Behaviour and productivity of sows and piglets in a family system and in farrowing crates

Arey, D.S.; Sancha, Emily

doi:10.1016/0168-1591(96)01075-1

Cited by 78 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Further, in an MS system from birth, nursing success was higher than in farrowing crates (96.7% v. 93.2%, s.e.d. = 1.3, Arey and Sancha, 1996). In conclusion, in the GA systems, sows have more freedom to regulate nursing behaviour compared with a natural environment and individual housing.…”

mentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Second, the increased space and environmental complexity in the MS systems may enhance piglet social development by better enabling the expression of threatening and submissive behaviour (Lammers and Schouten, 1985) and by stimulating play behaviour (Bolhuis et al, 2005;Oostindjer et al, 2011). Play is thought to be important for the social development of piglets (Bekoff and Byers, 1981), and Arey and Sancha (1996) reported a ninefold increase in play behaviour in MS housing, compared Group housing for lactating sows with farrowing crates. Šilerová et al (2010), however, found no difference in frequency of play between farms with strawbedded pens for individually loose housed sows and MS housing, possibly because of a lower contrast between housing types.…”

Section: Piglet (Social) Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies found an increased level of crushing during the MS phase if litters were housed with crated sows before grouping of litters, compared with continuous housing in farrowing crates (Wattanakul et al, 1997;Marchant et al, 2000), which may be explained by sudden exposure to 'dangerous' lying behaviour of the sows (Marchant et al, 2000). In an MS system from birth, it was indicated that MS-housed sows were more careful in their lying behaviour, as they showed a higher and more consistent standing-up response to playbacks of piglet vocalisations compared with sows housed in crates (Arey and Sancha, 1996). In addition, in MS housing preceded by individual housing, a higher level of crushing may result from an increased activity level of sows (Wattanakul et al, 1997).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A review of sow and piglet behaviour and performance in group housing systems for lactating sows

Nieuwamerongen

Bolhuis

Peet–Schwering

et al. 2014

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Commercial use of group housing systems for lactating sows is limited, but the recent transition to group housing during gestation in the EU may result in a renewed interest in such systems. Therefore, this review aims to identify key factors that may contribute to the success or failure of group housing of lactating sows in comparison with individual housing by describing the variety in group housing systems and discussing animal behaviour and performance compared with individual housing. Group housing systems can be divided in multi-suckling (MS) systems, in which sows are grouped with their litters, and get-away (GA) systems, which include a separate communal area accessible to sows only. These systems differ in many aspects regarding management and layout but, compared with individual housing, generally provide more environmental complexity, more freedom of movement for the sows and more freedom to express behaviours related to, for example, maternal care and social interactions. Group housing poses several risks, such as disrupted nursing and an increased level of crushing during the MS phase, and in the GA systems there is a risk for early cessation of nursing. On the other hand, pre-weaning mingling of litters clearly benefits piglet social development and may improve adaptation to the post-weaning situation. In addition, group-housed sows may show lactational ovulation, which provides opportunities for insemination during an extended lactation period, which benefits the piglets. Gradual transitions in social and physical environment around gestation, farrowing, grouping and weaning seem to be key success factors for group housing systems during lactation. In addition, selection of suitable sows and quality of stockmanship seem important.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Piglet (Social) Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A review of sow and piglet behaviour and performance in group housing systems for lactating sows

Nieuwamerongen

Bolhuis

Peet–Schwering

et al. 2014

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been shown in some studies that sows when able to move freely in farrowing pens have a greater maternal responsiveness to playbacks of pre-recorded piglet screams during trapping compared with crated sows (Arey and Sancha, 1996;Thodberg et al, 2002b;Melišová et al, 2014), whereas other studies have not found any differences between crates and pens (Harris and Gonyou, 1998;Nowicki and Schwarz, 2010). Good maternal ability resembles calmness and also a fast response in cases of piglet distress calls; therefore, it is important to know whether outdoor sows are more responsive towards piglet screams than indoor-penned sows.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

The effect of farrowing environment and previous experience on the maternal behaviour of sows in indoor pens and outdoor huts

Wülbers-Mindermann

Berg

Illmann

et al. 2015

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Outdoor farrowing huts facilitate a less restricted maternal behaviour in sows compared with sows kept indoors in farrowing pens. The aim of our study was to investigate whether there are behavioural differences between primiparous sows kept outdoors in farrowing huts and indoors in pens, and whether the maternal behaviour during the second parity, when all sows were kept outdoors in farrowing huts, would differ between sows that have experienced the indoor or the outdoor environment, respectively, during their first parturition. A total of 26 Yorkshire × Swedish Landrace sows were studied. Of these, 11 sows were housed outdoors in farrowing huts during both parturitions (group = OUTOUT). The other 15 sows were kept indoors in a barn with single farrowing pens during their first parturition. During their second parturition, sows were kept outdoors in farrowing huts (group = INOUT). The behaviour was video recorded from 2 h prepartum to 48 h postpartum. The sows' responsiveness to playbacks of a piglet's screams was tested on days 2 to 3 postpartum. Parity 1: during the last 2 h prepartum, OUTOUT sows had a higher proportion of observations in the sternal lying position ( P < 0.01). During parturition, OUTOUT sows changed posture more often ( P < 0.05) and were lying less ( P < 0.05) than INOUT sows. All sows in both groups responded with 'lifting head' towards the playback of piglet scream, whereas 100% of OUTOUT sows and only 43% of INOUT sows thereafter were 'getting up' ( P < 0.01). Parity 2: There were no behavioural differences between INOUT and OUTOUT sows. In conclusion, it is not problematic for a second parity sow with initial maternal experience from an indoor farrowing pen to be kept outdoors in farrowing huts during its following farrowing.

show abstract

“…Modification of the parturient and lactation environment of the sow could improve maternal behavior. Some researchers have found that improvement of maternal behavior in sows through environmental modification will improve pre-weaning growth of litters (Cronin and Smith, 1992;Lou and Hurnik, 1994;Arey and Sancha, 1996) and survival of piglets (Cronin and van Amerongen, 1991;Cronin and Smith, 1992). However, other researchers have reported that attempts to improve maternal behavior did not promote piglet pre-weaning survival and growth (Cronin et al, 1994;Cronin et al, 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maternal behavior in mice selected for large litter size

Chiang

Johnson

Nielsen

2002

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A total of 96 lactating mice and their pups from each of three replications of lines selected 21 generations for increased litter size (LS) followed by 23-25 generations of random selection and contemporary unselected control lines (LC) were characterized for maternal behavior. Sixteen dams and their pups from each replication of LS and LC lines were sampled. Litter sizes at birth for LS versus LC in the first, second, and third replicates were 17.3 versus 13.2, 15.9 versus 13.1, and 12.3 versus 10.6 pups, respectively, with LS dams averaging 2.87 ± .70 pups more. One-half of the litters were standardized to either 12 pups (Replications 1 and 2) or 8 pups (Replication 3) on day 1 of lactation; the others were not standardized. Behavioral categories included time dams spent: (1) nursing pups, (2) licking pups, (3) retrieving pups, (4) nest building, (5) resting with pups. (6) resting alone, (7) eating and drinking, (8) grooming, and (9) in other activities. Categories one through five were summed as an index of maternal behavior. Activities during 30 min observation periods from days 2 to 22 of lactation were recorded. Interactions of line by stage of lactation (days 2-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-17, and 18-22) and line by litter standardization were not significant for any trail except time spent resting with pups (line × stage, P = 0.03).The maternal behavior index was 7.0 ± 2.2% greater (P = 0.08) for LS than LC dams. The difference was due mostly to increased time LS dams spent nursing pups (LS -LC = 9.7 ± 2.1%, P = 0.04). Averaged across lactation stages, LS dams tended to spend less time resting with their pups (-2.32 ± 1.04%, P = 0.15) than LC dams, but the difference was greatest and significant only in the last stage (-10.45 ± 2.20, P < 0.01). Selection for larger litters altered maternal behavior by increasing the time dams spent nursing pups. Interaction of line by litter size standardization existed for pup survival to weaning (P = 0.03). Survival of pups in standardized litters raised by LS dams was 10.4 ± 4.9% greater (P = 0.04) than in standardized LC litters whereas line difference in non-standardized litters was not significant (P > 0.30). Because interactions of line by litter size standardization for maternal behavior traits were not significant, correlated responses in maternal behavior were considered to be independent of size of litter being nursed.

show abstract

Behaviour and productivity of sows and piglets in a family system and in farrowing crates

Cited by 78 publications

References 21 publications

A review of sow and piglet behaviour and performance in group housing systems for lactating sows

A review of sow and piglet behaviour and performance in group housing systems for lactating sows

The effect of farrowing environment and previous experience on the maternal behaviour of sows in indoor pens and outdoor huts

Maternal behavior in mice selected for large litter size

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About