<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.3/JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd"><article xml:lang="en" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="issn">2615-790X</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Tropical Animal Science Journal</journal-title><abbrev-journal-title>Trop. Anim. Sci. J.</abbrev-journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2615-790X</issn><issn pub-type="ppub">2615-787X</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Faculty of Animal Science, IPB University</publisher-name><publisher-loc>Indonesia</publisher-loc></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5398/tasj.2026.49.4.354</article-id><title-group><article-title>Animal Welfare Status and Meat Quality Attributes of Finishing Pigs Across Diverse Farm Production Scales</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Dang</surname><given-names>A. T. N.</given-names></name><address><country>Viet Nam</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-1"></xref><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-2"></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Do</surname><given-names>D. T.</given-names></name><address><country>Viet Nam</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-1"></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Pham</surname><given-names>T. T. K.</given-names></name><address><country>Viet Nam</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-3"></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Dang</surname><given-names>A. T. N.</given-names></name><address><country>Viet Nam</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-4"></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Duong</surname><given-names>K. N.</given-names></name><address><country>Viet Nam</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-1"></xref><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-5"></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Nguyen</surname><given-names>H. T.</given-names></name><address><country>Viet Nam</country><email>hai.nguyenthanh@hcmuaf.edu.vn</email></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="AFF-1"></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor-5"></xref></contrib></contrib-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="editor"><name><surname>Wiryawan</surname><given-names>Prof. Dr. Komang G</given-names></name><address><country>Indonesia</country></address><xref ref-type="aff" rid="EDITOR-AFF-1"></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="AFF-1"><institution content-type="dept">Faculty of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine</institution><institution-wrap><institution>Nong Lam University Ho Chi Minh City</institution><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/03030f487</institution-id></institution-wrap><country country="VN">Vietnam</country></aff><aff id="AFF-2"><institution content-type="dept">Department of Animal Science</institution><institution-wrap><institution>KonKuk University</institution><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/025h1m602</institution-id></institution-wrap><addr-line>Seoul, Republic of Korea</addr-line><country country="KR">South Korea</country></aff><aff id="AFF-3">National Centre for Appraisal of Livestock Production No.I, Hanoi, Vietnam</aff><aff id="AFF-4"><institution content-type="dept">Faculty of Chemical Engineering and Food Technology</institution><institution-wrap><institution>Nong Lam University Ho Chi Minh City</institution><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/03030f487</institution-id></institution-wrap><country country="VN">Vietnam</country></aff><aff id="AFF-5"><institution content-type="dept">The Research and Technology Transfer Center</institution><institution-wrap><institution>Nong Lam University Ho Chi Minh City</institution><institution-id institution-id-type="ror">https://ror.org/03030f487</institution-id></institution-wrap><country country="VN">Vietnam</country></aff><aff id="EDITOR-AFF-1">Tropical Animal Science Journal</aff><author-notes><fn fn-type="coi-statement"><label>CONFLICT OF INTEREST  </label><p>We certify that there is no conflict of interest with any financial, personal, or other relationships with other people or organizations related to the material discussed in the manuscript.</p></fn><corresp id="cor-5">Corresponding author: H. T. Nguyen, Faculty of Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, Nong Lam University Ho Chi Minh City.  Email: <email>hai.nguyenthanh@hcmuaf.edu.vn</email></corresp></author-notes><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2026-6-3" publication-format="electronic"><day>3</day><month>6</month><year>2026</year></pub-date><pub-date date-type="collection" iso-8601-date="2026-6-3" publication-format="electronic"><day>3</day><month>6</month><year>2026</year></pub-date><volume>49</volume><issue>4</issue><issue-title>Tropical Animal Science Journal</issue-title><fpage>354</fpage><lpage>363</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2025-12-12"><day>12</day><month>12</month><year>2025</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd" iso-8601-date="2026-4-30"><day>30</day><month>4</month><year>2026</year></date><date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="2026-5-5"><day>5</day><month>5</month><year>2026</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright (c) 2026 Tropical Animal Science Journal</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2026</copyright-year><copyright-holder>Tropical Animal Science Journal</copyright-holder><license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/" license-type="open-access"><ali:license_ref xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/</ali:license_ref><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.Authors submitting manuscripts should understand and agree that copyright of manuscripts of the article shall be assigned/transferred to Tropical Animal Science Journal. The statement to release the copyright to Tropical Animal Science Journal is stated in Form A. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA) where Authors and Readers can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, as well as remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, but they must give appropriate credit (cite to the article or content), provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journal.ipb.ac.id/tasj/article/view/70255" xlink:title="Animal Welfare Status and Meat Quality Attributes of Finishing Pigs Across Diverse Farm Production Scales">Animal Welfare Status and Meat Quality Attributes of Finishing Pigs Across Diverse Farm Production Scales</self-uri><abstract><p>The intensification of pig production in developing countries raises concerns about animal welfare and its impact on pork quality, as well as industry sustainability and product value. This study aimed to evaluate the welfare status and post-slaughter meat quality of finishing pigs across different production scales in Vietnam. A cross-sectional survey of 45 farms (small, medium, and large-scale) was conducted using the Welfare Quality® framework (four principles and twelve assessment criteria). Subsequently, 18 crossbred pigs were slaughtered to analyze <italic>Longissimus dorsi</italic> quality (10<sup>th</sup>-15<sup>th</sup> ribs), including pH, color, chemical composition, and fatty acid profiles. Results indicated that the good feeding principle scored significantly higher in large-scale farms (LF: 80.28) compared to medium (MF: 67.89) and small-scale farms (SF: 59.95) (p&lt;0.001). Conversely, the good health principle recorded the lowest scores across all scales (LF at 7.80, MF at 7.51, and SF at 7.74; p&lt;0.01). Acceptable levels were obtained for appropriate behavior and environmental comfort (40-60 points). While pH remained similar across groups, meat from LF pigs exhibited significantly lighter color, higher protein content, and increased drip loss (p&lt;0.01). Notably, the proportion of unsaturated fatty acids and the UFA/SFA ratio (unsaturated fatty acids/saturated fatty acids) were greater in pigs raised on the LF, suggesting a favorable lipid composition. Briefly, large-scale production systems demonstrated enhanced animal welfare and beneficial meat quality traits, indicating that improved housing management and nutritional strategies contribute to more sustainable and higher-quality pork production.</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>animal welfare</kwd><kwd>fatty acid profile</kwd><kwd>finishing pigs</kwd><kwd>large-scale farm</kwd><kwd>longissimus dorsi</kwd></kwd-group><custom-meta-group><custom-meta><meta-name>File created by JATS Editor</meta-name><meta-value><ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://jatseditor.com" xlink:title="JATS Editor">JATS Editor</ext-link></meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta><meta-name>issue-created-year</meta-name><meta-value>2026</meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-group></article-meta></front><body><sec><title>INTRODUCTION</title><p>In Vietnam, large-scale pig farms are leading the adoption of innovations and progressing through initial digital transformation stages. This transition is expected to reshape the livestock sector by reducing the dominance of disease-vulnerable smallholder farms, promoting sustainable and biosecure production<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-56">(Qui et al., 2025)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-71">(Zhu et al., 2023)</xref>. Technological applications such as microclimate monitoring<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-22">(Gao et al., 2022)</xref> and artificial intelligence (AI) are increasingly integrated to ensure optimal housing, detect abnormal behaviors, monitor health parameters<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-4">(Balthazar et al., 2025)</xref>;<xref rid="BIBR-57" ref-type="bibr">(Reza et al., 2025)</xref>, enable early disease detection<xref rid="BIBR-5" ref-type="bibr">(Bordignon et al., 2025)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-57">(Reza et al., 2025)</xref>, and facilitate rapid outbreak response. Furthermore, automation minimizes human-animal interaction, limiting pathogen transmission and mitigating stress caused by frequent human presence in intensive settings<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-6">(Bossert &amp; Coeckelbergh, 2024)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-68">(Williams et al., 2024)</xref>.</p><p>Despite these advances, the rapid adoption of digital systems raises concerns regarding animal welfare (freedom from hunger and thirst, freedom from discomfort, freedom from pain, injury or disease, freedom to express normal behavior, and freedom from fear and distress) in intensive pig production globally<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-28">(Herlin et al., 2021)</xref>. Overemphasis on productivity can increase stress<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-37">(Karaer et al., 2023)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-47">(Michielon et al., 2024)</xref>, adversely affecting physiological balance and ultimately compromising pork quality<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-21">(Gagaoua et al., 2025)</xref>;<xref rid="BIBR-53" ref-type="bibr">(Ogawa et al., 2024)</xref>. Studies show animal welfare improvements have a nonlinear relationship with productivity<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-50">(Morgado et al., 2023)</xref>, depending on the degree of enhancement and linked to the animal’s physiological responses<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-58">(Riesner et al., 2025)</xref>.</p><p>Restricted space allowance is a major welfare issue, escalating competition for resources<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-9">(Camp et al., 2021)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-13">(Chidgey, 2024)</xref>, elevating aggression, and promoting skin lesions and lameness<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-9">(Camp et al., 2021)</xref>;<xref rid="BIBR-67" ref-type="bibr">(Vermeer et al., 2017)</xref>. Gilts, in particular, may sustain more severe injuries than mixed-sex groups<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-3">(Angela et al., 2023)</xref> due to factors like higher growth rates<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-26">(He et al., 2019)</xref>.</p><p>Stress, whether from an adverse environment or management, activates neural and endocrine pathways<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-41">(Lee et al., 2024)</xref>. While acute stress causes increased blood cortisol and abnormal behavior<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-41">(Lee et al., 2024)</xref>, chronic stress exerts long-term physiological impacts, including suppressed immune function and altered lipid metabolism<xref rid="BIBR-42" ref-type="bibr">(Lomax et al., 2013)</xref>. Cholesterol is central as a precursor<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-60">(Salisbury et al., 2023)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-70">(Zhang et al., 2019)</xref> for steroid/reproductive hormones (testosterone, estradiol, and cortisol steroid hormones (testosterone, estradiol, cortisol), vitamin D, and bile acids<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-10">(Celso &amp; Elise, 2024)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-44">(Ma et al., 2024)</xref>, essential for homeostasis, reproductive function, and lipid metabolism. Prolonged stress is linked to reduced lymphocyte count and altered monocyte quality<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-45">(Maydych et al., 2017)</xref>, leading to impaired immune function<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-2">(Alotiby, 2024)</xref>;<xref rid="BIBR-19" ref-type="bibr">(Dhabhar, 2014)</xref>. Consequently, growth indicators such as average daily gain (ADG) are reduced<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-59">(Rodrigues et al., 2024)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-61">(Silpa et al., 2025)</xref>, and slaughter age is delayed<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-31">(Hultgren et al., 2022)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-63">(Terlouw &amp; Gagaoua, 2023)</xref>.</p><p>Given these challenges, achieving a balance between production efficiency and animal welfare is critical for the modern pig industry. Especially in rapidly digitalizing Vietnam, integrating welfare assessment into management is essential for sustainable development and improved meat quality. Therefore, the present study was designed to evaluate the welfare status (good feeding, good housing, good health, and appropriate behavior) of finishing pigs (aged 124 - 156 days) and assess post-slaughter meat quality indicators across farms of different production scales.</p></sec><sec><title>MATERIALS AND METHODS</title><sec><title>Study Site and Farm Classification</title><p>The study was conducted from October 2024 to October 2025 across 45 pig farms in Dong Nai Province, Vietnam. Farms were categorized into three distinct scales according to the Law on Animal Husbandry (Government of Vietnam, 2020) and sow-unit equivalents: small-scale (SF, 10-30 units, equivalent to approximately 100 sows), medium-scale (MF, 30-300 units, equivalent to approximately 100-500 sows), and large-scale (LF, over 300 units, equivalent to over 500 sows). Prior to data collection, farm managers were interviewed to ensure only healthy herds, free from recent disease outbreaks, were included in the assessment.</p></sec><sec><title>Experimental Design</title><p>The study was conducted using a completely randomized design (CRD), with farm scale as the main experimental factor. For the welfare assessment component, 45 farms (N = 15 per scale) were evaluated, with each farm serving as an experimental unit. For meat quality evaluation, 18 finishing pigs (crossbred PDLY; balanced for sex: 3 barrows and 3 gilts per scale) were randomly selected for slaughter. A total of 36 <italic>Longissimus dorsi</italic> (LD) muscle samples (two per pig) were collected. Statistical analyses for meat quality were based on six biological replicates per treatment group.</p></sec><sec><title>Assessment Protocol For Finishing Pigs</title><p>The welfare assessment of growing-finishing pigs was conducted based on the Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for pigs (2009). Prior to data collection, preliminary interviews were performed with farm managers to exclude farms with disease outbreaks or health issues that could bias the welfare assessment. Subsequently, pens and observation areas were selected randomly. The Welfare Quality® framework evaluates animal welfare using four main principles, namely good feeding (GF), good housing (GHs), good health (GHt), and appropriate behavior (B) (<xref rid="table-3" ref-type="table">Table 1</xref>). Each principle encompasses specific criteria designed to assess distinct aspects of animal welfare while avoiding overlap or double-counting (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table-2">Table 2</xref>).</p><p>Each criterion was scored on a 0-100 point scale according to the detailed standards described in the guidelines of Welfare Quality® (2009). The mean score for each criterion was used to calculate the corresponding principal score, which reflects the overall welfare level of growing-finishing pigs according to the following classification: 0-20 points means not classified; &gt; 20-60 points means acceptable; &gt; 60-80 points means enhanced; and &gt; 80-100 points means excellent.</p><table-wrap id="table-3" ignoredToc=""><label>Table 1</label><caption><p>. Main principles and definitions of the Welfare Quality® framework</p></caption><table frame="box" rules="all"><thead><tr><th valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Principle</th><th align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Detailed definition</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="middle">Good feeding (GF)</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Animals should not suffer from prolonged hunger or thirst; they must have access to an appropriate diet and an adequate clean water supply.</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="middle">Good housing (GH)</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Animals should have sufficient space to move freely, with an environment that maintains comfortable thermal conditions.</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="middle" align="left">Good health (GHt)</td><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Animals should be free from injuries, diseases, and pain caused by management and husbandry procedures such as castration,  ear tagging, tail docking, etc.</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="middle">Appropriate behaviour (B)</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Animals should be able to express normal and social behaviors, be handled gently, and avoid negative emotional states such as fear, etc.</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>Note: Source: Welfare Quality®, 2009.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap><table-wrap ignoredToc="" id="table-2"><label>Table 2</label><caption><p>List of 12 criteria used in the Welfare Quality® Assessment protocol for growing-finishing pigs</p></caption><table frame="box" rules="all"><thead><tr><th valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1">Principle</th><th valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1">Criteria</th><th valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1">Measure for growing and finishing pigs</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1">Good feeding</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">1. Absence of prolonged hunger</td><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Body condition score (BCS)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">2. Absence of prolonged thirst</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Water supply (nipple drinker)</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3" valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1">Good housing</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">3. Comfort around resting</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Bursitis and absence of manure on the body</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">4. Thermal comfort</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Shivering, panting, and huddling</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">5. Ease of movement</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Space allowance</td></tr><tr><td valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="3">Good health</td><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">6. Absence of injuries</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Lameness, wounds on the body and tail biting</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">7. Absence of disease</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Mortality, coughing, skin condition, hernia, and rectal prolapse</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">8. Absence of pain induced by management procedures</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Castration, ear tagging, and tail docking</td></tr><tr><td valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="4">Appropriate behaviour</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">9. Expression of social behaviour</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Social interaction</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">10. Expression of other behaviour</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Exploratory behaviour</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">11. Good human-animal relationship</td><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Avoidance distance (fear of humans)</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">12. Positive emotional state</td><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA)</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>Note: Source: Welfare Quality®, 2009.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap></sec><sec><title>Ethical Approval</title><p>The present study, which involved field investigation and post-slaughter sampling of growing-finishing pigs, was conducted in accordance with the animal welfare and ethical guidelines of the Animal Ethics Committees, Nong Lam University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (AEC - NLU). The committee confirmed that no ethics approvals were required because only commercial post-slaughter samples were used in the current study.</p></sec><sec><title>Meat Quality Evaluation</title><sec><title><bold>Slaughtering process.</bold></title><p>Six crossbred pigs (three barrows and three gilts) per treatment, with an average final body weight of 103.2 ± 1.4 kg, were slaughtered under standardized commercial conditions. Prior to transport to the slaughterhouse, pigs were fasted for 8 h on the farm with <italic>ad libitum</italic> access to water in accordance with animal welfare requirements for pre-slaughter management described in Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009. At the slaughterhouse, pigs were stunned using electrical shock (voltage ≥ 200 V; frequency 50–60 Hz; duration ≥ 3 seconds), followed by exsanguination, scalding, and depilation.</p><p>Carcasses were then transferred to the processing line for inspection and removal of by-products (front feet, head, and any contaminated tissues). A total of 36 longissimus dorsi (LD) muscle samples were collected between the 10<sup>th</sup> and 15<sup>th</sup> ribs, with individual sample weights ranging from 1.5-2.5 kg. All samples were vacuum-packed and stored at 4 °C for subsequent determination of meat quality parameters, including pH value, color, water-holding capacity, chemical composition, and fatty acid profiles.</p></sec><sec><title><bold>Measurement of meat quality variables.</bold></title><p>pH value<bold>:</bold> LD muscle samples (36 samples, approximately 120 g each) were vacuum-packed and stored at 2–4 <sup>o</sup>C. The pH value was measured using a portable meat pH meter (HI9816, Hanna Instruments, Italy) at 45 minutes, 24 h, and 48 h after the slaughter. For each sample, five readings were taken at different points, and the mean value was recorded as the final pH.</p><p>Meat color: Meat color was determined at 24 and 48 h after slaughter using a CR-300 Chroma Meter (Minolta Co., Osaka, Japan). Five readings per sample were taken at different points, and the mean values for L* (lightness), a* (redness), and b* (yellowness) were calculated to represent meat color parameters.</p><p>Water-holding capacity (WHC) traits: The ability of meat to retain water was assessed through drip loss and cooking loss measurements.</p><p>For drip loss, samples (36 samples, 120 g/sample) were vacuum-packed, stored at 2–4 °C for 24 and 48 h, blotted dry, and reweighed. Drip loss (%) was calculated as the difference in sample weight before and after storage<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-29">(Honikel, 1997)</xref>.</p><p>For cooking loss, samples (36 samples, 120 g/sample) were cooked in a water bath at 75 °C for 60 min until reaching an internal temperature of 70 °C. Cooking loss (%) was expressed as the difference in sample weight before and after cooking<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-29">(Honikel, 1997)</xref></p><p>Chemical composition and fatty acid profiles<bold>:</bold> LD muscle samples (36 samples, approximately 120 g each) were vacuum-packed, stored at 2–4 °C, and analyzed at the UP-Science Laboratory (1B Quarter, An Phu, Thuan An, Binh Duong, Vietnam). Crude protein, lipid, phosphorus, zinc, and iron were quantified using standard analytical procedures according to ISO 5983-1:2005<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-34">(I.S.O., 2005)</xref>, ISO 1443:1973<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-32">(I.S.O., 1973)</xref>, ISO 23776:2021<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-36">(I.S.O., 2021)</xref>, and ISO 6869:2000<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-33">(I.S.O., 2000)</xref>, respectively, while fatty acid profiles were determined according to ISO 12966-2:2017<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-35">(I.S.O., 2017)</xref>. Moisture content was quantified using a standard oven-drying technique. Intramuscular fat (IMF) was determined in duplicate by Soxhlet extraction according to Horwid &amp; Latimer (2012)<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-30">(Horwitz &amp; Latimer, 2012)</xref>. Fatty acid composition of LT samples was analyzed based on the method described by Zhang <italic>et al.</italic> (2019)<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-70">(Zhang et al., 2019)</xref>. The average value of duplicate measurements was used for all subsequent analyses.</p></sec></sec><sec><title>Statistical Analysis</title><p>Analyzed using GraphPad Prism 8.3 (GraphPad Software Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). Each farm was treated as the experimental unit for all analyses, whereas the LD muscle sample was considered the experimental unit for meat quality measurements. A completely randomized design (CRD) with one experimental factor (farm scale) was applied. Analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA) was performed to compare animal welfare scores and meat quality indicators. All data were expressed as the mean. Results were considered significantly different at p&lt;0.05 and, when there was a significant effect, values were compared with a Tukey’s multiple range post hoc test.</p></sec></sec><sec><title>RESULTS</title><sec><title>Animal Welfare</title><p>The assessment outcomes of animal welfare demonstrated noticeable differences in welfare performance among the three farm scales (p&lt;0.05;<xref ref-type="fig" rid="figure-1">Figure 1</xref>). Large-scale farms (LF) showed the highest mean scores for absence of prolonged thirst, thermal comfort, and human-animal relationship, whereas medium-scale farms (MF) had intermediate scores and small-scale farms (SF) exhibited the lowest values. In contrast, the absence of the prolonged hunger criterion was greatest in SF (73.69 points), followed by MF (64.12 points) and LF (56.48 points). The remaining indicators, including comfort around resting, ease of movement, absence of injuries, and expression of social behavior, <italic>showed</italic> mean scores ranging from 50 to 90 points, reflecting moderate to favorable welfare levels. For the absence of disease and absence of pain induced by management procedures, average scores were consistently low (approximately 8 points) across all farm scales. This result was mainly associated with routine piglet management practices, such as teeth clipping and tail docking. No significant differences were observed among farm scales.</p><fig id="figure-1" ignoredToc=""><label>Figure 1</label><graphic mimetype="image" xlink:href="https://journal.ipb.ac.id/tasj/article/download/70255/version/50698/33954/414693" mime-subtype="png"><alt-text>Image</alt-text></graphic></fig><p>The principles of good feeding and appropriate behavior were within an acceptable to enhanced range across all three farm scales (<xref rid="figure-2" ref-type="fig">Figure 2</xref>). In contrast, the remaining welfare principles showed significant differences among the three treatments (p&lt;0.05). Meanwhile, the good health principle remained very low across all farm scales and was classified as “not classified.”. Overall, an increasing trend in welfare performance with farm scale was particularly evident for the good housing principle in growing-finishing pigs.</p><fig id="figure-2" ignoredToc=""><label>Figure 2</label><graphic mime-subtype="png" mimetype="image" xlink:href="https://journal.ipb.ac.id/tasj/article/download/70255/version/50698/33954/414694"><alt-text>Image</alt-text></graphic></fig><fig id="figure-3" ignoredToc=""><label>Figure 3</label><graphic mime-subtype="png" mimetype="image" xlink:href="https://journal.ipb.ac.id/tasj/article/download/70255/version/50698/33954/414695"><alt-text>Image</alt-text></graphic></fig></sec><sec><title>Meat Quality Indicators</title><sec><title><bold>pH value.</bold></title><p>No significant differences were observed in the pH value of pork among the three farm scales at 45 minutes post-slaughter ( Figure 3). However, at 24 hours after slaughter, pigs from large-scale farms (LF) exhibited a higher mean pH value (5.61) compared with those from MF (5.55) and SF (5.54) farms (p&lt;0.01). The final pH values measured across the three scales were 5.57 (SF), 5.63 (MF), and 5.61 (LF), with a significant difference (p&lt;0.01). These results indicate that carcasses from pigs raised on large-scale farms tended to maintain a slightly higher pH value, possibly reflecting better regulation of postmortem muscle glycolysis and reduced pre-slaughter stress compared to smaller-scale operations.</p></sec><sec><title><bold>Meat color.</bold></title><p>At 24 hours post-slaughter, the lightness (L*) of pork from MF (57.23) was significantly higher (p&lt;0.01;<xref ref-type="table" rid="table-4">Table 3</xref>) than that from SF (54.62) and LF (51.31). The redness (a*) value increased with farm scale, being lowest in MF (14.05), intermediate in SF (15.07), and highest in LF (16.33) (p&lt;0.01). Conversely, the yellowness (b*) value was greatest in MF (7.93), followed by LF (7.10) and SF (7.04) (p&lt;0.01).</p><p>At 48 hours post-slaughter, the L* value in MF (58.54) remained significantly higher (p&lt;0.01;<xref ref-type="table" rid="table-4">Table 3</xref>) than those in LF (53.83) and SF (54.26). According to Warner et al. (1997), pork with an L* value above 50 is considered lighter-colored, whereas values below 42 indicate darker-colored meat; thus, all treatments fell within the normal color range (&gt; 50). The a* value at 48 hours was significantly affected by farm scale (p&lt;0.01), ranging from 12.68 (MF) to 15.53 (LF). In addition, the b* value in the MF (8.65) was higher than that in the SF (8.03) (p=0.012), suggesting a slightly more yellow hue in meat from medium-scale farms.</p><table-wrap id="table-4" ignoredToc=""><label>Table 3</label><caption><p>Pork color traits at 24 and 48 h post-slaughter across three different farm scales</p></caption><table frame="box" rules="all"><thead><tr><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="2" valign="middle">Indicators</th><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="3">Farm scale</th><th rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1">SEM</th><th colspan="1" rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="center">p-value</th></tr><tr><th align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">SF</th><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">MF</th><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">LF</th></tr><tr><th colspan="6" valign="top" align="left">24 hours post-slaughter</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">L*</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">54.62ᵇ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">57.23ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">51.31<sup>c</sup></td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.307</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">&lt; 0.01</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">a*</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">15.07ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">14.05<sup>c</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">16.33ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.188</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">&lt; 0.01</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">b*</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">7.04ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">7.93ᵃ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">7.10ᵇ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.161</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">&lt; 0.01</td></tr><tr><th valign="top" align="left" colspan="6">48 hours post-slaughter</th></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">L*</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">54.26ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">58.54ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">53.83ᵇ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.210</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">&lt; 0.01</td></tr><tr><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">a*</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">14.52ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">12.68<sup>c</sup></td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">15.53ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.090</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">&lt; 0.01</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">b*</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">8.03ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">8.65ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">8.48<sup>ab</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.149</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.012</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>Note: Means in the same row with different superscripts differ significantly (p&lt;0.05). SF= small-scale farm; MF=medium-scale farm; LF=large-scale farm; L*= lightness; a*= redness; b*= yellowness; SEM=standard error of means.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap></sec><sec><title>Water-holding capacity.</title><p>At 24 hours post-slaughter, drip loss did not differ significantly among the three farm scales (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table-5">Table 4</xref>). However, cooking loss in pork from medium-scale farms (33.63%) was significantly higher (p&lt;0.05) than that from SF (30.25%) and large-scale farms (29.00%). At 48 hours post-slaughter, the percentage of drip loss increased with farm scale, being lowest in SF (1.38%) and highest in MF (2.10%) and LF (2.00%) (p&lt;0.01). Similarly, cooking loss values were higher in MF (32.98%) and LF (32.59%) compared with SF (27.40%) (p&lt;0.05). Overall, pork from medium-scale and large-scale farms exhibited slightly greater water loss during storage and cooking, and a slightly lower water-holding capacity than pork from small-scale farms.</p><table-wrap ignoredToc="" id="table-5"><label>Table 4</label><caption><p>Drip loss and cooking loss of pork across three different farm scales</p></caption><table frame="box" rules="all"><thead><tr><th rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1">Indicators</th><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="3">Farm scale</th><th rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1">SEM</th><th colspan="1" rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="center">p-value</th></tr><tr><th colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">SF</th><th align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">MF</th><th valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1">LF</th></tr><tr><th valign="top" align="left" colspan="6">24 hours post-slaughter</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Drip loss (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.42</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.42</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.44</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.135</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.997</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Cooking loss (%)</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">29.00ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">33.63ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">30.25<sup>ab</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.189</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.045</td></tr><tr><th colspan="6" valign="top" align="left">48 hours post-slaughter</th></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Drip loss (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.38ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2.10ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2.00ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.125</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.003</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Cooking loss (%)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">27.40ᵇ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">32.98ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">32.59ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.013</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.019</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>Note: Means in the same row with different superscripts differ significantly (p&lt;0.05). SF= small-scale farm; MF= medium-scale farm; LF= large-scale farm; SEM=standard error of means.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table-1" ignoredToc=""><label>Table 5</label><caption><p>Chemical composition of pork across three different farm scales</p></caption><table frame="box" rules="all"><thead><tr><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="2" valign="middle">Indicators</th><th align="center" colspan="3" valign="top">Farm scale</th><th rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1">SEM</th><th align="center" colspan="1" rowspan="2" valign="middle">p-value</th></tr><tr><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">SF</th><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">MF</th><th colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">LF</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Crude protein (g/100g)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">20.21</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">20.80</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">20.70</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.574</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.820</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Lipid (g/100g)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">6.65</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">7.85</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">8.45</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2.891</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.910</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">P (mg/kg)</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">2029.5</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2227.5</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">2250.0</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">135.8</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.527</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Zn (mg/kg)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">15.90</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">17.75</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">21.45</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.167</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.092</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Fe (mg/kg)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">7.58ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">12.27<sup>ab</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">20.40ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.157</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.021</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>Note: Means in the same row with different superscripts differ significantly (p&lt;0.05). SF= small-scale farm; MF= medium-scale farm; LF= large-scale farm; SEM=standard error of means.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap></sec><sec><title><bold>Chemical composition and the profile of fafly acids.</bold></title><p>The predominant fatty acids identified in pork samples were palmitic acid (C16:0), stearic acid (C18:0), and oleic acid (C18:1), which together accounted for the majority of total fatty acids across all farm scales (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table-6">Table 6</xref>). The proportion of saturated fatty acids (SFA) was highest in SF (41.48%), followed by MF (39.27%) and LF (39.01%), but the differences were not significant (p&gt;0.05). Conversely, the concentration of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), particularly linoleic acid (C18:2), linolenic acid (C18:3), and arachidonic acid (C20:4), tended to increase in pork from MF and LF (p&lt;0.05). Similarly, the UFA/SFA ratio increased slightly with farm scale, from 1.38 in SF to 1.57 in LF, although the difference was not statistically significant. Overall, pork from larger-scale farms showed a trend toward a higher proportion of unsaturated fatty acids, suggesting a potentially more favorable lipid profile, even though most differences among farm scales were not significant.</p><table-wrap id="table-6" ignoredToc=""><label>Table 6</label><caption><p> Fatty acid profile of pork across three different farm scales</p></caption><table frame="box" rules="all"><thead><tr><th rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="left" colspan="1">Fatty acids</th><th align="center" colspan="3" valign="top">Farm scale</th><th colspan="1" rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="center">SEM</th><th rowspan="2" valign="middle" align="center" colspan="1">p-value</th></tr><tr><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">SF</th><th valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">MF</th><th align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">LF</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Caprylic (C10:1)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.11</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.10</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.05</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.029</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.416</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Undecanoic (C12:0)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.01ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.26ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.21<sup>ab</sup></td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.023</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.034</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Myristic (C14:0)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.46</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.70</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.60</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.066</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.172</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Palmitic (C16:0)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">26.21ᵃ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">24.22ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">23.69ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.267</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.014</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">Palmitoleic (C16:1)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">3.55</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">2.90</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2.39</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.348</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.208</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Stearic (C18:0)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">14.66</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">12.25</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">12.82</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.559</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.109</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Cis - Oleic (C18:1)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">42.29</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">40.54</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">40.76</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.582</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.722</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Linoleic (C18: 2)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">7.78ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">13.00ᵃ</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">14.14ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.313</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.001</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Linolenic (C18:3)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.24ᵇ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.53ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.48<sup>ab</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.044</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.035</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Eicosadiennoic (C20:2)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.32</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.38</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.74</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.093</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.089</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Arachidonic (C20:4)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.56<sup>c</sup></td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2.27ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">3.07ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.101</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.004</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Docosatetraenoic (C22:4)</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.30ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.39ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.55ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.021</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.007</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Docosapentaenoic (C22:5)</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.15ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.30<sup>ab</sup></td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.35ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.028</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.029</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Omega 3</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.32ᵇ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.75ᵃ</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.68ᵃ</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.051</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.017</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">Omega 6</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">10.29</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">15.15</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">15.53</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">2.548</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.389</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">Omega 9</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">38.56</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">37.68</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">37.56</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.527</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.884</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" valign="top">SFA</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">41.48</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">39.27</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">39.01</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.219</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.405</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">MUFA</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">46.78</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">44.39</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">44.24</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.606</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.532</td></tr><tr><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="left">PUFA</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">10.51</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">16.34</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">16.76</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">2.211</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">0.230</td></tr><tr><td valign="top" align="left" colspan="1">UFA/SFA ratio</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.38</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">1.55</td><td align="center" colspan="1" valign="top">1.57</td><td valign="top" align="center" colspan="1">0.068</td><td colspan="1" valign="top" align="center">0.258</td></tr></tbody></table><table-wrap-foot><p>Note: Means in the same row with different superscripts differ significantly (p&lt;0.05). SF= small-scale farm; MF= medium-scale farm; LF= large-scale farm; SEM= standard error of means. SFA= saturated fatty acids; MUFA= monounsaturated fatty acids; PUFA= polyunsaturated fatty acids; UFA= unsaturated fatty acids.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap></sec></sec></sec><sec><title>DISCUSSION</title><p>Restricted space allowance in most commercial pig production systems and industrial limits the animals’ ability to move freely and express natural behaviors. In the present study, the average space provided for finishing pigs (126-154 days old) ranged between 0.4 and 0.6 m² per pig (Gonçalves Vero et al., 2023), which is considerably lower than the recommended standard of 0.8-1.2 m² per pig established by welfare guidelines<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-38">(Kim et al., 2016)</xref>. Such confinement conditions can increase competition for space, feed, and water resources, leading to heightened stress and aggressive interactions among pigs.</p><p>One common management practice contributing to welfare challenges is regrouping, particularly during the transition from the nursery to the growing-finishing stage<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-16">(Coutellier et al., 2007)</xref>. Pigs originating from different litters are frequently mixed according to similar age or body weight<xref rid="BIBR-3" ref-type="bibr">(Angela et al., 2023)</xref>, which often provokes fighting behavior as animals attempt to establish new social hierarchies<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-15">(Clavell-Sansalvador et al., 2024)</xref>. These confrontations may result in skin lesions<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-15">(Clavell-Sansalvador et al., 2024)</xref>, leg and hoof injuries<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-7">(Boyle et al., 2022)</xref>, and negative emotional states, such as fear or avoidance of human contact<xref rid="BIBR-40" ref-type="bibr">(Lecorps et al., 2020)</xref>, which can be observed through behavioral changes within pens.</p><p>Furthermore, several painful husbandry and management procedures are still routinely implemented across farms of all sizes, probably due to preventive measures. Among these, tail docking remains a common practice to mitigate the risk of tail biting<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-66">(Valros, 2024)</xref> during the growing-finishing period<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-17">(D’eath et al., 2014)</xref>. However, findings from this study demonstrated that this management intervention contributed to one of the lowest welfare scores under the criterion “absence of pain induced by management procedures.” This outcome reinforces concerns that routine invasive practices can adversely affect animal welfare, emphasizing the need for refinement or replacement with less painful alternatives.</p><p>In recent years, many large-scale pig production systems have adopted modernized, biosecure housing models to reduce the risk of infectious diseases such as African Swine Fever (ASF). One common innovation is the implementation of zero-discharge slatted floor systems<xref rid="BIBR-8" ref-type="bibr">(Butucel et al., 2022)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-69">(Witkowska &amp; Ponieważ, 2022)</xref>, which aim to minimize water usage and wastewater generation. These systems help maintain lower humidity levels within barns<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-24">(Han et al., 2024)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-51">(Mosquera et al., 2019)</xref> and effectively limit the proliferation of pathogenic microorganisms, including bacteria and fungi that thrive in moist environments<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-12">(Cheng et al., 2024)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-25">(Haq et al., 2024)</xref>. However, despite their biosecurity advantages, such systems may pose potential welfare challenges. In addition, the accumulation of manure or urine on the animals’ bodies, due to infrequent washing or inadequate drainage, can cause pigs to develop skin irritations or diseases and dermatological disorders/coughing symptoms<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-11">(Chen et al., 2024)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-20">(Duniere et al., 2024)</xref>. Thus, these factors may be associated with the relatively low scores observed for the “absence of disease” criterion in large-scale farms.</p><p>Nutritional management also plays a crucial role in maintaining welfare outcomes across production scales. Understanding the nutrient requirements of pigs at different growth stages allows farms to maintain relatively consistent body condition scores (BCS) (3.5-4.5 points per maximum of 5) in finishing herds<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-49">(Moniruzzaman et al., 2023)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-62">(Song et al., 2025)</xref>. Additionally, most large-scale farms ensure sufficient nipple drinkers that provide continuous and unrestricted access (<italic>ad libitum</italic>) to clean water. Therefore, the “good housing” principle consistently achieved higher ratings, reaching the enhanced welfare level across scales. Furthermore, large-scale farms are also more likely to invest in modern housing designs, such as enclosed housing systems (EHS), which provide improved environmental control compared with conventional indoor housing (IHS)<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-18">(Delsart et al., 2020)</xref>. For example, Song <italic>et al.</italic> (2011)<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-62">(Song et al., 2025)</xref> reported that the EHS facilities maintained summer temperatures between 24.8 and 29.1 °C, while conventional barns exhibited wider fluctuations (up to 7.6 °C) with peaks of 32.3 °C. Such temperature stability is essential for maintaining animal comfort and productivity.</p><p>Moreover, most large-scale pig farms operate under integrated commercial or contract farming models, where companies collaborate with farmers through structured production and marketing agreements<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-65">(Thawee et al., 2024)</xref>. In contrast, small-scale farms often lack comprehensive feed planning<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-65">(Thawee et al., 2024)</xref>, resulting in inconsistent feed quality or occasional shortages<xref rid="BIBR-65" ref-type="bibr">(Thawee et al., 2024)</xref>. Many large-scale farms have established contracts with feed mills, supported by silo storage and automated feeding systems, ensuring both feed consistency and efficiency<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-48">(Miller et al., 2023)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-65">(Thawee et al., 2024)</xref>. As a result, pigs raised under large-scale systems may exhibit minor differences in chemical composition and nutritional value compared with those from smaller farms.</p><p>From a meat science perspective, stress-induced physiological changes affect muscle glycogen reserves, which play a key role in post-mortem glycolysis and meat quality. Depletion of glycogen prior to slaughter limits lactic acid production, leading to high ultimate pH and the development of dark, firm, and dry (DFD) meat<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-39">(Kiyimba et al., 2024)</xref>;<xref rid="BIBR-64" ref-type="bibr">(Terlouw et al., 2021)</xref>. In contrast, acute pre-slaughter stress accelerates glycolysis, causing rapid glycogen breakdown and excessive lactic acid accumulation while carcass temperature remains high, resulting in protein denaturation, reduced water-holding capacity, and the formation of pale, soft, and exudative (PSE) meat<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-43">(Ma et al., 2022)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-46">(Michelle et al., 2024)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-53">(Ogawa et al., 2024)</xref>. Numerous studies have demonstrated the antimicrobial and antioxidative properties of plant-derived compounds, which can enhance gut health, immunity, and overall growth performance. The incorporation of herbal extracts not only supports disease resistance but also contributes to improved meat quality indicators, particularly in terms of lipid profile. In fact, the antimicrobial ability of various herbal extracts has been well-documented in numerous studies<xref rid="BIBR-27" ref-type="bibr">(Hemeg et al., 2020)</xref>, primarily due to the natural bioactive compounds present in plants, which contribute to improved animal health<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-52">(Njimoh et al., 2015)</xref> and reduced disease incidence<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-1">(Alem, 2024)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-23">(Guo et al., 2024)</xref>. Phytogenic additives play an important role as natural antioxidants, helping to reduce oxidative stress and improve meat quality<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-55">(Orzuna-Orzuna et al., 2024)</xref>;<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="BIBR-54">(Orlowski et al., 2018)</xref>. These bioactive compounds are associated with increased proportions of unsaturated fatty acids (such as linoleic, linolenic, and arachidonic acids) and a higher UFA/SFA ratio, aligning with the growing consumer preference for healthier, nutritionally balanced pork products.</p></sec><sec><title>CONCLUSION</title><p>The assessment results indicated that large-scale pig farms achieve higher standards in animal welfare principles, specifically regarding feeding and housing management, compared to medium and small-scale farms. However, health status and behavioral indicators remain relatively consistent across all production scales. In terms of meat quality, while large-scale farming influences certain quality traits, the overall differences in chemical composition and water retention properties among the scales are not substantial. These findings suggest that although large-scale production systems may provide relatively more consistent environmental management and feeding practices, their potential advantages in meat quality were limited under the conditions of the present study.</p></sec></body><back><ack><sec><title>ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  </title><p>This study was conducted while Dang Thi Ngoc Anh was supported by a scholarship from the Korea International Cooperation Agency while pursuing a graduate degree at Konkuk University.</p></sec></ack><sec><title>DECLARATION OF GENERATIVE AI AND AI-ASSISTED TECHNOLOGIES IN THE WRITING PROCESS  </title><p>During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used ChatGPT in order to improve the readability and language of the manuscript. After using this tool/service, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the publication.</p></sec><ref-list><title>REFERENCES</title><ref id="BIBR-1"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effect of herbal extracts in animal nutrition as feed additives</article-title><source>Heliyon</source><volume>10</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Alem</surname><given-names>W.T.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>24973</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24973</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-2"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Immunology of stress: A review article</article-title><source>Journal of Clinical Medicine</source><volume>13</volume><issue>21</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Alotiby</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>6394</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/jcm13216394</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-3"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Mixed management in growing and finishing pigs: Differences between gender and their impacts on behavior, growth performance, and physiological parameters</article-title><source>PLoS ONE</source><volume>18</volume><issue>4</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Angela</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Oliveira.</surname></name><name><surname>Costa</surname><given-names>L.B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Weber</surname><given-names>S.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ramayo-Caldas</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dalmau</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>0284481</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0284481</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-4"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>RobôFrango: Proof of concept of a mobile biosensor robot for environmental monitoring in broiler houses</article-title><source>Results in Engineering</source><volume>28</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Balthazar</surname><given-names>G.d R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Silveira</surname><given-names>R.M.F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Soares</surname><given-names>T.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Silva</surname><given-names>I.J.O.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><page-range>107796</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.rineng.2025.107796</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-5"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Smart technologies to improve the management and resilience to climate change of livestock housing: A systematic and critical review</article-title><source>Italian Journal of Animal Science</source><volume>24</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bordignon</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Provolo</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Riva</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Caria</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Todde</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sara</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cesarini</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Grossi</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Vitali</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lacetera</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Pezzuolo</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><fpage>376</fpage><lpage>392</lpage><page-range>376-392</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/1828051X.2025.2455500</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-6"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>From milkingbots to robodolphins: How AI changes human-animal relations and enables alienation towards animals</article-title><source>Humanities and Social Sciences Communications</source><volume>11</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bossert</surname><given-names>L.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Coeckelbergh</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>920</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1057/s41599-024-03441-3</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-7"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>The evidence for a causal link between disease and damaging behavior in pigs</article-title><source>Frontiers in Veterinary Science</source><volume>8</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Boyle</surname><given-names>L.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Edwards</surname><given-names>S.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Bolhuis</surname><given-names>J.E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Pol</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Šemrov</surname><given-names>M.Z.</given-names></name><name><surname>Schütze</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Nordgreen</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Bozakova</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sossidou</surname><given-names>E.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Valros</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><page-range>771682</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fvets.2021.771682</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-8"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Farm biosecurity measures and interventions with an impact on bacterial biofilms</article-title><source>Agriculture</source><volume>12</volume><issue>8</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Butucel</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Balta</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><name><surname>McCleery</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Morariu</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Pet</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Popescu</surname><given-names>C.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Stef</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Corcionivoschi</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><page-range>1251</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/agriculture12081251</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-9"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effect of space allowance and mixing on growth performance and body lesions of grower-finisher pigs in pens with a single wet-dry feeder</article-title><source>Porcine Health Management</source><volume>7</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Camp</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>J.</surname><given-names>Boyle</given-names></name><name><surname>A.</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Solà-Oriol</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Muns</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gasa</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Garcia Manzanilla</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><page-range>7</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s40813-020-00187-7</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-10"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Cholesterol availability and adrenal steroidogenesis</article-title><source>Endocrinology</source><volume>165</volume><issue>4</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Celso</surname><given-names>E.G.-S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Elise</surname><given-names>P.G.-S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1210/endocr/bqae032</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-11"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Daily occupational exposure in swine farm alters human skin microbiota and antibiotic resistome</article-title><source>Imeta</source><volume>3</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>D.R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cheng</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wan</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cui</surname><given-names>C.Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>D.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yu</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Liao</surname><given-names>X.P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>Y.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>D’Souza</surname><given-names>A.W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lian</surname><given-names>X.L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sun</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>158</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/imt2.158</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-12"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Indoor thermal comfort sector: A review of detection and control methods for thermal environment in livestock buildings</article-title><source>Sustainability</source><volume>16</volume><issue>4</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cheng</surname><given-names>Q.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Xu</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name><name><surname>He</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>Z.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>1662</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/su16041662</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-13"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Review: Space allowance for growing pigs: animal welfare, performance and on-farm practicality</article-title><source>Animal</source><volume>18</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chidgey</surname><given-names>K.L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>100890</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.animal.2023.100890</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-14"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effects of different stocking density and various phytogenic feed additives dosage levels on growing-finishing pigs</article-title><source>Journal of Animal Science and Technology</source><volume>65</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cho</surname><given-names>H.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Song</surname><given-names>M.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lee</surname><given-names>J.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Oh</surname><given-names>H.J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>Y.J.</given-names></name><name><surname>An</surname><given-names>J.W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chang</surname><given-names>S.Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Go</surname><given-names>Y.B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Song</surname><given-names>D.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cho</surname><given-names>S.Y.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>535</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5187/jast.2023.e19</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-15"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effect of group mixing and available space on performance, feeding behavior, and fecal microbiota composition during the growth period of pigs</article-title><source>Animals</source><volume>14</volume><issue>18</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Clavell-Sansalvador</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Río-López</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>González-Rodríguez</surname><given-names>O.</given-names></name><name><surname>García-Gil</surname><given-names>L.J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Xifró</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zigovski</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ochoteco-Asensio</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ballester</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dalmau</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ramayo-Caldas</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>2704</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/ani14182704</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-16"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Pig’s responses to repeated social regrouping and relocation during the growing-finishing period</article-title><source>Applied Animal Behaviour Science</source><volume>105</volume><issue>1-3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Coutellier</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Arnould</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Boissy</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Orgeur</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Prunier</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Veissier</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Meunier-Salaün</surname><given-names>M.-C.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2007</year><fpage>102</fpage><lpage>114</lpage><page-range>102-114</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.applanim.2006.05.007</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-17"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Injurious tail biting in pigs: How can it be controlled in existing systems without tail docking?</article-title><source>Animal</source><volume>8</volume><issue>9</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>D’eath</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Arnott</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Turner</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Jensen</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lahrmann</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Busch</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Niemi</surname><given-names>J.K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lawrence</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sandøe</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2014</year><fpage>1479</fpage><lpage>1497</lpage><page-range>1479-1497</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/S1751731114001359</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-18"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Pig farming in alternative systems: Strengths and challenges in terms of animal welfare, bosecurity, animal health and pork safety</article-title><source>Agriculture</source><volume>10</volume><issue>7</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Delsart</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Pol</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dufour</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rose</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Fablet</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><page-range>261</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/agriculture10070261</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-19"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effects of stress on immune function: the good, the bad, and the beautiful</article-title><source>Immunologic Research</source><volume>58</volume><issue>2-3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dhabhar</surname><given-names>F.S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2014</year><fpage>193</fpage><lpage>210</lpage><page-range>193-210</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s12026-014-8517-0</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-20"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Conditioner application improves bedding quality and bacterial composition with potential beneficial impacts for dairy cow’s health</article-title><source>Microbiology Spectrum</source><volume>12</volume><issue>4</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Duniere</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Frayssinet</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Achard</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chevaux</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Plateau</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>0426323</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/spectrum.04263-23</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-21"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Towards a ‘One quality’ approach of pork: A perspective on the challenges and opportunities in the context of the farm-to-fork continuum – Invited review</article-title><source>Meat Science</source><volume>226</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gagaoua</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gondret</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lebret</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><page-range>109834</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.meatsci.2025.109834</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-22"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Microclimate environment model construction and control strategy of enclosed laying brooder house</article-title><source>Poultry Science</source><volume>101</volume><issue>6</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gao</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Er</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wen</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Jia</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Huo</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><page-range>101843</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.psj.2022.101843</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-23"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>The role of plant extracts in enhancing nutrition and health for dogs and cats: Safety, benefits, and applications</article-title><source>Veterinary Sciences</source><volume>11</volume><issue>9</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Guo</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhu</surname><given-names>Z.</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>426</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/vetsci11090426</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-24"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Recent application of heat pump systems for environmental control in livestock facilities–A Review</article-title><source>Agriculture</source><volume>14</volume><issue>12</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Han</surname><given-names>Z.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dai</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>2309</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/agriculture14122309</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-25"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Eco-smart biocontrol strategies utilizing potent microbes for sustainable management of phytopathogenic diseases</article-title><source>Biotechnology Reports (Amst</source><volume>44</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Haq</surname><given-names>I.U.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rahim</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yahya</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ijaz</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Maryam</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Paker</surname><given-names>N.P.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>00859</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.btre.2024.e00859</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-26"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Host gender and androgen levels regulate gut bacterial taxa in pigs leading to sex-biased serum metabolite Profiles</article-title><source>Frontiers in Microbiology</source><volume>10</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>He</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gao</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wu</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhou</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Fu</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ke</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chen</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Huang</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2019</year><page-range>1359</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fmicb.2019.01359</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-27"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Antimicrobial effect of different herbal plant extracts against different microbial population</article-title><source>Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences</source><volume>27</volume><issue>12</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hemeg</surname><given-names>H.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Moussa</surname><given-names>I.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ibrahim</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dawoud</surname><given-names>T.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Alhaji</surname><given-names>J.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mubarak</surname><given-names>A.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kabli</surname><given-names>S.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Alsubki</surname><given-names>R.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Tawfik</surname><given-names>A.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Marouf</surname><given-names>S.A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><fpage>3221</fpage><lpage>3227</lpage><page-range>3221-3227</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.sjbs.2020.08.015</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-28"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Animal welfare implications of digital tools for monitoring and management of cattle and sheep on pasture</article-title><source>Animals</source><volume>11</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Herlin</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Brunberg</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hultgren</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Högberg</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rydberg</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Skarin</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><page-range>829</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/ani11030829</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-29"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Reference methods supported by OECD and their use in Mediterranean meat products</article-title><source>Food Chemistry</source><volume>59</volume><issue>4</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Honikel</surname><given-names>K.-O.</given-names></name></person-group><year>1997</year><fpage>573</fpage><lpage>582</lpage><page-range>573-582</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0308-8146(97)00002-2</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-30"><element-citation publication-type="book"><article-title>Official Methods of Analysis of the AOAC International</article-title><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Horwitz</surname><given-names>W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Latimer</surname><given-names>G.W.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2012</year><publisher-name>AOAC International</publisher-name><edition>19th</edition></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-31"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Preslaughter stress and beef quality in relation to slaughter transport of cattle</article-title><source>Livestock Science</source><volume>264</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hultgren</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Segerkvist</surname><given-names>K.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Berg</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Karlsson</surname><given-names>A.H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Öhgren</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Algers</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><page-range>105073</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.livsci.2022.105073</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-32"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Meat and meat products - Determination of total fat content</article-title><source>International Organization for Standardization</source><person-group person-group-type="author"><name name-style="given-only"><given-names>I.S.O.</given-names></name></person-group><year>1973</year><ext-link xlink:href="https://www.iso.org/standard/6038.html" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:title="Standard">Standard</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-33"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Animal feeding stuffs - Determination of the contents of calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, sodium and zinc - Method using atomic absorption spectrometry</article-title><source>International Organization for Standardization</source><person-group person-group-type="author"><name name-style="given-only"><given-names>I.S.O.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2000</year><ext-link xlink:href="https://www.iso.org/standard/33707.html" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:title="Standard">Standard</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-34"><element-citation publication-type="webpage"><article-title>Animal feeding stuffs — Determination of nitrogen content and calculation of crude protein content. Part 1: Kjeldahl method International Organization for Standardization</article-title><person-group person-group-type="author"><name name-style="given-only"><given-names>I.S.O.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2005</year><ext-link xlink:href="https://www.iso.org/standard/39145.html" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:title="Standard">Standard</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-35"><element-citation publication-type="webpage"><article-title>Animal and vegetable fats and oils — Gas chromatography of fatty acid methyl esters. Part 2: Preparation of methyl esters of fatty acids International Organization for Standardization</article-title><person-group person-group-type="author"><name name-style="given-only"><given-names>I.S.O.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2017</year><ext-link xlink:href="https://www.iso.org/standard/72142.html" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:title="Standard">Standard</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-36"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Meat and meat products — Determination of total phosphorous content</article-title><source>International Organization for Standardization</source><person-group person-group-type="author"><name name-style="given-only"><given-names>I.S.O.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><ext-link xlink:href="https://www.iso.org/standard/76935.html" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:title="Standard">Standard</ext-link></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-37"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Stress in wildlife: comparison of the stress response among domestic, captive, and free-ranging animals</article-title><source>Frontiers in Veterinary Science</source><volume>10</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Karaer</surname><given-names>M.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Čebulj-Kadunc</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Snoj</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>1167016</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fvets.2023.1167016</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-38"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effects of stocking density on growth performance, carcass grade and immunity of pigs housed in sawdust fermentative pigsties</article-title><source>South African Journal of Animal Science</source><volume>46</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cho</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Seol</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sa</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2016</year><fpage>294</fpage><lpage>301</lpage><page-range>294-301</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4314/sajas.v46i3.9</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-39"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Glycogen supplementation in vitro promotes pH decline in dark-cutting beef by reverting muscle’s metabolome toward a normal postmortem muscle state</article-title><source>Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry</source><volume>72</volume><issue>45</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kiyimba</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hartson</surname><given-names>S.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mafi</surname><given-names>G.G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ramanathan</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><fpage>25275</fpage><lpage>25285</lpage><page-range>25275-25285</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1021/acs.jafc.4c06490</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-40"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Regrouping induces anhedonia-like responses in dairy heifers</article-title><source>JDS Communications</source><volume>1</volume><issue>2</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lecorps</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Weary</surname><given-names>D.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Keyserlingk</surname><given-names>M.A.G.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2020</year><fpage>45</fpage><lpage>49</lpage><page-range>45-49</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3168/jdsc.2020-0023</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-41"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Assessing the relationship between pigs’ stress resilience and their behavior in response to weaning</article-title><source>Frontiers in Animal Science</source><volume>5</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lee</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Luttman</surname><given-names>A.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ernst</surname><given-names>C.W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Raney</surname><given-names>N.E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Oh</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Siegford</surname><given-names>J.M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>1461526</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fanim.2024.1461526</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-42"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Pigs fed saturated fat/cholesterol have a blunted hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal function, are insulin resistant and have decreased expression of IRS-1, PGC1α and PPARα</article-title><source>The Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry</source><volume>24</volume><issue>4</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lomax</surname><given-names>M.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Karamanlidis</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Laws</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cremers</surname><given-names>S.G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Weinberg</surname><given-names>P.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Clarke</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2013</year><fpage>656</fpage><lpage>663</lpage><page-range>656-663</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jnutbio.2012.03.013</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-43"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>The effect of postmortem pH decline rate on caspase-3 activation and tenderness of bovine skeletal muscle during aging</article-title><source>Journal of Food Biochemistry</source><volume>46</volume><issue>9</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ma</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yu</surname><given-names>Q.</given-names></name><name><surname>Han</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><page-range>14215</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/jfbc.14215</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-44"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effects of dietary cholesterol on ovary development and reproductive capacity in Pacific white shrimp broodstock, Litopenaeus vannamei</article-title><source>Aquaculture Reports</source><volume>38</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ma</surname><given-names>Q.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Z.</given-names></name><name><surname>Xu</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wei</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Liang</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>102346</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.aqrep.2024.102346</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-45"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Impact of chronic and acute academic stress on lymphocyte subsets and monocyte function</article-title><source>PLoS One</source><volume>12</volume><issue>11</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Maydych</surname><given-names>V.</given-names></name><name><surname>Claus</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dychus</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ebel</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Damaschke</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Diestel</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wolf</surname><given-names>O.T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kleinsorge</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Watzl</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2017</year><page-range>0188108</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1371/journal.pone.0188108</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-46"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Impact of cooking temperature on pork longissimus, and muscle fibre type, on quality traits and protein denaturation of four pork muscles</article-title><source>Meat Science</source><volume>209</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Michelle</surname><given-names>N.L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ha</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dunshea</surname><given-names>F.R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chauhan</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>D’Souza</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Warner</surname><given-names>R.D.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>109395</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.meatsci.2023.109395</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-47"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Mind the step: An artificial intelligence-based monitoring platform for animal welfare</article-title><source>Sensors</source><volume>24</volume><issue>24</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Michielon</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Litta</surname><given-names>P.</given-names></name><name><surname>Bonelli</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Don</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Farisè</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Giannuzzi</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Milanesi</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Pietrucci</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Vezzoli</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cecchinato</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chillemi</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gallo</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mele</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Furlanello</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>8042</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/s24248042</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-48"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Strategies to manage barn feed supply to prolong and hold late finishing pigs during a supply chain disruption</article-title><source>Translational Animal Science</source><volume>7</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Miller</surname><given-names>K.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Johnson</surname><given-names>E.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Matchan</surname><given-names>S.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Goehring</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ross</surname><given-names>J.W.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gabler</surname><given-names>N.K.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>166</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/tas/txac166</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-49"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Evaluation of dietary curcumin nanospheres as phytobiotics on growth performance, serum biochemistry, nutritional composition, meat quality, gastrointestinal health, and fecal condition of finishing pigs</article-title><source>Frontiers in Veterinary Science</source><volume>10</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Moniruzzaman</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chin</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Karthikeyan</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Han</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Min</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>1127309</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fvets.2023.1127309</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-50"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effects of management strategies on animal welfare and productivity under heat stress: A synthesis</article-title><source>Frontiers in Veterinary Science</source><volume>10</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Morgado</surname><given-names>J.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lamonaca</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Santeramo</surname><given-names>F.G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Caroprese</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Albenzio</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ciliberti</surname><given-names>M.G.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>1145610</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fvets.2023.1145610</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-51"><element-citation publication-type="webpage"><article-title>Ammonia and odour emission from a veal calves housing system with V-shaped manure belt and ‘Groene Vlag</article-title><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mosquera</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hattum</surname><given-names>T.v</given-names></name><name><surname>Nijeboer</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hol</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dooren</surname><given-names>H.v</given-names></name><name><surname>Bokma</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2019</year><comment>slatted floor. Wageningen Livestock Research.</comment><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.18174/478308</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-52"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Antimicrobial activities of a plethora of medicinal plant extracts and hydrolates against human pathogens and their potential to reverse antibiotic resistance</article-title><source>International Journal of Microbiology</source><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Njimoh</surname><given-names>D.L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Assob</surname><given-names>J.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mokake</surname><given-names>S.E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Nyhalah</surname><given-names>D.J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yinda</surname><given-names>C.K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sandjon</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2015</year><page-range>547156</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1155/2015/547156</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-53"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Animal welfare assessment and meat quality through assessment of Stress Biomarkers in Fattening Pigs with and without Visible damage during slaughter</article-title><source>Animals</source><volume>14</volume><issue>5</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ogawa</surname><given-names>N.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Silva</surname><given-names>G.L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Barbon</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Flaiban</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Silva</surname><given-names>C.A.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rocha</surname><given-names>L.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Bridi</surname><given-names>A.M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>700</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5433/1679-0359.2013v34n6Supl2p4213</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-54"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effects of phytogenic additives on meat quality traits in broiler chickens</article-title><source>Journal of Animal Science</source><volume>96</volume><issue>9</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Orlowski</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Flees</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Greene</surname><given-names>E.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ashley</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lee</surname><given-names>S.-O.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>F.L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Owens</surname><given-names>C.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kidd</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Anthony</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dridi</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2018</year><fpage>3757</fpage><lpage>3767</lpage><page-range>3757-3767</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/jas/sky238</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-55"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Growth performance, dietary energetics, blood metabolites, carcass traits, meat quality, and gene expression of lambs supplemented with a polyherbal phytogenic additive</article-title><source>Veterinary Sciences</source><volume>11</volume><issue>11</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Orzuna-Orzuna</surname><given-names>J.F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lara-Bueno</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gloria-Trujillo</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mendoza-Martínez</surname><given-names>G.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Miranda-Romero</surname><given-names>L.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hernández-García</surname><given-names>P.A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>520</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/vetsci11110520</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-56"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Improving competitiveness among small-scale pig farmers: Challenges, innovations and sustainable practices in the mekong delta</article-title><source>Vietnam. Journal of Animal Health and Production</source><volume>13</volume><issue>2</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Qui</surname><given-names>H.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Guntoro</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Putra</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Thu</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Liangco</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dang</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Linh</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Vui</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><fpage>470</fpage><lpage>479</lpage><page-range>470-479</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.17582/journal.jahp/2025/13.2.470.479</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-57"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>RGB-based machine vision for enhanced pig disease symptoms monitoring and health management: a review</article-title><source>Journal of Animal Science and Technology</source><volume>67</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Reza</surname><given-names>M.N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lee</surname><given-names>K.-H.</given-names></name><name><surname>Habineza</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Samsuzzaman</surname><given-names>Kyoung</given-names></name><name><surname>H.</surname><given-names>Choi</given-names></name><name><surname>K.</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Kim</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Chung</surname><given-names>S.-O.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><fpage>17</fpage><lpage>42</lpage><page-range>17-42</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5187/jast.2024.e111</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-58"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>What must not be named</article-title><source>EMBO reports</source><volume>26</volume><issue>8</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Riesner</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hammerich</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Jahn</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ellinghaus</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Polenz</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Grohmann</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Unger</surname><given-names>J.K.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><fpage>1929</fpage><lpage>1934</lpage><page-range>1929-1934</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/s44319-025-00429-1</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-59"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Animal growth models as a tool to estimate resilience indicators in Bos indicus and Bos taurus heifers: Selection effects and genetics parameters</article-title><source>Livestock Science</source><volume>282</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rodrigues</surname><given-names>G.R.D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rezende</surname><given-names>V.T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mercadante</surname><given-names>M.E.Z.</given-names></name><name><surname>Bonilha</surname><given-names>S.F.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Canesin</surname><given-names>R.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Raineri</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Valente</surname><given-names>J.D.P.S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ligori</surname><given-names>V.A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gonçalves Cyrillo</surname><given-names>J.N.D.S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>105435</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.livsci.2024.105435</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-60"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Characterization of the cholesterol biosynthetic pathway in Dioscorea transversa</article-title><source>Journal of Biological Chemistry</source><volume>299</volume><issue>6</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Salisbury</surname><given-names>L.J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Fletcher</surname><given-names>S.J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Stok</surname><given-names>J.E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Churchman</surname><given-names>L.R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Blanchfield</surname><given-names>J.T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Voss</surname><given-names>J.J.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>104768</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jbc.2023.104768</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-61"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Impacts of heat stress on growth performance and its mitigation in small ruminants</article-title><source>Animal Frontiers</source><volume>15</volume><issue>3</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Silpa</surname><given-names>M.V.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gunasekaran</surname><given-names>I.</given-names></name><name><surname>Narasingam</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ramajothi</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Arulselvam</surname><given-names>V.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dona Mary</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ernest Angelin Shyona</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gajendirane</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ebenezer Binuni</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Veerasamy</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><fpage>6</fpage><lpage>20</lpage><page-range>6-20</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/af/vfaf021</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-62"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Effects of corn–soybean meal-based fermented feed supplementation on growth performance, meat quality, fatty acid profiles, nutritional values, and gut microbiota of lean-type finishing pigs</article-title><source>Foods</source><volume>14</volume><issue>15</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Song</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>X.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cao</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>He</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2025</year><page-range>2641</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/foods14152641</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-63"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Stress at slaughter: A key factor in the determination of meat quality?</article-title><source>Foods</source><volume>12</volume><issue>6</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Terlouw</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gagaoua</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>1294</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/foods12061294</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-64"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Understanding the determination of meat quality using biochemical characteristics of the muscle: Stress at slaughter and other missing keys</article-title><source>Foods</source><volume>10</volume><issue>1</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Terlouw</surname><given-names>E.M.C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Picard</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Deiss</surname><given-names>V.</given-names></name><name><surname>Berri</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hocquette</surname><given-names>J.F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lebret</surname><given-names>B.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lefèvre</surname><given-names>F.</given-names></name><name><surname>Hamill</surname><given-names>R.</given-names></name><name><surname>Gagaoua</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2021</year><page-range>84</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/foods10010084</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-65"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Optimizing vertically integrated pork production supply chain: A lagrangian heuristic approach</article-title><source>Heliyon</source><volume>10</volume><issue>6</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Thawee</surname><given-names>N.-A.</given-names></name><name><surname>Vorasayan</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Pitiruek</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name><surname>Arunyanart</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Niyamosoth</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Pathumnakul</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>26407</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26407</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-66"><element-citation publication-type="book"><article-title>Managing tail biting in pigs: Preventing risk factors or docking tails?</article-title><source>Advances in Pig Welfare</source><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Valros</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><fpage>261</fpage><lpage>287</lpage><page-range>261-287</page-range><publisher-name>Elsevier</publisher-name><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/B978-0-323-85676-8.00002-X</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-67"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Exploration feeding and higher space allocation improve welfare of growing-finishing pigs</article-title><source>Animals</source><volume>7</volume><issue>5</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Vermeer</surname><given-names>H.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Dirx-Kuijken</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name><surname>Bracke</surname><given-names>M.B.M.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2017</year><page-range>36</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/ani7050036</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-68"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions in animals under human care: A summary of stakeholder and researcher perceptions and future directions</article-title><source>Animal Welfare</source><volume>33</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Williams</surname><given-names>E.</given-names></name><name><surname>Sadler</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Rutter</surname><given-names>S.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Mancini</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Nawroth</surname><given-names>C.</given-names></name><name><surname>Neary</surname><given-names>J.M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ward</surname><given-names>S.J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Charlton</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Beaver</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2024</year><page-range>27</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/awf.2024.23</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-69"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>The effect of housing system on disease prevalence and productive lifespan of dairy herds - A case study</article-title><source>Animals</source><volume>12</volume><issue>13</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Witkowska</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Ponieważ</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2022</year><page-range>1610</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/ani12131610</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-70"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Evolution of the cholesterol biosynthesis pathway in animals</article-title><source>Molecular Biology and Evolution</source><volume>36</volume><issue>11</issue><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>T.</given-names></name><name><surname>Yuan</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Xie</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Lei</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Fang</surname><given-names>G.</given-names></name><name><surname>Tian</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name><name><surname>Liu</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Cui</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Xiao</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Xu</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhang</surname><given-names>J.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhu</surname><given-names>M.</given-names></name><name><surname>Zhan</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2019</year><fpage>2548</fpage><lpage>2556</lpage><page-range>2548-2556</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/molbev/msz167</pub-id></element-citation></ref><ref id="BIBR-71"><element-citation publication-type="journal"><article-title>Consumer preference for pork safety characteristics: Considering rational and irrational behavior</article-title><source>Food Control</source><volume>148</volume><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhu</surname><given-names>D.</given-names></name><name><surname>Tang</surname><given-names>Y.</given-names></name><name><surname>Wu</surname><given-names>L.</given-names></name></person-group><year>2023</year><page-range>109659</page-range><pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.foodcont.2023.109659</pub-id></element-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>