Author:

9 September 2024

3 minute read

Editor’s note: The following is from a poster presentation by David Buckwalter and faculty advisers, University of Pennsylvania, during the 2024 annual conference of the American Association of Swine Veterinarians.

Lameness represents a widespread issue which affects viability and growth, ultimately impeding efficient production and adding extra costs to producers. The causes of lameness in growing swine, however, are poorly elucidated and often difficult to diagnose in the field. The objective of this study was to use gross pathological examination to compare lesions in lame and non-lame growing pigs to better understand the etiology of lameness in growing pigs.

Two production companies enrolled 5 farms each for a total of 10 farms. On each farm 2 pigs were chosen, a single lame pig (L) and a single non-lame control pig (C). Pigs were identified as lame if two observers agreed that the animal was slow to rise, limping, reluctant to walk or reluctant to place weight on one or more limbs. Pigs were euthanized and transported to a diagnostic lab for complete postmortem evaluation. Visceral examination was competed on all pigs, all four legs were excised, and each joint examined grossly. Joints were scored for the presence or absence of synovial hypertrophy, hyperemia, or effusion as well as for lesions consistent with osteochondrosis (OC) and physeal bone lesions.

One joint in each L pig that contained synovial lesions was swabbed and a swab was taken from the same location on the C pig from that farm. Odds ratios were calculated for the odds of OC lesions, visceral lesions, and having multiple types of lesions in the lame versus non-lame pigs using a Fisher’s Exact test.

Lameness lesions

The average farm size was 3,624 pigs and the mean age of the pigs was 14.6 weeks. Eight females and 12 males were selected. Eight sow flows were included with five being comingled. There were 16 times greater odds of having multiple lesions in the L pigs compared to the C pigs. The odds of having an OC lesion were no different between the L and C pigs. There was no difference in the odds of having a visceral lesion in the L pigs versus the C pigs.

All 10 of the L pigs had at least one synovial lesion while only 30% of the C pigs had synovial lesions. None of the C pigs had physeal bone lesions, whereas 30% of the L pigs had such lesions. (No odds ratios could be calculated for either of these lesions).

There was a significant difference in the median numbers of locations where there were lesions in the L pigs compared to the C pigs (P<.001) (Table 1). Lesions were evenly distributed between front and hind limbs with 16% of locations scored in the front limbs having a lesion and 14% of the locations in the hind limbs. Only one L pig joint was found to be positive for M. hyosynoviae and none of the C pigs tested positive.

L pigs had more lesions and were more likely to have synovial lesions than C pigs. Only one pig was found positive for M. hyosynoviae, so the cause of the lesion is unclear. In contrast to other studies of pigs this age, the osteochondrosis lesions found were mild and not more likely to be found in the L pigs, decreasing the likelihood of its involvement in the clinical lameness.

Systemic disease was not more prominent in the L pigs, indicating that lameness is likely not secondary to systemic illness with common swine pathogens such as Streptococcus suis, especially given that none of the pigs had overt septic lesions (fibrinosuppurative joint or bone lesions).

Determining the cause of lameness in these animals remains challenging, though bacterial pathogens that cause lesions to the synovium like M. hyosynoviae may be more likely than other causes based on these findings.

In this exclusive interview, Brad Freking, CEO of New Fashion Pork, shares his journey from the ground up in the swine industry and provides unique perspectives on the most pressing issues facing the sector today. Brad dives deep into the ongoing debate around loose sow housing, offering a viewpoint that contrasts with that of Brent Hershey. While Hershey has voiced criticism of certain industry practices, Brad emphasizes the need for unity, focusing on collaboration rather than internal conflict. He believes the industry should prioritize consumer choice and avoid attacking one another, as working together will better serve both producers and consumers alike.

We also explore the challenges of sustainability and how New Fashion Pork is adapting to rising costs and the need for innovation in modern agriculture. Brad discusses the importance of leadership evolution, the role of technology, and New Fashion Pork’s strategy for meeting changing consumer preferences for better product quality.

Additionally, Brad reflects on his greatest accomplishments and lessons learned as a CEO and shares his vision for the future, including the biggest opportunities and challenges for New Fashion Pork in the next five years.

Brought to you by Ceva Swine: https://swine.ceva.com/

CHICAGO — Circana’s annual report on “Eating Patterns in America” reveals consumers are switching up where, when and what they eat in response to changes in their daily lives.

The Chicago-based market research company said 86% of eating occasions are sourced from home. People also are eating breakfast earlier, and snacking away from home is becoming more popular, the report found.

Emerging trends in eating patterns are “really driven by the disruption of our daily routines,” said David Portalatin, senior vice president and industry adviser, food and foodservice, Circana. He said because of shifting home and work habits, lunch in the restaurant industry is permanently disrupted and has been 15% lower than it was in 2019.

“People pack their days with meetings, and then they look up and it’s 2:30 and they say, ‘What are we going to do about lunch?’ and dinner is at 6:30,” Portalatin said.

Snacks are more often filling the gaps left by foregone meals, he added, with some snacking happening in mid-morning, some in the afternoon and some at night.

“Two things that we’ve seen steadily increase over the years are the consumption of snack items during mealtimes — and sometimes in replacement of a main meal — and the increase of time between mealtimes,” he said. “It’s the ‘snackification’ of our mealtimes.”

In response, consumer packaged goods companies increasingly are developing foods and beverages offering the convenience, ingredients and value consumers want.

“For CPG companies, it’s thinking about crafting eating flexibility for consumers in three ways: price points, portion control and portability,” Portalatin said.

The trends are especially evident among younger people who have more flexibility, he said.

“They throw a collection of items in their backpack, maybe string cheese snacks, salty snacks for satiety, a bottle of water or juice for pleasure, and just have a snack and save some for later,” he said. “In any case, (the items) are packaged to go where the consumer goes.”

The 86% of eating occasions being sourced at home is up about 3 percentage points from pre-pandemic years, according to Portalatin. The eating trend is part of the overall shift in consumer behaviors that includes more people working at home and investing more time and effort in their kitchens.

“That doesn’t mean we’re all going to become Michelin Star chefs,” he said, adding, “We’re seeing more heat-and-eat options and more meals thrown into an Instant Pot.

“As a food manufacturer, if you can bring that kind of architecture to the home from items in the pantry or the refrigerator, those are the kinds of things consumers are looking for. We still want culinary exploration, and we still want to try global cuisine, so manufacturers are still developing items in response.”

As CPG companies continue to innovate, consumers continue to want to experiment by trying new products, Portalatin said. This trend is unlikely to wane, especially if new products are overlain with functional aspects and offered so that budget-conscious consumers perceive value.

“The consumer is under pressure right now,” he said. “It’s the cumulative effect of inflation and debt causing people to rationalize their spend across categories. They’re focusing in on the value equation and not just the cheapest item.” 

Ukraine’s surprise cross-border incursion into Russia’s Kursk region on August 6 has jeopardised dozens of large pig farms and huge processing capacities in the region.

Within a week, the advance was 12km deep, and this new chapter of the conflict may herald big problems for the Russian pig industry.

Kursk is Russia’s second-largest pig-producing region, after neighbouring Belgorod, which has been consistently suffering from cross-border shelling.

As of early 2024, Kursk’s pig population was almost 2.5 million head. The region houses Russia’s biggest slaughterhouse and processing plant, with a capacity of 4.5 million head a year, owned by the largest Russian pork manufacturer, Miratorg, nearly 100km away from Soudzha, a town at the epicentre of the Ukrainian offensive.

In a statement on August 19, Miratorg revealed it had helped its employees evacuate from the parts of Kursk affected by the fighting, not specifying whether any of its operations were affected.

As estimated by Smirnov, nearly 130,000 Russians were evacuated from the areas bordering Ukraine.  Miratorg employs about 8,000 people in the Kursk region, nearly one-quarter of its total workforce.

It is too early to judge whether the fighting has affected the pig industry’s output—much is still hidden in the ‘fog of war’, but recent events clearly show that some of the worst nightmares of Russian pig farmers are coming true.

Belgorod, Bryansk and Kursk – three regions bordering Ukraine – jointly house around 8 million pigs. Fears that the fighting could escalate into Russian territory were voiced by a prominent Russian pig company, RusAgro, in late 2022.

One of the biggest challenges for the Russian pig farms in the regions affected by the hostilities is filling the available vacancies, as the Russian economy deals with one of the worst labour-force crises in its history.

For example, a Russian poultry farm near St Petersburg has estimated it lacked nearly 30% of the workers needed for sustainable operation.

The picture is believed to be similar in the pig industry, where labour shortages is a pressing issue, even in the safe territories.

Reeling foreign trade

Fights raging in the Kursk region are not the only problem the Russian pig industry faces.

Mounting difficulties in making and receiving payments in the Chinese yuan have reached the point where Russian agricultural exporters have started to consider switching to barter trade, local press reported.

These problems stem from US authorities’ threats to impose secondary sanctions against foreign banks and financial institutions facilitating trade with Russian businesses.

This is bad news for Russian pork exporters, who have contemplated ramping up exports to China, following the withdrawal of the 15-year ban late last year.

In 2024, Russia could export 60,000-70,000t of pork to China, the Russian Union of Pork Producers estimated.

Most of this was due to be shipped in the second half of 2024, after deliveries reached only 10,000t in the first six months of the year.

The prospects of continuing exports to Vietnam, the largest foreign market for Russian pork outside post-Soviet space, remain vague, as difficulties in collecting payments for the delivered goods are also being seen there. In 2023, Vietnam imported 86,000t of Russian pork, 89% up on 2022.

Last but not least, the Russian pig industry is very dependent on feed additive imports. China meets around 90% of the demand in the Russian market, and any disruption in these deliveries would make the industry suffer.

It remains to be seen whether the barter trade can come up with a reasonable solution to this problem.