal diseases causing harm to society. Diseases for which biosecurity are needed depend on species of interest, e.g., African swine fever, avian influenza, or foot-and-mouth disease. However, several definitions of biosecurity co-exist in the literature. Under the new COST Action “Biosecurity Enhanced Through Training Evaluation and Raising Awareness” (BETTER) CA20103, we launched an initial survey on the agreement with eight existing definitions of (livestock) biosecurity, to rank keywords to consider before attempting a more consolidated definition, and to select the desirable qualities of a definition of livestock biosecurity. Respondents (N = 316) had a male–female gender ratio close to one, were mostly between 25 and 54 years old, and had animal health as the main field of expertise (30% were government officials). The significant most popular biosecurity definition was the one that conceptualized the rules of 5B’s (bio-exclusion, bio-containment, bio-compartmentation, bio-prevention, and bio-preservation). The top two keywords to consider for the consolidation of the biosecurity definition were “prevention” and “measures”. The optimal biosecurity definition needs to be operational and related to animal health but also comprehensible, simple, and related to public health. The survey results highlight the need for the integration of more aspects in the existing definitions of livestock biosecurity (prevention of zoonoses and preservation of the environment and diversity).

This systematic review aimed to assess the link between animal welfare and antimicrobial use (AMU) in captive species (i.e., farm, zoo, companion, and laboratory animals) and its effect. Studies empirically examining the effect of welfare on AMU or vice versa were included. Studies in wild animals were excluded. A total of 6610 studies were retrieved from PubMed^® and Web of Science^® in April 2021. Despite finding several papers superficially invoking the link between welfare and AMU, most did not delve into the characteristics of this link, leading to a small number of publications retained (n = 17). The majority (76%) of the publications were published from 2017–2021. Sixteen were on farm animals, and one publication was on laboratory animals. Most of the studies (82%) looked at the effect of animal welfare on AMU. The body of research retained suggests that, in farm animals, better animal welfare often leads to lower AMU, as was hypothesised, and that, generally, poor welfare is associated with higher AMU. Additionally, AMU restrictions in organic systems may prevent animals from receiving treatment when necessary. Limitations of this study include focusing only on empirical research and excluding non-peer reviewed evidence. More research is needed to corroborate these findings, especially on the link between animal welfare and AMU in other captive species.

Purpose of Review: Ensuring broilers’ meat safety is a priority to policy makers, producers, and consumers. This systematic review aims to update the recent knowledge on pre-harvest interventions to control main foodborne pathogens in broilers and to assess their effectiveness.Recent Findings: A total of 815 studies were retrieved from PubMed® and Web of Science for 13 pathogens. In total, 51 studies regardingCampylobacterspp.,Salmonellaspp., VTEC, ESBL-AmpCEscherichia coli, andClostridium perfringenswere included in this review.Summary: Research mostly focused onSalmonellaspp. andCampylobacterspp. Biosecurity and management interventions had mixed outcomes, while the effectiveness of feed additives, though intensively researched, remains controversial. Research on other pathogens (i.e. ESBL-AmpCE. coli/Salmonella, andToxoplasma gondii) was scarce, with publications focusing on epidemiology and/or on source-attribution studies. This is also true regarding research onListeria monocytogenes,Bacillus cereus,Clostridium botulinum,Clostridium perfringens, andStaphylococcus aureusas these are frequently controlled by post-harvest interventions. Overall, studies on recent developments of novel pathogen-specific immunisation strategies are lacking.

Background: Respiratory disease is one of the most important factors impacting pig production worldwide. There is no available information on the prevalence of key pathogens implicated in Irish pig production. The objective of this study was to describe the prevalence of pleurisy, pneumonia, lung abscesses, pericarditis and liver milk spots in finisher pigs of a cohort of Irish pig farms, and to describe the seroprevalence of: influenza A virus (IAV), porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSv), Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae (Mhyo) and Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (APP). Results: In brief, 56 farrow-to-finish farms (29% of the Irish breeding herd) were enrolled in the study in 2017. Data on lungs, heart, and liver lesions were assessed for each farm at slaughter. An average of 417 (range 129–1154) plucks per farm were assessed for pleurisy, pneumonia, lung abscesses, pericarditis, and liver milk spots. Blood samples from 32 finisher pigs were collected at slaughter for each farm. The observed prevalence of pleurisy and pneumonia was one of the lowest reported in similar studies in Europe (13 and 11% estimated average within farm, respectively). Pleurisy lesions were mostly moderate and severe. Pneumonia lesions affected a low level of lung surface (5.8%). Prevalence of pericarditis was mid-high (8%) and the prevalence of liver milk spots was high, with an average of 29% of the livers affected. For serology, 78.6% of the farms were positive for IAV, 50% were positive for PRRSv, 71.4% were positive for Mhyo, and 98.2% were positive for APP. Influenza virus was the main pathogen associated with pleurisy (P < 0.001) and Mhyo was the main pathogen associated with pneumonia (P < 0.001) and pericarditis (P = 0.024). Conclusions: Farms affected with pleurisy had moderate to severe lesions. Farms affected with pneumonia had mild lesions, which could be the effect of the generalised use of Mhyo vaccination in piglets. The seroprevalence of IAV, PRRSv, Mhyo and APP in the present study sample is similar to or lower than in other European countries. Further research on the PRRSv and APP strains circulating in Ireland is necessary to support the design of national or regional control plans.

This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of pre-harvest interventions to control the main foodborne pathogens in pork in the European Union. A total of 1180 studies were retrieved from PubMed^® and Web of Science for 15 pathogens identified as relevant in EFSA’s scientific opinion on the public health hazards related to pork (2011). The study selection focused on controlled studies where a cause–effect could be attributed to the interventions tested, and their effectiveness could be inferred. Altogether, 52 studies published from 1983 to 2020 regarding Campylobacter spp., Clostridium perfringens, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Mycobacterium avium, and Salmonella spp. were retained and analysed. Research was mostly focused on Salmonella (n = 43 studies). In-feed and/or water treatments, and vaccination were the most tested interventions and were, overall, successful. However, the previously agreed criteria for this systematic review excluded other effective interventions to control Salmonella and other pathogens, like Yersinia enterocolitica, which is one of the most relevant biological hazards in pork. Examples of such successful interventions are the Specific Pathogen Free herd principle, stamping out and repopulating with disease-free animals. Research on other pathogens (i.e., Hepatitis E, Trichinella spiralis and Toxoplasma gondii) was scarce, with publications focusing on epidemiology, risk factors and/or observational studies. Overall, high herd health coupled with good management and biosecurity were effective to control or prevent most foodborne pathogens in pork at the pre-harvest level.