Effects of distance moved during loading and floor space on the trailer during transport on losses of market weight pigs on arrival at the packing plant

¹ Department of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana 61801
² The Maschhoffs, Inc., Carlyle, IL 62231
³ ELANCO Animal Health, Greenfield, IN 46140

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: mellis7{at}uiuc.edu.

	Abstract

Effects of distance moved during loading and floor space on the trailer during transport on the incidence of transport losses (dead and non-ambulatory pigs) on arrival at the packing plant were evaluated in a study involving 42 loads of pigs (average BW = 131.2 kg ± 5.05). A split-plot design was used with a 2 x 6 factorial arrangement of the following treatments: 1) distance moved from the pen to the exit of the building [short (0 to 30.5 m) vs. long (61.0 to 91.4 m)] and 2) transport floor space (0.396, 0.415, 0.437, 0.462, 0.489, and 0.520 m²/pig). Loading distance treatments (subplots) were compared within transport floor space treatments (main plot). Pigs were loaded at the farm using sorting boards and, if necessary, electric goads, transported approximately 3 h to a commercial plant, and unloaded using livestock paddles. The number of non-ambulatory pigs during loading and the number of dead and non-ambulatory pigs at the plant were recorded. Non-ambulatory pigs were classified as fatigued, injured, or injured and fatigued. In addition, the incidence of pigs exhibiting signs of stress (open-mouth breathing, skin discoloration, and muscle tremors) during loading and unloading was recorded. There were no interactions (P > 0.05) between distance moved and transport floor space treatments. Moving pigs long compared to short distances during loading increased (P < 0.001) the incidence of open mouth breathing after loading (24.9 vs. 11.0 ± 1.03%, respectively), and tended to increase the incidence of non-ambulatory pigs during loading (0.32 vs. 0.08 ± 0.09%, respectively; P = 0.09) and of non-ambulatory, injured pigs at the plant (0.24 vs. 0.04 ± 0.07%, respectively; P = 0.06). However, loading distance did not affect other losses at the plant. Total losses at the plant were greater (P < 0.05) for the 3 lowest floor spaces compared to the 2 highest floor spaces, and pigs provided 0.462 m²/pig during transport had similar transport losses to those provided 0.489 and 0.520 m²/pig (total losses at the plant = 2.84, 1.88, 1.87, 0.98, 0.13, and 0.98 ± 0.43% of pigs transported, for 0.396, 0.415, 0.437, 0.462, 0.489, and 0.520 m²/pig, respectively). These data confirm previous findings that transport floor space has a major impact on transport losses, and suggest that these losses are minimized at a floor space of 0.462 m²/pig or greater.

Key Words: distance moved, floor space, non-ambulatory, pig, transport losses