Assessment of three large-scale depopulation methods for swine

The threat of foreign animal disease outbreaks to U.S. swine herds warrants effective and readily available depopulation methods. Current American Veterinary Medical Association-recommendations using preferred physical methods for swine depopulation are unsuitable for large commercial swine herds. Our objectives were to assess and compare the efficacy and performance of three suggested large-scale depopulation methods: 1) medium-expansion water-based foam, 2) prototype high-expansion nitrogen foam and, 3) carbon dioxide gas for finisher pigs under field conditions. Out of 793 finisher pigs included in the study, 84 were implanted with bio-loggers recording electrocardiogram and pig movement data. Aversive pig behaviors were collected manually on a group level for each depopulation method. A subsample of pigs from each method were examined post-mortem for lesions and compared to a reference group of nine pigs euthanized with pentobarbital. Depopulation method assessments included container fill time, the number of aversive pig behaviors observed during depopulation, overall pig movement intensity, time to cessation of movement, time to and cause of cardiac arrest, and respiratory lesions. No difference in fill times between water-based foam and nitrogen foam was observed. The total number of aversive swine behaviors was higher for carbon-dioxide compared to both foam methodologies (P < 0.01). The total pig activity was higher in water-based foam compared to nitrogen foam (P = 0.02) and carbon-dioxide methods (P = 0.01). The mean time to cessation of movement was significantly shorter for water-based foam and nitrogen foam compared to carbon-dioxide (P < 0.01). No differences in cardiac activity were observed. Water-based foam pigs had increased odds of distal trachea occlusions compared to other methods. All depopulation methods demonstrated high efficacy with a 100% mortality rate. The results from this study support large-scale water-based foam, nitrogen foam and carbon dioxide as viable AVMA depopulation guideline candidates for swine.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2025-03-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320217
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.35

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessment of three large-scale depopulation methods for swine

Todd Williams, Justin Kieffer, Ting‐Yu Cheng, Andrew S. Bowman et al.
1 citations
PLoS ONE
Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
2.35
article

Assessment of three large-scale depopulation methods for swine

Todd Williams, Justin Kieffer, Ting‐Yu Cheng, Andrew S. Bowman, Janice Y. Park, D.P. Hougentogler, Marie Culhane, Jesse V. Miller, Albert Canturri, Michael D. Cressman, J. M. Hill, Andréia G. Arruda, Lucia Hunt, Magnus R. Campler, Brad Youngblood, Gary A. Flory, Dawn M. Torrisi
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The threat of foreign animal disease outbreaks to U.S. swine herds warrants effective and readily available depopulation methods. Current American Veterinary Medical Association-recommendations using preferred physical methods for swine depopulation are unsuitable for large commercial swine herds. Our objectives were to assess and compare the efficacy and performance of three suggested large-scale depopulation methods: 1) medium-expansion water-based foam, 2) prototype high-expansion nitrogen foam and, 3) carbon dioxide gas for finisher pigs under field conditions. Out of 793 finisher pigs included in the study, 84 were implanted with bio-loggers recording electrocardiogram and pig movement data. Aversive pig behaviors were collected manually on a group level for each depopulation method. A subsample of pigs from each method were examined post-mortem for lesions and compared to a reference group of nine pigs euthanized with pentobarbital. Depopulation method assessments included container fill time, the number of aversive pig behaviors observed during depopulation, overall pig movement intensity, time to cessation of movement, time to and cause of cardiac arrest, and respiratory lesions. No difference in fill times between water-based foam and nitrogen foam was observed. The total number of aversive swine behaviors was higher for carbon-dioxide compared to both foam methodologies (P < 0.01). The total pig activity was higher in water-based foam compared to nitrogen foam (P = 0.02) and carbon-dioxide methods (P = 0.01). The mean time to cessation of movement was significantly shorter for water-based foam and nitrogen foam compared to carbon-dioxide (P < 0.01). No differences in cardiac activity were observed. Water-based foam pigs had increased odds of distal trachea occlusions compared to other methods. All depopulation methods demonstrated high efficacy with a 100% mortality rate. The results from this study support large-scale water-based foam, nitrogen foam and carbon dioxide as viable AVMA depopulation guideline candidates for swine.

PLoS ONEVol. 20(3)
University of Minnesota (US), Pipestone (United States) (US), Minnesota Department of Agriculture (US), The Ohio State University (US)
National Pork Board
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
2.35
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.