Nest-building, behavioural disturbances and heart rate in farrowing sows kept in crates and Schmid pens

Damm, B.I; Lisborg, L.; Vestergaard, K.; Vaníček, Jiří

doi:10.1016/s0301-6226(02)00186-0

Cited by 76 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previously, a few authors have reported that better options for conducting nest-building behaviour by housing the sows loose instead of in a crate resulted in easier farrowing and a shorter farrowing time (Oliviero et al, 2008;Oliviero et al, 2010). On the contrary, others did not detect a difference in the farrowing time between loose sows and sows in crates (Damm et al, 2003;Jarvis et al, 2004). Farrowing time can influence the number of stillborn piglets, as a prolonged farrowing time increases the risk of the piglets dying during farrowing (Borges et al, 2005;Canario et al, 2006;Oliviero et al, 2010).…”

Section: Stillbirthsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Confinement of lactating sows in crates for 4 days after farrowing reduces piglet mortality

Moustsen

Hales

Lahrmann

et al. 2013

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To reduce mortality among suckling piglets, lactating sows are traditionally housed in farrowing crates. Alternatively, lactating sows can be housed in farrowing pens where the sow is loose to ensure more behavioural freedom and consequently a better welfare for the sow, although under commercial conditions, farrowing pens have been associated with increased piglet mortality. Most suckling piglets that die do so within the first week of life, so potentially lactating sows do not have to be restrained during the entire lactation period. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to investigate whether confinement of the sow for a limited number of days after farrowing would affect piglet mortality. A total of 210 sows (Danish Landrace × Danish Yorkshire) were farrowed in specially designed swing-aside combination farrowing pens measuring 2.6 m × 1.8 m (combi-pen), where the sows could be kept loose or in a crate. The sows were either: (a) loose during the entire experimental period, (b) crated from days 0 to 4 postpartum, (c) crated from days 0 to 7 postpartum or (d) crated from introduction to the farrowing pen to day 7 postpartum. The sows and their subsequent litters were studied from introduction to the combi-pen ∼1 week before expected farrowing and until 10 days postpartum. Confinement period of the sow failed to affect the number of stillborn piglets; however, sows that were crated after farrowing had fewer live-born mortality deaths (P < 0.001) compared with the sows that were loose during the experimental period. The increased piglet mortality among the loose sows was because of higher mortality in the first 4 days after farrowing. In conclusion, the current study demonstrated that crating the sow for 4 days postpartum was sufficient to reduce piglet mortality.

show abstract

Section: Stillbirthsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Confinement of lactating sows in crates for 4 days after farrowing reduces piglet mortality

Moustsen

Hales

Lahrmann

et al. 2013

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nest building activity typically starts earlier in the pens, is more elaborate and has a longer duration than in the crate (e.g. Damm et al, 2003;Thodberg et al, 2002), and there is less activity in the last period prior to farrowing in the pen compared to in the crate (e.g. Damm et al, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Damm et al, 2003;Thodberg et al, 2002), and there is less activity in the last period prior to farrowing in the pen compared to in the crate (e.g. Damm et al, 2003). The farrowing crate has several negative effects on maternal behaviours (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nest building and posture changes and activity budget of gilts housed in pens and crates

Andersen

Vasdal

Pedersen

2014

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe aim of the present work was to study nest building, posture changes and the overall activity budget of gilts in pens vs. crates. Twenty-three HB gilts (high piglet survival day 5) and 21 LB gilts (low piglet survival day 5) were video recorded from day 110 in pregnancy to four days after farrowing in either a farrowing pen or farrowing crate. The gilts were provided with 2 kg of chopped straw daily from day 113 of pregnancy until farrowing in both environments. Nest building and other activity measures of the sows were analysed using continuous sampling the last 12 h before the first piglet was born until 8 h after the birth of the first piglet. There was no significant effect of the sows breeding value on any of the sow behaviours. Sows housed in pens spent significantly more time nest building than crated sows from 4 to 12 h prepartum (P < 0.05). Crated sows spent more time sitting (P < 0.01), chewed more frequently on pen fittings (P < 0.001) and showed a higher frequency of quick flops when entering a resting position after farrowing (P < 0.05), but had a lower number of posture changes (P < 0.05) after farrowing.In conclusion, provision of a similar amount of straw does not compensate for the lack of space in the crate compared to the pens. Sows in pens spent more time nest building from 4 to 12 h post partum compared to crated sows, and crated sows showed more behaviours related to frustration and restlessness.

show abstract

“…Invariably, such needs conflict with those of the farrowing sow, resulting currently in a predominant system where welfare of the sow is compromised. This compromise is evidenced by research demonstrating that sows kept in crated compared with loose accommodation show heart rate and stress hormone responses, and negative or abnormal behaviours, indicative of an impaired welfare state (Lawrence et al, 1994;Jarvis et al, 2002;Damm et al, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative farrowing accommodation: welfare and economic aspects of existing farrowing and lactation systems for pigs

Baxter

Lawrence

Edwards

2012

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is growing societal pressure, expressed through government legislation and consumers' purchasing choices, to abolish livestock systems considered detrimental to farm animal welfare. Such systems include farrowing crates, which are behaviourally and physically restrictive for sows. Therefore, identifying less restrictive farrowing systems for commercial implementation has become an important focus of pig research. Despite numerous attempts to develop indoor alternatives to crates, there is as yet no universal acceptance of such systems at the commercial level. The primary concern is piglet survival, because often favourable figures are reported at the experimental level, but not replicated in commercial evaluation. Alternative farrowing systems should equal or surpass survival levels in conventional systems and perform consistently across a range of farm circumstances for widespread commercial implementation. In addition, it is important that alternatives consider ease of management, operator safety and economic sustainability. Utilising a large database of literature, 12 existing alternative indoor systems were identified and compared against each other, conventional crates and outdoor systems. An assessment of how well alternative systems satisfy the design criteria for meeting animals' biological needs was carried out by developing a welfare design index (WDI). The physical and financial performance of these systems was also evaluated and summarised. The derived WDI yielded values of 0.95 for conventional crates, with higher scores for commercial outdoor systems of 1.10 and indoor group farrowing or multi-suckling systems (e.g. Thorstensson 5 2.20). However, the high total piglet mortality (23.7% 6 s.e. 2.26) in indoor group systems compared with conventional crates (18.3% 6 s.e. 0.63) and outdoor systems (17.0% 6 s.e. 2.05), together with the added capital cost (92% more than conventional crates, 249% more than commercial outdoor huts), mainly as a result of extra building space provided per animal, question their feasibility to deliver from an economic perspective. Designed pen systems offered the best compromise, scoring 1.64 from the WDI, with a total piglet mortality of 16.6% (6s.e. 0.88) and capital costs and labour input more comparable to farrowing crates (17.5% more than crates). The critical review of different systems was hampered by the lack of comprehensive data and detailed system descriptions. When attempting to assess welfare and economic attributes of systems, there are certain caveats that require discussion, in particular weighting of the contribution of different design attributes to pig welfare, the relative importance of the sow and her piglets and the many potential confounding factors that arise. Also, when judging any system, it must be emphasised that the maternal characteristics of sows and the quality of stockpersonship will be integral to its success.

show abstract

Nest-building, behavioural disturbances and heart rate in farrowing sows kept in crates and Schmid pens

Cited by 76 publications

References 39 publications

Confinement of lactating sows in crates for 4 days after farrowing reduces piglet mortality

Confinement of lactating sows in crates for 4 days after farrowing reduces piglet mortality

Nest building and posture changes and activity budget of gilts housed in pens and crates

Alternative farrowing accommodation: welfare and economic aspects of existing farrowing and lactation systems for pigs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About