Effects of stall or small group gestation housing on the production, health and behaviour of gilts

被引:37
作者
Harris, M. J.
Pajor, E. A.
Sorrells, A. D.
Eicher, S. D.
Richert, B. T.
Marchant, J. N.
机构
[1] Purdue Univ, Dept Anim Sci, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
[2] Purdue Univ, Livestock Behav Res Unit, USDA ARS, W Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
关键词
pig; gestation; housing; production; behaviour; welfare;
D O I
10.1016/j.livsci.2005.12.004
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
The effects of housing gestating gilts in groups of four (G n = 8) or individual stalls (S, n = 14) on production, health and behavioural time budget were evaluated. Gilts were allocated to a gestation treatment by d 7 after breeding. They were housed in a single room, floors were fully slatted with no bedding, and all conditions except for housing type were identical. Gilts were weighed and their backfat measured at wk 1 (just after moving to gestation housing), 5, 9 and 13 of pregnancy. After farrowing, litter size, sex ratio, piglet weights and mortality percentages were recorded. Skin lesions were scored using a 6-point scale every 2 wk. Gait was scored using a 6-point scale at the end of gestation. Heart rate was assessed at wk 14 to 15 after breeding. Behaviour was videotaped to collect data on body postures and ingestive behaviour for 24 h at wk 4, 6, 9 and 13 of gestation. Apart from at wk 5, when S gilts had higher backfat than G (P < 0.05), G and S gilts did not differ in body weight or backfat during the study. Reproductive performance did not differ. While skin lesion scores did not differ at wk 1, by wk 13 lesion scores for several regions of the head, face, body, feet and legs were higher in G than S animals (P < 0.05). There were no differences in heart rate, but gait scores at the end of pregnancy tended to be poorer in G than S gilts (P < 0.1). As gestation progressed gilts spent less time standing (P < 0.0001) and more time lying (P < 0.05), but behavioural time budgets (percentages of time spent standing, lying, sitting, eating and drinking) of animals housed in G and S did not differ. In conclusion, there were few differences detected between gilts housed for one pregnancy in groups of four or stalls. Stalls in this study were relatively spacious, while group pens were relatively small and barren. Effects of gestation housing on sows' welfare
引用
收藏
页码:171 / 179
页数:9
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1998, NUTR REQ SWIN
  • [2] Time course for the formation and disruption of social organisation in group-housed sows
    Arey, DS
    [J]. APPLIED ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR SCIENCE, 1999, 62 (2-3) : 199 - 207
  • [3] A review of the welfare issues for sows and piglets in relation to housing
    Barnett, JL
    Hemsworth, PH
    Cronin, GM
    Jongman, EC
    Hutson, GD
    [J]. AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH, 2001, 52 (01): : 1 - 28
  • [4] Sow performance when housed either in groups with electronic sow feeders or stalls
    Bates, RO
    Edwards, DB
    Korthals, RL
    [J]. LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION SCIENCE, 2003, 79 (01): : 29 - 35
  • [5] Boyle LA, 2000, ANIM WELFARE, V9, P39
  • [6] A COMPARISON OF THE WELFARE OF SOWS IN DIFFERENT HOUSING CONDITIONS
    BROOM, DM
    MENDL, MT
    ZANELLA, AJ
    [J]. ANIMAL SCIENCE, 1995, 61 : 369 - 385
  • [7] EVALUATION OF HOUSING SYSTEMS FOR SOWS
    DENHARTOG, LA
    BACKUS, GBC
    VERMEER, HM
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 1993, 71 (05) : 1339 - 1344
  • [8] Friend T. H., 1995, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, V44, P261, DOI 10.1016/0168-1591(95)92345-T
  • [9] Observations on behaviour and skin damage of slaughter pigs and treatment during lairage
    Geverink, NA
    Engel, B
    Lambooij, E
    Wiegant, VM
    [J]. APPLIED ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR SCIENCE, 1996, 50 (01) : 1 - 13
  • [10] Skin lesions and callosities in group-housed pregnant sows: Animal-related welfare indicators
    Leeb, B
    Leeb, C
    Troxler, J
    Schuh, M
    [J]. ACTA AGRICULTURAE SCANDINAVICA SECTION A-ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2001, 51 : 82 - 87