Rebecka Westin

Dr. Rebecka Westin

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

18Years (2009-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2016 in Journal of Dairy Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RWRebecka Westin
Rebecka Westin
AVA. Vaughan
A. Vaughan
APA.M. de Passillé
A.M. de Passillé
TDT.J. DeVries
T.J. DeVries
EPE.A. Pajor
E.A. Pajor
JRJ. Rushen
J. Rushen
Lying down and resting are important for optimal cow health, welfare, and production. In comparison with free stall farms with a milking parlor, farms with automated milking systems (AMS) may place less constraint on how long cows can lie down. However, few studies report lying times on AMS farms. The aims of this study were to describe the variation in lying times of dairy cows in AMS farms and to understand how much of the variation in individual lying times is related to cow-level factors, including lameness, the presence of hock and knee lesions, and body condition score (BCS). We visited 36 farms in Canada (Quebec: n = 10; Ontario: n = 10; British Columbia: n = 4; and Alberta: n = 5), and the United States (Michigan: n = 7). Gait scores, presence of hock and knee lesions, and BCS were recorded for 40 Holstein cows from each herd. Parity and days in milk were retrieved from farm records. Lying time was recorded across 4d using accelerometers (n = 1,377). Multivariable analysis was performed. Of scored cows, 15.1% were lame (i.e., obviously limping; 203 of 1,348 cows). Knee lesions were found in 27.1% (340 of 1,256 cows) and hock lesions were found in 30.8% (421 of 1,366 cows) of the animals. Daily lying time varied among cows. Cows spent a median duration of 11.4 h/d lying down (25th-75th percentile = 9.7-12.9 h), with a lying bout frequency of 9.5 bouts/d (25th-75th percentile = 7.5-12 bouts/d) and a median bout duration of 71 min (25th-75th percentile = 58-87 min/bout). Lameness was associated with cows lying down for 0.6 h/d longer in fewer, longer bouts. Increased lying time was also associated with increased parity, later stage of lactation and higher BCS. Older cows (parity ≥ 3) spent about 0.5 h/d more lying down compared with parity 1 cows, and cows with BCS ≥ 3.5 lay down on average 1 h/d longer than cows with BCS ≤ 2.25. Hock lesions were associated with shorter lying times in univariable models, but no associations were found in the multivariable models. We concluded that only a small proportion of the variation between cows in lying time is explained by lameness, leg lesions, and BCS.

1 May 2016 in Journal of Dairy Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RWRebecka Westin
Rebecka Westin
AVA. Vaughan
A. Vaughan
APA.M. de Passillé
A.M. de Passillé
TDT.J. DeVries
T.J. DeVries
EPE.A. Pajor
E.A. Pajor
JRJ. Rushen
J. Rushen
Lameness is a major concern to animal health and welfare within the dairy industry. Our objectives were to describe the prevalence of lameness in high-producing cows on farms with automated milking systems (AMS) and to identify the main risk factors for lameness at the animal and farm level. We visited 36 AMS farms across Canada and Michigan. Farm-level factors related to stall design, bedding use, flooring, and stocking rates were recorded by trained observers. Cows were scored for lameness, leg injuries, body condition (BCS), and body size (hip width and rump height; n=1,378; 25-40 cows/farm). Mean herd prevalence of clinical lameness was 15% (range=2.5-46%). Stall width relative to cow size and parity was found to be the most important factor associated with lameness. Not fitting the average stall width increased the odds of being lame 3.7 times in primiparous cows. A narrow feed alley [<430cm; odds ratio (OR)=1.9], obstructed lunge space (OR=1.7), a low BCS (OR=2.1 for BCS ≤2.25 compared with BCS 2.75-3.0), and presence of hock lesions (OR=1.6) were also identified as important risk factors for lameness. Only 1 of 36 farms had stalls of adequate width and length for the cows on their farm. For lameness prevention, it can be concluded that more emphasis needs be placed on either building stalls of appropriate width or selecting for smaller-framed cows that fit the existing stalls.

5 December 2016 in Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TWTorun Wallgren
Torun Wallgren
RWRebecka Westin
Rebecka Westin
Stefan GunnarssonStefan Gunnarsson
Stefan Gunnarsson
Tail biting is a common problem in intensive pig farming, affecting both welfare and production. Although routine tail docking is banned within the EU, it remains a common practice to prevent tail biting. Straw as environmental enrichment has been proposed as an alternative to tail docking, but its effectiveness against tail biting and function in manure handling systems have to be considered. The aim of the study was to survey how pigs with intact tails are raised and how tail biting is handled in Sweden, where tail docking is banned through national legislation. The study emphasises straw usage and its association with tail biting pigs and problems in the manure handling system. The expectation is that this information could be conveyed to the rest of the EU to reduce the need for tail docking. In a telephone survey of randomly selected Swedish pig farmers (46 nursery and 43 finishing pig units) with at least 50 sows or 300 finishing places, it was found that straw was used by 98% of the farmers. The median daily straw ration provided was 29 g/pig for nursery and 50 g/pig for finishing pigs in systems with partly slatted flooring. The reported prevalence of tail biting was 1.6% at slaughter. The majority of farmers reported that they never had manure handling problems caused by straw (56% of nursery units and 81% of finishing pig units). A proportion of farmers (37%) also provided with additional material apart from straw on some occasions, which may have affected tail biting prevalence and manure handling problems. Swedish farmers rear undocked pigs without large problems with tail biting. Straw is the main manipulable material used, and additional manipulable material is used to various extents. The low incidence of straw obstructing the manure handling systems implies that it is indeed possible to use straw in partly slatted flooring systems, reducing the need for tail docking. The impact of using additional manipulable material is unknown and requires more investigation to separate the impact of such material from the impact of straw.

15 October 2019 in Animals
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TWTorun Wallgren
Torun Wallgren
NLNils Lundeheim
Nils Lundeheim
UWUppsala Wallenbeck
Uppsala Wallenbeck
RWRebecka Westin
Rebecka Westin
Stefan GunnarssonStefan Gunnarsson
Stefan Gunnarsson
Tail biting is a common issue within commercial pig production. It is mainly an indicator of inadequate housing environment and results in reduced health welfare and production. To reduce the impact of tail biting, pigs are commonly tail docked, without pain relief, within the first week of life. EU Council Directive 2008/120/EC prohibits routine tail docking, but the practice is still widely used in many Member States. Sweden has banned tail docking since 1988 and all pigs have intact tails, yet tail biting is a minor problem. This paper summarises and synthesises experimental findings and practical expertise in production of undocked pigs in Sweden and describes solutions to facilitate a transition to producing pigs with intact tails within intensive pig production in the EU. Swedish pig housing conditions and management differ in many aspects from those in other EU Member States. Swedish experiences show that lower stocking density, provision of sufficient feeding space, no fully slatted flooring, strict maximum levels for noxious gases and regular provision of litter material are crucial for success when rearing pigs with intact tails. To prevent tail biting and to eliminate the need for tail docking, we strongly recommend that EU legislation should more clearly match the biological needs of pigs, as is done in Swedish legislation.

21 February 2022 in Animal Production Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Adalinda HernandezAdalinda Hernandez
Adalinda Hernandez
CGC.S. Galina
C.S. Galina
MGMariana Geffroy
Mariana Geffroy
JJJens Jung
Jens Jung
RWRebecka Westin
Rebecka Westin
Charlotte BergCharlotte Berg
Charlotte Berg
There is a growing demand for animal products, especially food for human consumption, including in developing countries in tropical regions of the world. Simultaneously, animal welfare and a reduced environmental impact are increasingly important to modern consumers and non-consumers. Increased efficiency of existing animal production systems is key to meeting the growing demand of animal products without ignoring societal concerns. Adequate animal welfare can play an important role in improving production and addressing consumer demands. This review describes the main cattle production systems in the tropics and considers how they meet the need for transparent animal welfare conditions. Several challenges to overcome are highlighted, including lack of information about the real cattle welfare status in the tropics. Adequate assessment protocols and improvements in animal nutrition, infrastructure, animal health and farming-related education need special attention in the region. Better animal welfare could improve tropical animal production in terms of productivity, and increase the volume of meat and milk delivered. It could also guarantee consumer acceptance and future consumption of animal products, secure incomes, alleviate poverty and reduce migration to urban areas and countryside abandonment.

1 May 2015 in Preventive Veterinary Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RWRebecka Westin
Rebecka Westin
NHNils Holmgren
Nils Holmgren
JHJan Hultgren
Jan Hultgren
KOKerstin Ortman
Kerstin Ortman
ALAnders Linder
Anders Linder
BABo Algers
Bo Algers