Despite being the most commonly used mammal in biomedical research, problems with perinatal mortality in mice have received little attention and the causes of pup death are still poorly known. Females are often housed alone with their litters and since the lost pups are generally eaten, it is commonly assumed that the mother has killed them. However, more detailed observations than have been reported previously in the literature are required to establish if the cause of death is infanticide. Litter loss can only be prevented efficiently after underlying causes have been carefully investigated and interpreted. The aim of this study was to investigate if females actively kill their pups by observing the behaviour of females and pups in litters that later were lost. We used video recordings of females that lost their entire litter to observe females in detail from parturition until the pups died. In total, 10 C57BL/6 females (wildtype and the knockouts Hfe−/− and β2m−/−) were studied, housed in Makrolon II cages with or without access to a small amount of nesting material.

Sows’ ability to produce an excessive amount of piglets has shaped modern piglet production and there has been a steady increase in litter size during the last decades. This development has caused some negative side-effects, such as an increase in the proportion of stillborn piglets, a decrease in the proportion of weaned piglets and a larger variation in quality of piglets. Swedish commercial piglet producing herds have, like other countries with high production levels, high piglet mortality and high annual removal rate of gilts and sow. These problems seem to have increased during the same period that litter sizes have increased. Therefore present study aim to investigate whether there is an association between litter sizes and sow stayability. The probability to produce ≥4 litters during a lifetime was significantly lower for sows giving birth to ≤8, 15 and ≥17 piglets in total in their first parity litter compared to sows giving birth to 13 piglets. Except for the group of sows having a small (≤11 piglets born in total) first parity litter size in combination with a medium (12–14 piglets born in total) second parity litter size, all other groups were significantly associated with an impaired ability to stay ≥4 litters compared to sows having a medium both first and second parity litter size. There were differences in removal reason between sows having small, medium or large first parities litter sizes. Associations between litter sizes in low parities and sow stayability were found. Our results indicate that aiming for keeping sows giving birth to a medium-sized litter, with approximately 12–14 piglets born in total may improve sows stayability and decrease the risk of unplanned removal. This should be considered when planning breeding strategy and annual removal in Swedish commercial piglets producing herds.

This study assessed aversion, stunning effectiveness, and product quality of nitrogen and carbon dioxide (CO₂) mixtures used for stunning pigs. A total of 1852 slaughter pigs divided into two similar batches was assessed during routine slaughter in a Swedish commercial abattoir using either hypercapnic-hypoxia (20% CO₂ and less than 2% O₂; 20C2O) or hypercapnia (90% CO₂; 90C) gas mixtures. Behavioral indicators of aversion and discomfort were recorded. After exposure, the stunning quality was assessed through brainstem reflexes. After slaughter, the pH and electric conductivity of carcasses were assessed to estimate the incidence of pale, soft, and exudative (PSE) pork, and the presence of ecchymosis were inspected. Compared to 90C, pigs exposed to 20C2O showed a later (p < 0.05) onset of behaviors indicative of aversion, and a lower (p < 0.01) incidence of breathlessness. However, unconsciousness (i.e., losing posture) appeared earlier (p < 0.01) in 90C compared to 20C2O. In 90C, all (100%) pigs were adequately stunned, whereas in 20C2O a 7.4% of pigs showed signs of poor stunning, especially when oxygen concentrations were >2% (p < 0.001). The percentage of PSE carcasses was higher (p < 0.01) in 20C2O than 90C. In conclusion, compared to 90C, 20C2O reduced aversion and discomfort but showed lower stun effectiveness, especially when O₂ was above 2%, and a slightly poorer pork quality.

During the pre-slaughter period, animals experience novel environment and procedures which may cause reduced welfare and suffering. Over the last decades, the slaughter industry has restructured into fewer and larger abattoirs, implying potential risks of transport stress, injuries, and impaired animal welfare. Since recently, however, there is growing interest in small-scale slaughter to supply locally or regionally produced meat. Risk managers at all levels thus need to assess animal welfare risks also at small-scale operations. This study aimed to assess risks of poor animal welfare at small-scale lamb slaughter (≤5000 sheep/year and ≤70 sheep/day) in Norway, Iceland, Sweden and Finland, and to compare these risks to large-scale industrial slaughter. Assessment was done applying an individual expert opinion approach during a 2-day workshop. Nine experts in lamb slaughter procedures, behaviour, physiology, health, scoring schemes and/or risk assessment provided estimates of exposure, likelihood of negative consequences following exposure, and intensity and duration of negative consequences for 71 hazards. The methods applied mainly adhered to the risk assessment guidelines of the European Food Safety Authority. The list of hazards was modified from an earlier study and distributed to the experts before the assessment. No other literature was reviewed specifically for the purpose of the assessment. The highest risks to animal welfare identified in both small- and large-scale slaughter were related to inadequate conditions during overnight lairage at the slaughter plant. For most hazards, risk estimates were lower in small-scale slaughter. The reverse was true for splitting of groups and separation of one sheep from the group. Small-scale slaughter has a potential for improved sheep welfare in comparison with large-scale industrial slaughter. Keeping the animals overnight at the slaughterhouse and prolonged fasting before slaughter should be avoided. Solutions include continuing education and training of stockpersons and, especially in large-scale slaughter, application of existing techniques for efficient transport logistics that minimise stress.

The question of tail docking in pigs is an ongoing problem despite the fact that it should have been solved long ago. In the Council Directive 2008/120/EC it is clearly stated that routine tail docking in pigs are prohibited and enrichment materials for the pigs must be provided, which is in line with the high animal welfare standards that the European Union aim for. This directive is in force in all member states. The habit of tail docking is widespread as a simple comparison by two reports by EFSA shows. We present these results together with results showing that some countries, like Sweden, Finland and Lithuania manage to still keep their production without tail docking routinely. We therefore suggest that the gap between the strong intentions of prohibiting tail docking in the directive and the weak (or non-existent) enforcement of it in most countries in the EU needs to be closed. Of the arguments saying that this will be a troublesome task, we will here focus on two of them. The first is that the directive is unclear or actually allows tail docking. The second is that the habit of routine tail docking is economically profitable. Both these arguments will not hold. There are three ways to bridge the gap. The first is to lower the threshold, lowering the animal welfare level in the directive. We believe strongly that this solution is contradictory to the trend in today’s legislation about animals and not in line with the Lisbon treaty. The second is to demand stronger enforcement which is in line with the EU Strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012–2015. The third is to accept that different countries will not enforce the directive, then leaving it to the consumer to choose between more or less animal friendly pork. EU seems to adopt this way in contrast to the EU AW Strategy. To properly inform consumers about animal welfare is a good help although it demands a lot of resources and is a rather slow process. Therefore, in order to have a rapid solution to the gap one need to have a stronger enforcement of the law.