Turning and Walking by Gilts in Modified Gestation Crates

Abstract

Mated gilts in gestation crates designed specially so gilts could turn or walk at will did turn around and walk. In Exp. 1, in crates 2.1 m long, flared at one end and pointed at the other, and 56 or 61 cm wide at center, gilts' turning frequency averaged 11.2 turns/d. Neither feeder nor waterer location, independent of the other, influenced turning frequency. Most turns apparently were not motivated by any obvious external stimulus. Narrowing crates from 61 to 56 cm reduced turning rate from 12.9/d to 8.9/d. Gilts spent more time facing the feeder when it was at the flared end (F; 66.1%) than when it was at the pointed end (P; 49.4%). Turning was followed by standing or lying, without simultaneous eating or drinking, 65.3% of the time. A greater proportion of turns were succeeded by eating or drinking when feeder and waterer were located in opposite ends of the crate (39.2%) instead of in the same end (29.7%). As a result of turns followed by only standing or lying, gilts were oriented head by head 52.9% of the times. Mean time of day for turning was 1016 in wide crates and 0855 in narrow crates. Also, mean turning time with waterer at P vs at F was 1012 vs 0928. In Exp. 2, a 2 X 2 factorial arrangement of treatments compared crates that were either 2.1 m or 3.4 m long and had either flared or rectangular ends. Neither length nor shape affected gilts' total daily duration of standing. Gilts stood up 8.3 times/d in rectangular crates, 13.9 times/d in flared.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Space allowance for dry, pregnant sows in pens: Body condition, skin lesions, and performance1

“…Just as space allowance can affect sow performance traits (e.g., BCS, BW, and BF), it is possible that changes in the physical aspect of the gestation stall can do likewise (Curtis et al, 1989;Tauson, 1995;McGlone et al, 2004b). For example, a gestation stall design that allows a sow more freedom of movement and the opportunity to turn around, which in itself is 1 of the 5 freedoms, may improve sow well-being (McFarlane et al, 1988;Johnson et al, 1990). The physical exercise associated with sow movement also might result in more muscle and BW gain over the gestation period (Marchant and Broom, 1996).…”

Behavioral and physiological responses of Meishan, Yorkshire and crossbred gilts to conventional and turn-around gestation stalls

“…Even thbueh !! : l"gd for turning does not seem to be very stroig (McFarlane et al 1988), the possibility of performing thii behavior may still be essential to ensure the animal's well_ being. Dawkins (1988) pointed out that the demand curve for a specific behavior may be non-linear.…”

“…This finding contrasis with pre_ vious experiments where no differencei in standins behav_ ior have been reported for gilts and sows allowej'to turn around. (McFarlane et al 1988;Johnson et al 1990). …”

Dynamic space utilization of lame and non-lame sows as determined by their lying-standing sequence profile

“…The present study reports either 1.9 m 2 or 7.17 m 2 for an uninterrupted area utilized to turn around based on mathematical equations that used the sows' body length to pivot. This contrasts with other studies where direct sow observation has been used (Bøe et al, 2011;McFarlane et al, 1988). Bøe and colleagues (2011) calculated minimum pen widths at which a sow would turn around.…”

“…Sows will exercise their ability to turn around if it is available to them (McFarlane et al, 1988;Bøe et al, 2011), and will even show a preference toward a wider stall that will allow them to turn around before and after farrowing . The present study reports either 1.9 m 2 or 7.17 m 2 for an uninterrupted area utilized to turn around based on mathematical equations that used the sows' body length to pivot.…”