Provision of straw as a foraging substrate reduces the development of excessive chain and bar manipulation in food restricted sows

Spoolder, Hans; Burbidge, J.A.; Edwards, Sandra A.; Simmins, P.H.; Lawrence, Alistair B.

doi:10.1016/0168-1591(95)00566-b

Cited by 91 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The researchers concluded that for growing pigs with adequate space, feed and thermal comfort, the main function of straw consists of providing a stimulus and outlet for exploratory and manipulative behaviour involving the snout and the mouth, which could otherwise be directed to other objects in the pen or to pen-mates. That such a provision can reduce undesirable behaviour such as aggression, tail biting and stereotypy has been confirmed by numerous studies (Fraser, 1975;Burbidge et al, 1994;Spoolder et al, 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 67%

The importance of straw for pig and cattle welfare: A review

Tuyttens

2005

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

236

156

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 67%

The importance of straw for pig and cattle welfare: A review

Tuyttens

2005

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

236

156

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Inanimate and feeding enrichment do not prevent or stop behavioural disorders but they temporarily reduce the frequency of their occurrence during the time that the animal is actively engaged with such enrichments (chickens: Nørgaard-Nielsen 1991, Lindberg & Nicol 1994gerbils: Wiedenmayer 1997;horses: Malpass & Weigler 1994, Henderson & Waren 2001, McAfee et al 2002, Mills & Davenport 2002mice: Würbel et al 1988;pigs: Van Putten 1980, Arellano et al 1992, Moore et al 1994, Horrell & Ness 1995, Petersen et al 1995, Spoolder et al 1995primates: Bennett & Spector 1989, Meunier et al 1989, Bayne et al 1991a, 1992, Lam et al 1991, Watson 1992, Brent & Long 1995, Pyle et al 1996, Kessel & Brent 1998rabbits: Lidfors 1997, Potter & Borkowski 1998, Berthelsen & Hansen 1999, Moore & Beeston 1999rats: Orok-Edem & Key 1994). The distraction derived from the availability of species-appropriate stimuli is likely to ameliorate the overall stress attendant with boredom.…”

Section: Alternatives To Understimulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Common husbandry-related variables in biomedical research with animals

Reinhardt

2004

Lab Anim

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A good management program provides the environment, housing, and care that . . . minimizes variations that can affect research' (National Research Council 1996). It would be naïve to rely on data collected from an animal who experiences depression and frustration resulting from an inability to show species-typical behaviours, or who experiences discomfort, pain, fear, anxiety and mental distress resulting from enforced bodily restraint. These experiences are re ected in the animal's physiological, psychological and behavioural responses to a test or to an experiment.The responses, however, differ from individual to individual because the experience itself is subjective. It is, at the least, questionable to do reliable 'scienti c' research under such methodological conditions because the data collected are bound to be in uenced by unaccounted-for extraneous variables such as distress, fear, anxiety, discomfort, depression and boredom. Sound scienti c methodology requires that research data should not be in uenced by uncontrolled variables and that the results can be replicated by other laboratories. 'Unless these requirements are met, an experiment is not considered scienti cally valid' (American Medical Association 1992).

show abstract

“…Foraging enrichment in particular appears to be among the most effective measures (Crocket, 1998;Miller and Mench, 2005;Dixon et al, 2010) as the provision of foraging opportunities in captivity was found to 1) increase activity; 2) provide cognitive stimulation and manipulative activities; 3) alleviate stress, frustration and boredom; and 4) reduce and prevent aggression, and abnormal repetitive behaviours, including stereotypies (Bloomsmith et al, 1988;Shepherdson et al, 1993;Spoolder et al, 1995;Baker, 1997;Aerni et al, 2000;Bashaw et al, 2003;Johnson et al, 2004;Honess and Marin, 2006;VargasAshby and Pankhurst, 2007;Brinch-Riber and Mench, 2008). In parrots, provision of foraging enrichments has been associated with positive behavioural changes and welfare effects (Coulton et al, 1997;van Hoek and King, 1997;Meehan et al, 2003Meehan et al, , 2004Elson and Marples, 2001;Lumeij and Hommers, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of foraging enrichments to increase foraging time in Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus erithacus)

Zeeland

Schoemaker

Ravesteijn

et al. 2013

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tForaging enrichment is considered one of the most effective strategies to improve welfare and reduce stereotypies and other abnormal repetitive behaviours in captive animals, including parrots. Few studies, however, have investigated the effects of the different types of enrichment and determined their effect on increasing foraging times and foraging-related activities.To study the effect of different types of enrichment on foraging activity, eleven types of foraging enrichment [multiple bowls, mixing food with inedible items, larger-sized food particles, and 8 puzzle feeders] were tested in 12 Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus erithacus). After acclimatization and assessment of baseline foraging times, enrichments were presented in a random order. Video recordings were used to analyze total foraging times and times spent on the different foraging activities. In addition, the frequencies and duration of foraging bouts, and the times at which they occurred, were determined. The learning curves and presence of habituation to the enrichment over a 1-week period were also assessed.Parrots needed 8.3 ± 1.1 days to learn how to use the foraging enrichments. For two of the puzzle feeders, it took considerably longer. Nine out of eleven foraging enrichments were able to significantly increase foraging times, with the most effective enrichments resulting in a 2-to 2.5-fold increase compared to baseline values (47 ± 18 min). The increases in time spent on foraging could be attributed to an increased amount of time spent on enrichmentrelated activities and/or an increased amount of time spent on food-related activities. None of the enrichments (including the use of multiple bowls in different locations) resulted in significant increases in time spent on locomotory behaviours (i.e. movement towards or away from the feeding site). No significant downwards trends in foraging times were observed over the 1-week observation period. The duration of the observations may, however, have been too short to demonstrate habituation effects.Results of this study show that distinct differences are present in the difficulty level, efficacy and time allocation, thereby affecting the choice for a particular foraging enrichment. Although most of the foraging enrichments were able to significantly increase foraging time, none of the enrichments were able to increase foraging times to levels comparable with that of wild conspecifics (i.e. 4-6 hours per day). New, more effective types of foraging enrichment should therefore be developed and tested.

show abstract

Provision of straw as a foraging substrate reduces the development of excessive chain and bar manipulation in food restricted sows

Cited by 91 publications

References 15 publications

The importance of straw for pig and cattle welfare: A review

The importance of straw for pig and cattle welfare: A review

Common husbandry-related variables in biomedical research with animals

Efficacy of foraging enrichments to increase foraging time in Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus erithacus)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About