Behaviour of pre-pubertal gilts and its relationship to farrowing behaviour in conventional farrowing crates and loose-housed pens

Ison, Sarah H.; Wood, C M; Baxter, Emma

doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2015.06.004

Cited by 13 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sow-piglet interactions on days 11 and 18 postpartum were more frequent in litters where the sow was temporarily confined until 3 days postpartum than in litters where the sow remained crated (Singh et al, 2017). Chidgey et al (2016), Ison et al (2015) and Martin et al (2015) also found more sow-piglet interactions in pens than crates, and furthermore Martin et al (2015) found that these interactions between sows and piglets occurred earlier in life in pens than crates.…”

Section: Farrowing and Lactation Housing And Sow Welfarementioning

confidence: 87%

Review of the influence of farrowing and lactation housing and positive human contact on sow and piglet welfare

Hemsworth,

Tilbrook,

Galea

et al. 2023

Front. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farrowing crates continue to be the most common system of housing farrowing and lactating sows, however continuous confinement is one of the most contentious welfare issues in livestock production. This review aims to critically evaluate the scientific literature on the implications of two important determinants of sow and piglet welfare: housing and human contact. While the evidence in sows is contradictory, there is consistent evidence of a greater short-term cortisol response in gilts introduced to farrowing crates than pens and there is limited evidence of changes in the HPA axis consistent with sustained stress in gilts during the fourth week of lactation. Confinement of sows during lactation increases stereotypic behaviour, reduces sow-piglet interactions, nursing duration and lying behaviour, and may contribute to leg and shoulder injuries in sows. Piglets reared by sows in pens display more play and less oral manipulative behaviours and generally have better growth rates than those reared in farrowing crates. However, there is increasing interest in developing alternate housing systems with minimal sow confinement and reduced piglet mortality risk. Recent research on temporary crating of sows suggests that confinement briefly around farrowing may be the best compromise between continuous housing in farrowing crates and pens, as it may reduce live-born piglet mortality, while providing the opportunity for the sow to move more freely prior to parturition. Together with housing, the behaviour of stockpeople is a key determinant of pig welfare. Recent evidence shows that positive handling of piglets during lactation reduces fear behaviour and physiological stress responses of pigs to humans, novelty and routine husbandry practices, and thus may be enriching for piglets. As a source of enrichment, positive human interactions provide several advantages: close interactions with piglets usually occur several times daily, positive interactions can be combined with routine checks, human interactions invariably provide variability in their predictability which will minimise habituation, and positive interactions may not require additional physical resources. There is a clear need for comprehensive research examining both the short- and long-term welfare implications and the practicality of less confinement of the sow, and positive handling of both sows and piglets during lactation.

show abstract

Section: Farrowing and Lactation Housing And Sow Welfarementioning

confidence: 87%

Review of the influence of farrowing and lactation housing and positive human contact on sow and piglet welfare

Hemsworth,

Tilbrook,

Galea

et al. 2023

Front. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, it is known that PWM differs between these different systems. For instance, it is higher in outdoor huts (e.g., 21%, [ 22 ]) and freedom farrowing pens (e.g., 18–20%, [ 23 , 24 , 25 ] than in farrowing pens with temporary crating (e.g., 14–17%, [ 26 , 27 , 28 ] or pens with conventional farrowing crates (e.g., 10–12%), [ 29 , 30 ]. The distribution of causes of death also varies between systems, with crushing more common than other causes in outdoor and loose pen-based systems compared to farrowing crates [ 31 , 32 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Animal Welfare Compromises Associated with Causes of Death in Neonatal Piglets

Chidgey

Udomteerasuwat

Morel

et al. 2022

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This pilot study aimed to assess the welfare impacts of different causes of pre-weaning deaths in piglets. Piglets that died between 0–7 days after birth (n = 106) were collected from two commercial pig farms and subject to post-mortem examination to confirm their cause of death as well as any contributing factors. Using the Five Domains Model, the most likely affective experiences associated with the pathological findings were carefully inferred to better understand affective experience as it related to known causes of liveborn piglet mortality. The most common causes of liveborn piglet mortality were starvation (23%), crushing (23%) and non-viable (21%). Thirty one piglets had evidence of starvation, but it was only considered the primary cause of death in 15 piglets, as cofactors such as poor viability (n = 13) were also present in many piglets with evidence of starvation. All 15 piglets that were crushed died within 24 h after birth and most had evidence of thoracic and/or abdominal internal bleeding. This study found that common causes of liveborn piglet death were associated with compromises in Domains 1 (Nutrition/hydration), 3 (Health/function), and4 (Behavioural interactions), with the most likely resulting affective states described in Domain 5 (Mental state). This highlights the interaction between physical/functional and situation-related (behavioural) aspects that influence an animals’ welfare status.

show abstract

“…15 In the human medical literature it is believed that kinetic friction forces rubbing the skin, possibly in combination with increased skin moisture, contribute to the development of pressure ulcers. 34 Friction, along with other flooring properties, such as abrasiveness, hardness, surface profile, and thermal properties, 35 may all contribute to the development of shoulder lesions in sows and should be explored further.…”

Section: Environmental Risk Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many countries have placed a ban or partial ban on the use of gestation stalls, and alternate indoor farrowing systems are being explored, from farrowing pens to group lactation systems. 35,38 The greater freedom of movement provided to sows in these systems may increase muscle tone and encourage more frequent postural changes, which may help to reduce the incidence of shoulder lesion development in sows. The use of bedding or alternative flooring types (ie, solid flooring, rubber-coated flooring) in these systems may also influence the development of shoulder lesions.…”

Section: Environmental Risk Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shoulder lesions in sows: A review of their causes, prevention, and treatment

Rioja-Lang,

Seddon,

Brown

2018

JSHAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Severe shoulder lesions in sows are manifested as ulcers comparable to pressure ulcers in humans. In sows, shoulder lesions appear on the skin overlying the bony prominence of the scapula, and are most commonly observed in the first weeks of lactation. Shoulder ulcers arise due to prolonged compression of blood vessels around the tuber of the scapular spine when the sow is lying, leading to insufficient blood circulation, necrosis, and subsequent ulceration. Due to the nature of shoulder lesions and their estimated occurrence (5%-50% of breeding sows worldwide), they represent an obvious welfare concern. There is also an economic impact due to labor time for treatment, medication, and premature culling of sows. While multiple factors contribute to ulcer development, maintaining optimum body condition in sows appears to be a key factor in prevention. This review summarizes the literature on sow shoulder ulcers, including the causes, prevention, and treatment. Regular monitoring of lesions is recommended, as this will help to identify individual farm causes and prevention measures. While much is known about shoulder ulcers, we conclude that there are significant gaps in the scientific literature regarding the mechanisms of development and healing, pain caused, and effective means for treatment and prevention.

show abstract

Behaviour of pre-pubertal gilts and its relationship to farrowing behaviour in conventional farrowing crates and loose-housed pens

Cited by 13 publications

References 34 publications

Review of the influence of farrowing and lactation housing and positive human contact on sow and piglet welfare

Review of the influence of farrowing and lactation housing and positive human contact on sow and piglet welfare

Animal Welfare Compromises Associated with Causes of Death in Neonatal Piglets

Shoulder lesions in sows: A review of their causes, prevention, and treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About