Surgical castration of piglets without pain relief is still common practice in many countries. Possible alternatives for surgical castration are application of pain relief or anaesthesia or production of boars (entire males) and immunocastrates. Each of these alternatives faces advantages and disadvantages which may result in different citizen attitudes and consumers acceptability. Understanding which practice is acceptable to whom and why may further stimulate implementation. Consumer (n = 3251) and stakeholder (n = 1027) attitudes towards surgical castration without pain relief, surgical castration with anaesthesia, immunocastration, and production of boars were surveyed from April to June 2020 via an online questionnaire in 16 countries (>175 respondents per country). Surgical castration without pain relief was separated from each of the alternatives due to animal welfare and showed the lowest acceptability (32%). Within the alternatives, a further partitioning between the alternatives was based on perceived quality and food safety, with an acceptance of 85% for applying anaesthesia, 71% for immunocastration, and 49% for boar production. Differences depending on professional involvement and familiarity with agriculture could be observed, mainly for the acceptance of surgical castration without anaesthesia, immunocastration, and boars. Castration with anaesthesia was highly accepted by all types of respondents.

The influence of a high inclusion level of Chlorella vulgaris, individually and supplemented with two carbohydrase mixtures, in finishing pig diets was assessed on zootechnical performance, carcass characteristics, pork quality traits and nutritional value of pork fat. Forty crossbred entire male pigs, sons of Large White × Landrace sows crossed with Pietrain boars, with an initial live weight of 59.1 ± 5.69 kg were used in this trial. Swines were randomly assigned to one of four dietary treatments (n = 10): cereal and soybean meal-based diet (control), control diet with 5% C. vulgaris (CV), CV diet supplemented with 0.005% Rovabio^® Excel AP (CV + R) and CV diet supplemented with 0.01% of a four-CAZyme mixture (CV + M). Animals were slaughtered, after the finishing period, with a BW of 101 ± 1.9 kg. Growth performance, carcass characteristics and meat quality traits were not influenced (p > 0.05) by the incorporation of C. vulgaris in the diets. However, the inclusion of the microalga in finishing pig diets increased some lipid-soluble antioxidant pigments and n-3 PUFA, and decreased the n-6:n-3 ratio of fatty acids, thus ameliorating the nutritional value of pork fat. Moreover, the supplementation of diets with the carbohydrase mixtures did not change (p > 0.05) neither animal performance nor meat quality traits, indicating their inefficacy in the increase of digestive utilization of C. vulgaris by pigs under these experimental conditions. It is concluded that the use of C. vulgaris in finishing pig diets, at this high incorporation level, improves the nutritional value of pork fat without compromising pig performance.

The aim of this study was to investigate how consumers (n = 2,171) originated from South-Western Europe (Italy, Portugal, and Spain) perceive cultured “meat” (CM) and if their demographic characteristics (origin, gender, age, education, occupation, and meat consumption) are related to their willingness to try (WTT), to regularly eat (WTE) and to pay (WTP) for CM. We found the current respondents had an initially positive attitude towards CM: 49% of them perceived CM as “promising and/or acceptable” and 23% “fun and/or intriguing” whereas 29% considered it as “absurd and/or disgusting”. In addition, 66 and 25% would be willing and not willing to try CM, respectively. However, 43% had no WTE for CM and, 94% would not pay more for CM compared to conventional meat. Age and especially occupation were good indicators of consumer acceptance of CM. Respondents of 18–30 years of age had the highest acceptance. Respondents outside the meat sector had the highest WTE and people working within the meat sector had the lowest WTE, scientists (within or outside the meat sector) had the highest WTT, people not scientists but within the meat sector had the lowest WTT. Additionally, we found that men are more likely to accept CM than women, Spanish-speaking consumers had the highest WTT and WTE, people with vegan and vegetarian diets may pay more for CM but generally no more than for conventional meat. The perceptions that CM may be more eco-friendly, ethical, safe and healthy than conventional meat, and to a lower extent, the perception that current meat production causes ethical and environmental problems are likely to be major motives for the current respondents to try, regularly eat and pay for CM. On the opposite, lower perceptions of CM benefits and of conventional meat weaknesses more generally, plus emotional resistance towards CM are main barriers to accept CM.