## 4 Discussion
However, it should be noted that, unfortunately, at slaughter, it was not possible to assess tail and ear lesions, and therefore, the carcass severity classification could not be reported in full. At the end of the trial, group L2 presented more lesions on the entire body (and in particular a significant difference in the thigh region and a tendential difference in the flank area) than the control group, with group L1 being intermediate. The tails were less severely bitten in group L1 compared to both C and L2. Overall, none of the lavender treatments resulted in a major positive effect on body lesions, with the administration twice a day resulting in a slightly increased damage grade, as a consequence of a possible increase in aggression rate. The only positive effect was observed on tail damage, which was reduced by the administration once a day (L1). The negative effect of lavender administration twice a day (L2), however, disappeared at slaughter (i.e., after animals had been loaded, transported and unloaded), with carcass showing no significant differences in lesion counts. This could imply a higher number of fights of C pigs during the pre-slaughter phases compared to L2. In previous studies, an increased aggression level was recorded in pigs inhaling lavender for 4 h after transportation ([PERSON], 2017). However, the authors argued that the increased aggression levels stimulated an earlier establishment of hierarchical stability after transportation. Increased activity levels during transportation were also reported in other studies, where either lavender straw ([PERSON], 2017) or a lavender-infused enrichments ([PERSON], 2017) were provided, although without negative consequences on animal welfare or lesion counts. [PERSON] et al. (2018) tested a different calming phytoextract (_Passiflora incarnata_ powder extract) administered in the diet and found a reduced number of lesions in postweaning piglets. To the best of our knowledge, no study investigated the effects of on-farm LEO administration on body lesions. The overall scarcity of evidence indicating an improvement in the welfare level of finishing pigs could be ascribed to two contrasting conditions: (1) as heavy pigs grow up, they spend a considerable part of their time lying (up to 87% (S  
in carcasses, linalool (the predominant compound used as a reference marker for LEO in tissues) showed no detectable residues and, therefore, no possible alteration in meat quality attributes that could affect taste or odor. In fact, the limit of 0.25 nL/g indicates that below this threshold, the extraction and analysis system is unable to evaluate the presence of linalool with respect to the system adopted and the sensitivity of the instrumentation. Under these analytical conditions, linalool did not exceed the LOD limit in fat and muscle tissues of the treated animals. Considering the extremely low value, it is clear that there were no residues of linalool. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study investigating the effects of LEO on pork quality. The only other available study considering meat quality aspects was carried out in broilers and reported no effects on carcass traits and composition but also an improved meat quality due to lower cooking loss and lipid peroxidation [11]. In the present study, we observed that loin pH at 45\({}^{\prime}\) post-mortem was significantly lower in the L1 group compared to the control group, with L2 being intermediate. As a consequence, the water holding capacity of L1 loins was reduced (i.e., resulted in higher drip loss values) compared to the control group. A difference was also observed for the L2 group, showing as well significantly higher drip loss values compared to C. It is well known that low pH and WHC in pork have been correlated to acute stressful situations prior to slaughter that may determine significant pork quality alteration such as PSE (pale, soft, exudative) meat. Our findings, however, did not highlight any change in meat color or tenderness [38].