Effects of Double Decking and Space Allowance on the Performance and Behavior of Feeder Lambs1

Abstract

A 2 X 2 factorial experiment was conducted using growing lambs to compare single-level vs double-decked pens and high (.32 m2/lamb) vs low (.48 m2/lamb) densities. Three replicates of each treatment combination were involved using 30 lambs/pen. In the double-decked pens, an upper deck located over the rear section of the lower level provided one-third of the total floor area. Feed and water were provided on the lower level only and lambs could move freely between levels by means of a slatted ramp. All floors were of expanded metal. Use of the various areas of the pens was determined during a 24-h observation and by a videotape recording of the double-decked pens during the daylight hours. Fleece contamination was determined by visual observation and standard wool testing procedures. Gain was determined over the 8-wk period of each replicate. The high density treatment resulted in 1.5 kg/lamb (10%) less gain (P less than .01) and, in the case of double-decked pens, different patterns of space utilization compared with the low density treatment. Lambs in the low density pens were able to move more successfully from resting areas to the feeding area in the afternoon (P less than .01). The double-decked system did not significantly affect weight gain, but resulted in dirtier fleeces (P less than .01).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Finishing feedlot lambs in enriched pens using feeder ramps and straw and its influence on behavior and physiological welfare indicators

“…Nevertheless, those studies used female adult sheep and the preferences of young lambs could be different, as reported by Teixeira et al (2013) in a multiple choice test that included several types of bedding. The EE lambs could have used FRA and PRA as activity areas because of their structural features and the natural inclination of lambs to climb on objects (Gonyou et al, 1985). The CO lambs used the FRA and PRA areas in the same way as the RM area, mainly to rest.…”

Behavioural indicators of sheep and goat welfare in organic and conventional Norwegian farms

“…Few studies relevant for Norwegian husbandry practices are conducted and most of the literature is old. Arehart et al (1969) found no effect of density in terms of differences in growth rate between two months old feedlot lambs in pens varying between 0.37 and 0.93 m 2 area per head, whereas Gonyou et al (1985) documented reduced growth of lambs in pens measuring 0.32 m 2 per lamb compared to 0.48 m 2 per lamb. Leme et al (2013) examined the effect of group size, and found that at the density of 2.4 m 2 per lamb, average weight gain tended to be higher for feedlot lambs in pens of two lambs compared to lambs housed in pens of ten.…”

Design and Execution of Animal Behavior Research: An Overview

“…For an overview of behavioral data collection equipment see Martin and Bateson (1986) and Lehner (1979). Wood-Gush, 1954) Sequential contraints; rates; percent of time; durations; nearest neighbor relationships (e.g., Crowell-Davis et al, 1985) Synchrony; frequencies; rates; durations (e.g., Sweeting et al, 1985) Synchrony; percent of time; subgroup sampling (e.g., Gonyou et al, 1985).…”