Alternative and enriched housing systems for breeding does: a review

Abstract

Abstract:The main results and observations on group and individually housed rabbit does were reviewed by Szendrő and McNitt in 2012, but in recent years several new papers in this field have been published. This provides a new opportunity to summarise the current knowledge on alternative housing systems for breeding does. In Switzerland, rabbit does are generally housed in group systems. The recently legislated Belgian and Dutch housing systems will be converted step by step into group housing systems. Recent research demonstrated that with semi-group housing systems much better performance levels are possible than with the Swiss group housing system. However, solutions to eliminate aggression, stress and injuries which are common among rabbit does in group housing systems have yet to be found. Some authors are of the opinion that individual cages are too small and allow limited possibilities for movement and social contact. Positive results were seen when platforms were inserted into the cages and the possibility for movement increased. The does and their kits could jump up and down using the platforms. Using footrests, the incidence of sore hocks declined. Several environmental enrichments which increase the well-being of rabbit does can also be used. These enriched cages (equipped with platforms, footrests, gnawing sticks, etc.) are fully in line with animal welfare requirements. Increasing the size of cages and enriching them increases the production cost and the meat will be more expensive.

Housing Rabbit Does in a Combi System with Removable Walls: Effect on Behaviour and Reproductive Performance

“…Does housed in C1always remained in the group, and after kindling, they remained with their kits until weaning (30 d). Subsequently, the kits were moved into bicellular cages, and the does were re-inseminated [10] and remained in the same cage until the next kindling (Figure 3).…”

“…Hoy and Matics [9] drew the same conclusions; in particular, they affirmed that in the near future, the single housing of does with kits with some enrichment would be the common housing system in intensive rabbit production. Szendrő et al [10], summarizing the advantages and disadvantages of the individual, combined, or grouphousing of does, proposed individual housing, but underlined the necessity of environmental enrichments. Thus, the colony cages proposed for does do not meet the needs of the animals and negatively affect the well-being and the reproductive performance of rabbit does (pseudopregnancy, abortion), and should therefore be modified to be more efficient.…”

A review of recent research outcomes on the housing of farmed domestic rabbits: reproducing does

“…In collective systems, reproductive performance decreases due to high rates of pseudopregnancy (Rommers et al, 2006;Mugnai et al, 2009;Andrist et al, 2013). Moreover, kit mortality is very high because of competition among does for nests, aggressions towards kits and kindling of 2 or 3 does in the same nest box (Mirabito et al, 2005;Hoy and Matics, 2016;Szendrő et al, 2016b;Hoy et al, 2017). Likewise, a very high number of attacks (Szendrő et al, 2016b) and mating attempts between does (Gerencsér et al, 2016) have been observed.…”

“…Moreover, kit mortality is very high because of competition among does for nests, aggressions towards kits and kindling of 2 or 3 does in the same nest box (Mirabito et al, 2005;Hoy and Matics, 2016;Szendrő et al, 2016b;Hoy et al, 2017). Likewise, a very high number of attacks (Szendrő et al, 2016b) and mating attempts between does (Gerencsér et al, 2016) have been observed. Decreased sanitary status, higher culling and shorter lifespan have also been reported (Andrist et al, 2013;Szendrő et al, 2013) (Table 3).…”

Bienestar y resultados zootécnicos en conejas de aptitud carne. Revisión bibliográfica

“…Para conseguir este agrupamiento temporal, se favorece o se impide el contac to entre las hembras mediante paredes móviles en las jaulas, o mediante puertas que puedan cerrarse o abrirse, permitiendo la formación del grupo o la individualización de las reproductoras a juicio del cuidador. No obstante, sea cual sea el protocolo, la agresividad y las lesiones consecuentes al restablecimiento de la jerarquía (Buijs et al, 2015) así como el estrés, me dido en función de la evolución de la tempe ratura corporal (Graf et al, 2011; Andrist et al, 2014) (Figura 1) y del nivel de glucocorticoides (Szendrö et al, 2016;Ródenas et al, 2019), se reactivan cada vez que las hembras vuelven a reunirse. Estas manifestaciones negativas son especialmente frecuentes en las conejas más jóvenes (Róde nas et al, 2019) y también cuan do los grupos no son estables porque se incor pora reposición (Andrist et al, 2012).…”