The effects of prior experience of straw and the level of straw provision on the behaviour of growing pigs

Day, J. M.; Burfoot, A.; Docking, C.M; Whittaker, X.; Spoolder, Hans; Edwards, Sandra A.

doi:10.1016/s0168-1591(02)00017-5

Cited by 116 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Amount of provided straw From the results of the behavioural registrations, it appears that the pigs were more active and performed more straw-directed activities as to an increased level of straw provision, which is in consistency with earlier observations (Day et al, 2002). However, the level of ear-in-mouth and pen componentdirected behaviour increased from 25 and 50 to 100 g of straw/pig per day.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Day et al (2002), showed that aggression, ear chewing, biting, belly nosing and tail biting were reduced when pigs were provided with 92 g straw/pig per day compared with no straw, though these behaviours were not reduced significantly when pigs were provided with 1092 g straw/pig per day. As the interval of amounts between 0 and 92 g straw/pig per day were not studied further by Day et al (2002), the first aim of this study was partly to examine the level of penmate-directed behaviour when pigs were provided with 25 and 50 g straw/pig per day compared with 100 g. A study by Jensen et al (2010) showed that 90 g straw/pig per day was enough to assure 45 to 90 kg pigs of permanent access to straw in pens with partly slatted floors, but they also found that penmate-directed behaviour increased readily to the daily straw provision, implying that the residual straw had become unattractive to the pigs and could not occupy them as well as fresh straw. Pigs are curious animals (Studnitz et al, 2007) and they actively search for novel stimuli (Stolba and Wood-Gush, 1980;Day et al, 1995), which is why Fraser et al (1991) and Moinard et al (2003) suggested that novelty of the occupational material was important to pigs and that the novelty of a material could be increased by renewing the material regularly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Straw can be effective in reducing penmate-directed behaviour among growing pigs (Fraser et al, 1991;Day et al, 2002;Tuyttens, 2005) and if provided on the floor, all pigs can have access to the straw at the same time. However, in pens with partly slatted floors, it is unavoidable that some straw will pass through slats and enter the slurry system where accumulation of straw and blocking of pipes may occur Day, 2009, Statham et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Behaviour of liquid-fed growing pigs provided with straw in various amounts and frequencies

Oxholm

Steinmetz

Lahrmann

et al. 2014

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Straw possesses many characteristics that make it attractive to pigs and can therefore be effective in preventing negative penmate-directed behaviours. However, straw is difficult to handle in current vacuum slurry systems under most commercial conditions and can therefore only be used in limited amounts. To occupy pigs effectively, straw must remain attractive to pigs throughout the whole day; hence, have a certain degree of novelty. We investigated the penmate-directed behaviour of liquid-fed growing pigs in a production herd, assigned to five experimental treatments: 1 × 25, 1 × 50, 1 × 100, 2 × 50 and 4 × 25 g of chopped straw/pig per day, with 20 replicates of each treatment (pen was regarded as experimental unit). Behaviour was observed at two different growth stages;~40 and 80 kg live weight of the pigs. Activity and exploratory behaviour directed at penmates, straw, pen components and the slatted floor were registered continuously for 15 min of each hour during day time (0600 to 2200 h) by use of video observation of three focal pigs per pen. The pigs were active for about one-third of the day corresponding to~5 h/day. Of the active time, an average of 7% (35 min) was spent on penmate-directed behaviour. The pigs were more active and increased their straw-directed behaviour when provided with 100 g straw/pig per day compared with 25 and 50 g ( P < 0.001). However, penmate-directed behaviour was not reduced with an increased amount of straw ( P > 0.05), and there was no effect on pigs' behaviour when straw provision was increased per day ( P > 0.05). Pigs became less active and reduced their straw-directed activities when their weight increased from 40 to 80 kg live weight ( P < 0.001), but the amount of penmate-directed behaviour was similar ( P > 0.05). Further, the residual straw results indicated that perhaps a more frequent straw provision could help establish a more even level of fresh available straw during the day. However, the frequent straw provision did not occupy pigs more than one daily allocation did. In conclusion, there was no difference in penmate-directed behaviour of the pigs when given 25 or 50 g of straw/pig per day compared with 100 g of straw/pig per day, nor were there any difference when 100 g of straw/pig per day was provided more frequently.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Behaviour of liquid-fed growing pigs provided with straw in various amounts and frequencies

Oxholm

Steinmetz

Lahrmann

et al. 2014

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research in older pigs also suggests that relatively small quantities of straw, if presented daily, appear to be almost as effective at generating greater straw-directed behaviour and less pig-directed and pendirected behaviour as large amounts (Kelly et al, 2000). However, Day et al (2002) found that an increasing provision of straw resulted in an increase in the proportional frequency of rooting and ploughing behaviours and an associated decrease in potentially damaging pig-behaviours, such as tail-biting. Further research is needed to determine the quantities of substrate needed to provide pre-weaned piglets with an enriched and diverse environment.…”

Section: Nest Departure and Social Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative farrowing systems: design criteria for farrowing systems based on the biological needs of sows and piglets

Baxter

Lawrence

Edwards

2011

Animal

114

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The construction of a suitable farrowing environment is a continuing dilemma: the piglet's needs must be matched with those of the sow and the farmer during the main phases that constitute farrowing: nest building, parturition and lactation. Difficulties exist in resolving the various conflicts of interest between and within these three parties (e.g. sow v. farmer: space needed for nest building v. space needed to maximise the amount of farrowing accommodation, or sow v. sow: ensuring the survival of the current litter v. maintaining condition for future litters). Thus, the challenge is to resolve these conflicts and design a system that maximises sow and piglet welfare while maintaining an economically efficient and sustainable enterprise. In order to successfully design a farrowing and lactation environment, it is necessary to consider the biological needs of both the sow and her litter. The natural behaviour of the sow has been well documented and very little variation exists between reports of peri-parturient behaviour observed in extensively kept domestic sows and their wild counterparts. The failure for domestication to significantly alter these behavioural patterns provides evidence that they are biologically significant and that the commercial farrowing environment should attempt to accommodate this behavioural repertoire. In addition, the behavioural needs of the piglets, as well as the physiological needs of both sows and their offspring should be considered. This article aims to review the considerable body of literature detailing the behavioural repertoire of sows and their offspring during the different phases of farrowing, and the accompanying physiological processes. The focus is on identifying biological needs of the animals involved in order to synthesise the appropriate design criteria for farrowing and lactation systems, which should optimise both welfare and animal production.

show abstract

“…Thus, caged birds brought in from the wild typically show more route-tracing than captive-bred conspecifics [19]; removing temporary enrichments from laboratory primates elevates stereotypic behaviours over the levels performed before they were provided (e.g. [2]), and removing straw from pigs used to interacting with it increases abnormal tail-biting above levels in pigs never provided with this enrichment [8]. Furthermore, to complicate the picture further, in yet other cases environmental enrichment can appear to protect animals against later developing stereotypic behaviour, even after its removal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Frustration and perseveration in stereotypic captive animals: Is a taste of enrichment worse than none at all?

Latham

Mason

2010

Behavioural Brain Research

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tStereotypic behaviours are common in animals in impoverished housing, arising from two complementary processes: (1) thwarted attempts to perform motivated behaviours; (2) forebrain dysfunction impeding normal behavioural inhibition. When enriched animals are moved to impoverished housing, they are sometimes protected against developing stereotypic behaviour, but in other cases become even more stereotypic than animals housed lifelong without enrichment. Negative contrast-induced frustration must occur in both scenarios. We hypothesise that sustained behavioural responses to this frustration are prevented in the former by normalised forebrain function, but exacerbated in the latter by forebrain dysfunction. ICRCD-1 mice reared in enriched or standard cages were re-caged at 3 months to standard conditions. Here, previously-enriched mice became far more stereotypic than mice reared from birth in such conditions. To investigate the role of frustration, we assessed both corticosterone output and motivation (break-point) to regain enrichments. We also assessed perseveration via extinction learning. As predicted, previously-enriched mice were as perseverative as standard-raised mice, and frustration seemed to play a causal role in their exacerbated stereotypic behaviour. Previously-enriched mice showed higher motivations to access enrichments, and only in this group did these correlate with corticosterone levels after re-caging; furthermore only in previously-enriched mice did corticosterone responses to re-caging predict stereotypic behaviour 30 days later (males only). All results need replicating and further investigation. However, they suggest for the first time that individual risk factors related to the HPA axis predict stereotypic behaviour following enrichment-removal, and that previously-enriched mice have lasting motivational differences from standard-raised mice, suggesting sustained behavioural effects related to the frustration of enrichment-loss.

show abstract

The effects of prior experience of straw and the level of straw provision on the behaviour of growing pigs

Cited by 116 publications

References 13 publications

Behaviour of liquid-fed growing pigs provided with straw in various amounts and frequencies

Behaviour of liquid-fed growing pigs provided with straw in various amounts and frequencies

Alternative farrowing systems: design criteria for farrowing systems based on the biological needs of sows and piglets

Frustration and perseveration in stereotypic captive animals: Is a taste of enrichment worse than none at all?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About