A five domains assessment of sow welfare in a novel free farrowing system

被引:0
|
作者
Plush, Kate [1 ]
Lines, David [1 ]
Staveley, Lauren [1 ]
D'Souza, Darryl [1 ]
van Barneveld, Robert [1 ]
机构
[1] SunPork Grp, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
关键词
sow; welfare; farrowing; lactation; piglet; Maternity Ring; BEHAVIOR; PIGLETS; CRATES; ENVIRONMENT; LACTATION; PATTERNS; SURVIVAL; LESIONS; MODELS; PENS;
D O I
10.3389/fvets.2024.1339947
中图分类号
S85 [动物医学(兽医学)];
学科分类号
0906 ;
摘要
The Maternity Ring was developed as a free farrowing alternative to crates that preserved space whilst providing the sow with unrestricted movement. This experiment aimed to apply the Five Domains model to assess sow welfare in the Maternity Ring in comparison with the farrowing crate. Eighty-eight sows were housed in a farrowing crate (FC) and 83 in a Maternity Ring (MR), and measures collected focussed on nutrition, environment, health, behaviour, and mental state outcomes. MR sows consumed less feed than FC sows (total feed intake: 93.8 +/- 3.06 kg vs. 111.2 +/- 3.13 kg; p < 0.001) but had reduced P2 backfat loss during lactation (0.0 +/- 0.11 vs. 1.2 +/- 0.11, p < 0.001). Fewer frustrated and pain-related behaviours during farrowing were observed in MR sows (bar biting: FC 3.3 +/- 2.12 vs. MR 0.5 +/- 0.29 events, p = 0.038, and back leg forward: FC 227 +/- 50.7 vs. MR 127 +/- 26.4 events, p = 0.019), and a decreased proportion of MR sows had facial injuries after farrowing (10% CI [5, 20] vs. 67% CI [47, 95], p < 0.001). More FC sows had udder damage at weaning (70% CI [48, 97] vs. 10% CI [6, 24], p < 0.001), and their piglets were medicated more frequently when compared to those in MR (51% CI [40, 61] vs. 30% [21, 41], p = 0.008). MR sows tended to have a higher reaction score to piglet processing (MR 2.0 +/- 0.38 vs. FC 1.2 +/- 0.27, p = 0.094) and had more contact with piglets once the procedure was complete than FC sows (13.5 +/- 2.55 vs. 6.9 +/- 1.26 events, respectively, p = 0.016). Whilst there was no difference in anticipation of a feeding event (p > 0.05), MR sows displayed a reduced startle response to an aversive noise stimulus at day 18 (FC 2.8 +/- 0.35, MR 0.7 +/- 0.16, p < 0.001). Using the Five Domains framework, sows housed in the MR during farrowing and lactation have improved welfare than those in FC and can be thought of as being in a positive affective state.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Sow-Piglet Nose Contacts in Free-Farrowing Pens
    Portele, Katrin
    Scheck, Katharina
    Siegmann, Susanne
    Feitsch, Romana
    Maschat, Kristina
    Rault, Jean-Loup
    Camerlink, Irene
    ANIMALS, 2019, 9 (08):
  • [2] Effects of free farrowing system on the productive performance and welfare of sows and piglets
    Sanchez-Salcedo, Jose A.
    Yanez-Pizana, Ariadna
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL WELFARE SCIENCE, 2024, 27 (01) : 1 - 11
  • [3] Review of the influence of farrowing and lactation housing and positive human contact on sow and piglet welfare
    Hemsworth, Paul H.
    Tilbrook, Alan J.
    Galea, Rutu Y.
    Lucas, Megan E.
    Chidgey, Kirsty L.
    Hemsworth, Lauren M.
    FRONTIERS IN ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2023, 4
  • [4] Comparison of management strategies for confinement of sows around farrowing in Sow Welfare And Piglet protection pens
    Skovbo, Danielle Kjerulff Funk
    Hales, Janni
    Kristensen, Anders Ringgaard
    Moustsen, Vivi Aarestrup
    LIVESTOCK SCIENCE, 2022, 263
  • [5] Influence of different sow traits on the expulsion and characteristics of the placenta in a free farrowing system
    Trachsel, C.
    Kueker, S.
    Nathues, H.
    Grahofer, A.
    THERIOGENOLOGY, 2021, 161 : 74 - 82
  • [6] Impact of Duration of Farrowing Crate Closure on Physical Indicators of Sow Welfare and Piglet Mortality
    Ceballos, Maria Camila
    Rocha Gois, Karen Camille
    Parsons, Thomas D.
    Pierdon, Meghann
    ANIMALS, 2021, 11 (04):
  • [7] Influence of the farrowing process and different sow and piglet traits on uterine involution in a free farrowing system
    Egli, Philipp T.
    Schupbach-Regula, Gertraud
    Nathues, Heiko
    Ulbrich, Susanne E.
    Grahofer, Alexander
    THERIOGENOLOGY, 2022, 182 : 1 - 8
  • [8] Sow free farrowing behaviour: Experiential, seasonal and individual variation
    King, Rebecca L.
    Baxter, Emma M.
    Matheson, Stephanie M.
    Edwards, Sandra A.
    APPLIED ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR SCIENCE, 2018, 208 : 14 - 21
  • [9] Improving sow welfare and outcomes in the farrowing house by identifying early indicators from pre-farrowing assessment
    Vargovic, Laura
    Athorn, Rebecca Z.
    Hermesch, Susanne
    Bunter, Kim L.
    JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2022, 100 (11)
  • [10] Evaluation of impact of farrowing pen design on sow welfare
    Botto, L
    Mihina, S
    Brestensky, V
    Hanus, A
    Szabova, G
    SWINE HOUSING, PROCEEDINGS, 2000, : 142 - 146