Technical note: Assessment of the better location of gnawing sticks in growing rabbit cages

Marín, Clara; Simarro-Catalá, Laura; Villagrá, Arantxa

doi:10.4995/wrs.2018.7547

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, incorrect positioning of gnawing material, high stocking densities or social tension hindering movement towards the enrichment, and competition are potential additional hazards for the inability to express gnawing behaviour. Little is known about this, although growing rabbits consumed more of their gnawing stick if it was floor mounted rather than ceiling mounted (Marin et al, 2018) and when lactating does spent more time on their platform later in lactation (presumably to avoid their kits) they also used the enrichment mounted above the platform more often (Rommers et al, 2014b). Since younger rabbits gnaw more than older ones (Katsarou et al, 2011), the impact of a lack of suitable material may be greater for them.…”

Section: Inability To Express Positive Social Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems

Nielsen

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2020

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The AGRI committee of the European Parliament requested EFSA to assess the welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems, including organic production, and to update its 2005 scientific opinion about the health and welfare of rabbits kept for meat production. Considering reproducing does, kits and growing rabbits, this scientific opinion focusses on six different housing systems, namely conventional cages, structurally enriched cages, elevated pens, floor pens, outdoor/partially outdoor systems and organic systems. To compare the level of welfare in the different housing systems and rabbit categories, welfare impact scores for 20 welfare consequences identified from the literature were calculated, taking their occurrence, duration and severity into account. Based on the overall welfare impact score (sum of scores for the single welfare consequences), obtained via a 2-step expert knowledge elicitation process, the welfare of reproducing does is likely (certainty 66-90%) to be lower in conventional cages compared to the five other housing systems. In addition, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66-99%) that the welfare of kits is lower in outdoor systems compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Finally, it is likely to extremely likely (certainty 66-99%) that the welfare of growing rabbits is lower in conventional cages compared to the other systems and that the welfare is higher in elevated pens than in the other systems. Ranking of the welfare consequences allowed an analysis of the main welfare consequences within each system and rabbit category. It was concluded that for reproducing does, as well as growing rabbits, welfare consequences related to behavioural restrictions were more prominent in conventional cages, elevated pens and enriched cages, whereas those related to health problems were more important in floor pens, outdoor and organic systems. Housing in organic rabbit farming is diverse, which can result in different welfare consequences, but the overall welfare impact scores suggest that welfare in organic systems is generally good.

show abstract

Section: Inability To Express Positive Social Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems

Nielsen

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2020

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As for the use of the different areas of the park, in the present trial, rabbits spent 51.5% observation time in the resting area; they rested for 39.0% of observation time in the resting area and spent 26.7% observation time in the feeding area (averages of the two observation days). Morisse et al [29] also showed that rabbits prefer to rest in the area of the park away from the feeders, likely because of less disturbance due to the animals' access to feeders. Based on this preference, we also provided the resting area with a plastic floor, which has been proven to be preferred over a wire net by rabbits [30][31][32].…”

Section: Effect Of Gnawing Blocksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Gnawing Hay Blocks: Effects on Productive Performance, Behavior and Reactivity of Growing Rabbits Kept in Parks with Different Sex-Group Compositions

Birolo

Trocino

Zuffellato

et al. 2022

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To improve animal welfare in collective park housing systems, this study assessed the effects of the provision of gnawing hay blocks and the group composition (F: females, M: males, FM: mixed sex) on performance, behavior, and reactivity of 288 growing rabbits reared in 18 parks (16 rabbits/park) from 31 to 73 days of age. The presence of gnawing blocks inside the feeding area of the parks scarcely affected performance and budget time, but decreased the time spent in the resting area compared to parks without blocks (p < 0.001); it increased the time spent moving during the open field test (p < 0.05) and the rate of rabbits that approached the object in the novel-object test (p < 0.05). As for sex-group composition, the feed conversion ratio was lower in parks F and FM than in park M (p < 0.05). During the open-field test, FM rabbits spent more time moving (p < 0.05), whereas M rabbits displayed self-grooming for a longer time (p < 0.01). Results related to production, behavior, and reactivity indicate the provision of gnawing blocks for welfare improvement, but do not support the change from current mixed-sex to single-sex rearing.

show abstract

“…Moreover, this type of enrichment also leads to hygienic problems, especially when wooden sticks are used. As a consequence, there is a recommendation to fix the sticks on the walls or the ceiling of the cage instead of the floor, in order to avoid an undesirable contamination of the sticks by pathogenic microorganisms that could cause the animals severe illnesses [29].…”

Section: New Models/trends In Housing Systems For Breeding Does 41 Individual Systems With Improved Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Housing and Rabbit Welfare in Breeding Does

García¹

2021

Lagomorpha Characteristics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal welfare is a rising concern in livestock production and to assess the welfare state of an animal, it is needed to consider health, behaviour and emotions. Housing conditions and management normally impair animal welfare at different levels, so developing housing systems and management practices that imply a high level of animal welfare by preserving productive results is a need. Rabbit cages have to be improved in terms of space, enrichment and materials used to promote better conditions, and several alternatives are under evaluation such as increasing available space, providing animals with elevated platforms and hiding spaces, making available gnawing materials or changing cage materials. Moving from individual to collective housing systems to enhance social interaction is also being tested. Most of these alternatives have provided some steps towards better housing and management conditions for rabbits, while some of them have demonstrated to create more problems and have been abandoned. There is still a long way to go on this research topic.

show abstract

Technical note: Assessment of the better location of gnawing sticks in growing rabbit cages

Cited by 5 publications

References 22 publications

Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems

Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems

Use of Gnawing Hay Blocks: Effects on Productive Performance, Behavior and Reactivity of Growing Rabbits Kept in Parks with Different Sex-Group Compositions

Housing and Rabbit Welfare in Breeding Does

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About