A comprehensive review of housing for pregnant sows

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Volumn 227, Issue 10, 2005, Pages 1580-1590

  Rhodes, R Tracy ^a   Appleby, Michael C ^b   Chinn, Kathy ^a   Douglas, Lawrence ^c   Firkins, Lawrence D ^d   Houpt, Katherine A ^e   Irwin, Christa ^a   McGlone, John J ^f   Sundberg, Paul ^g   Tokach, Lisa ^a   Wills, Robert W ^h  

^a Humane Society of the United States ^*  (United States)

^b Humane Society of the United States   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^e Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

^f TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g NATIONAL PORK BOARD   (United States)

^h MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BETA ENDORPHIN; CATECHOLAMINE; CORTICOTROPIN; CORTICOTROPIN RELEASING FACTOR; GLUCOCORTICOID; HYDROCORTISONE; PEPTIDE DERIVATIVE; PROOPIOMELANOCORTIN; UROCORTIN;

AGGRESSION; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL CARE; ANIMAL FOOD; ANIMAL HEALTH; ANIMAL HOUSING; ANIMAL WELFARE; ANIMAL WELLBEING; BREEDING; CONCEPTION; DIET RESTRICTION; ECONOMIC ASPECT; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; ESTRUS; ETHICS; EVALUATION; HORMONE ACTION; HORMONE RELEASE; HUNGER; HYDROCORTISONE BLOOD LEVEL; HYPOTHALAMUS HYPOPHYSIS ADRENAL SYSTEM; IMMUNE RESPONSE; INJURY; METHODOLOGY; NEGATIVE FEEDBACK; NONHUMAN; PEER REVIEW; PREGNANCY; RESEARCH; REVIEW; SOCIAL INTERACTION; STEREOTYPY; STRESS; SWINE;

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ANIMAL WELFARE; ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; FEMALE; HOOF AND CLAW; HOUSING, ANIMAL; PREGNANCY; RISK; SWINE; WOUNDS AND INJURIES;

ANIMALIA; SUS SCROFA;

EID: 27744520653     PISSN: 00031488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2460/javma.2005.227.1580     Document Type: Review

References (95)

1. Duncan IJH, Fraser D. 1997. Understanding animal welfare. In: Appleby MC, Hughes BO, eds. Animal welfare. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, 2004;19-31.
2. Sainsbury D. Farm animal welfare: cattle, pigs and poultry. London: Collins Professional and Technical Books, William Collins Sons & Co, 1986.
3. Dawkins MS. Behavioural deprivation: a central problem in animal welfare. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1988;20:209-225.
4. McGlone JJ. What is animal welfare? J Agric Environ Ethics 1993;6(suppl 2):26-36.
5. Waiblinger S, Baumgartner J, Kiley-Worthington M, et al. Applied ethology: the basis for improved animal welfare in organic farming. In: Vaarst M, Roderick S, Lund V, et al, eds. Animal health and welfare in organic agriculture. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, 2004;117-161.
6. te Velde H, Aarts N, van Woerkum C. Dealing with ambivalence: farmers' and consumers' perceptions of animal welfare in livestock breeding. J Agric Environ Ethics 2002;15:203-219.
7. Fraser D, Weary DM, Pajor EA, et al. A scientific conception of animal welfare that reflects ethical concerns. Anim Welf 1997;6: 187-205.
8. Johnson AK, Morrow-Tesch JL, McGlone JJ. Behavior and performance of lactating sows and piglets reared indoors or outdoors. J Anim Sci 2001;79:2571-2579.
9. McGlone JJ, von Borell EH, Deen J, et al. Review, compilation of the scientific literature comparing housing systems for gestating sows and gilts using measures of physiology, behavior, performance, and health. Prof Anim Sci 2004;20:105-117.
10. Vale W, Spiess J, Rivier C, et al. Characterization of a 41-residue ovine hypothalamic peptide that stimulates secretion of corticotrophic and beta-endorphin. Science 1981;213:1394-1397.
11. Koob GF, Heinrichs SC. A role for corticotrophin-releasing factor and urocortin in behavioral responses to stressors. Brain Res 1999;848:141-152.
12. Dunn AJ, Berridge CW. Physiological and behavioral responses to corticotrophin-releasing factor administration: is CRF a mediator of anxiety or stress response? Brain Res Rev 1990;15: 71-100.
13. Aguilera G, Nikodemova M, Wynn PC, et al. Corticotropin releasing hormone receptors: two decades later. Peptides 2004;25: 319-329.
14. Bale TL, Vale WW. CRF and CRF receptors: role in stress responsivity and other behaviors. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2004;44:525-557.
15. Takahashi LK, Ho SP, Livanov V, et al. Antagonism of CRF(2) receptors produces anxiolytic behavior in animal models of anxiety. Brain Res 2001;902:135-142.
16. Dantzer R. Behavioral, physiological and functional aspects of stereotyped behavior: a review and re-interpretation. J Anim Sci 1986;62:1776-1786.
17. Salak-Johnson JL, Anderson DL, McGlone JJ. Differential dose effects of central CRF and effects of CRF astressin on pig behavior. Physiol Behav 2004;83:143-150.
18. Johnson RW, von Borell EH, Anderson LL, et al. Intracerebroventricular injection of corticotrophin-releasing hormone in the pig: acute effects on behavior, adrenocorticotrophin secretion, and immune suppression. Endocrinology 1994;135: 642-648.
19. Salak-Johnson JL, McGlone JJ, Whisnart CS, et al. Intracerebroventricular porcine corticotrophin-releasing hormone and cortisol effects on pig immune measures and behavior. Physiol Behav 1997;61:15-23.
20. Barnett JL, Hemsworth PH, Winfield CG, et al. Effects of social environment on welfare status and sexual behavior of female pigs. 1. Effects of group size. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1986;16:249-257.
21. Barnett JL, Hemsworth PH, Winfield CG. The effects of design of individual stalls on the social behavior and physiological responses related to the welfare of pregnant pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1987;18:133-142.
22. Barnett JL, Hemsworth PH, Newman EA, et al. The effect of design of tether and stall housing on some behavioral and physiological responses related to the welfare of pregnant pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1989;24:1-12.
23. von Borell E, Morris JR, Hurnik JF, et al. The performance of gilts in a new group housing system: endocrinological and immunological functions. J Anim Sci 1992;70:2714-2721.
24. Tsuma VT, Einarsson S, Madej A, et al. Endocrine changes during group housing of primiparous sows in early pregnancy. Acta Vet Scand 1996;37:481-490.
25. Bergeron R, Gonyou HW, Eurell TE. Behavioral and physiological responses of Meishan, Yorkshire and crossbred gilts to conventional and turn-around gestation stalls. Can J Anim Sci 1996; 76:289-297.
26. Lawrence AB, Petherick JC, McLean KA, et al. The effect of environment on behavior, plasma cortisol and prolactin in parturient sows. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1994;39:313-330.
27. Zanella AJ, Brunner P, Unshelm J, et al. The relationship between housing and social rank on cortisol, β-endorphin and dynorphin (1-13) secretion in sows. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1998;59:1-10.
28. Marchant JN, Rudd AR, Broom DM. The effects of housing on heart rate of gestating sows during specific behaviours. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1997;55:67-78.
29. Damm BI, Bildsoe M, Gilbert C, et al. The effects of confinement on periperturient behaviour and circulating prolactin, prostaglandin F-2 alpha and oxytocin in gilts with access to a variety of nest materials. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2002;76:1350-1356.
30. Mendl M, Zanella AJ, Broom DM. Physiological and reproductive correlates of behavioural strategies in female domestic pigs. Anim Behav 1992;44:1107-1121.
31. Stolba A, Wood-Gush DGM. The behaviour of pigs in a semi-natural environment. Anim Prod 1989;48:419-425.
32. Gonyou HW. The social behaviour of pigs. In: Keeling LJ, Gonyou HW, eds. Social behaviour in farm animals. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, 2001.
33. Matthews LR, Ladewig J. Environmental requirements of pigs measured by behavioural demand functions. Anim Behav 1994;47:713-719.
34. Anil L, Anil SS, Deen J. Relationship between postural behaviour and gestation stall dimensions in relation to sow size. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2002;77:173-181.
35. Fredeen HT, Sather AP. Joint damage in pigs reared under confinement. Can J Anim Sci 1978;58:759-773.
36. Sather AP, Fredeen HT. The effect of confinement housing upon the incidence of leg weakness in swine. Can J Anim Sci 1982;62:1119-1128.
37. Marchant JN, Broom DM. Factors affecting posture-changing in loose-housed and confined gestating sows. Anim Sci 1996;63:477-485.
38. Copado F, de Aluja AS, Mayagoitia L, et al. The behaviour of free-ranging pigs in the Mexican tropics and its relationships with human faeces consumption. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2004;88:243-252.
39. Marchant-Forde RM, Marchant-Forde JN. Pregnancy-related changes in behavior and cardiac activity in primiparous pigs. Physiol Behav 2004;82:815-825.
40. Boyle LA, Leonard FC, Lynch PB, et al. Effect of gestation housing on behaviour and skin lesions of sows in farrowing crates. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2002;76:119-134.
41. Terlouw EM, Lawrence AB, Illius AW. Influences of feeding level and physical restriction on development of sterotypies in sows. Anim Behav 1991;42:981-991.
42. Lawrence AB, Terlouw EM. A review of behavioral factors involved in the development and continued performance of stereotypic behaviors in pigs. J Anim Sci 1993;71:2815-2825.
43. Terlouw EM, Lawrence AB. Long-term effects of food allowance and housing on development of stereotypies in pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1993;38:103-126.
44. Arey DS, Edwards SA. Factors influencing aggression between sows after mixing and the consequences for welfare and production. Livestock Prod Sci 1998;56:61-70.
45. Appleby MC, Lawrence AB. Food restriction as a cause of stereotypic behaviour in tethered gilts. Anim Prod 1987;45:103-110.
46. Fraser AF, Broom DM. Farm animal behaviour and welfare. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, 1997.
47. Fraser D. Selection of bedded and unbedded areas by pigs in relation to environmental temperature and behaviour. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1985;14:117-126.
48. de Leeuw JA, Ekkel ED. Effects of feeding level and the presence of a foraging substrate on the behaviour and stress physiological response of individually housed gilts. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2004;86:15-25.
49. Olsen AW, Simonsen HB, Dybkjaer L. Effect of access to roughage and shelter on selected behavioural indicators of welfare in pigs housed in a complex environment. Anim Welf 2002;11:75-87.
50. Arellano PE, Pijoan C, Jacobson LD, et al. Stereotyped behaviour, social interactions and suckling pattern of pigs housed in groups or in single crates. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1992;35:157-166.
51. Vieuille-Thomas C, Pape GL, Signoret JP. Stereotypies in pregnant sows: indications of influence of the housing system on the patterns expressed by the animals. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1995;44:19-27.
52. Backus GBC, Vermeer HM, Roelofs PFMM, et al. Comparison of four housing systems for non-lactating sows. Report P1.171. Rosmalen, The Netherlands: Research Institute for Pig Husbandry, 1997.
53. Cariolet RC, Vieuille P, Morvan F, et al. Evaluation du bien-etre chez la truie gestante bloquee: relation entre le bien-etre et la productivite numerique. J Rech Porcine Fr 1997;29:149.
54. McGlone JJ, Salak-Johnson JL, Nicholson RI, et al. Evaluation of crates and girth tethers for sows: reproductive performance, immunity, behavior and ergonomic measures. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1994;39:297-311.
55. Barnett JL, Winfield CG, Cronin GM, et al. The effect of individual and group housing on behavioural and physiological responses related to the welfare of pregnant pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1985;14:149-181.
56. Dailey JW, McGlone JJ. Oral/nasal/facial and other behaviors of sows kept individually outdoors on pasture, soil or indoors in gestation crates. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1997;52:25-43.
57. Horrell I, A'Ness PA. Stone chewing in outdoor pigs, in Proceedings. 33rd Int Cong Int Soc Appl Ethol 1999;88.
58. Morris JR, Hurnik JF, Friendship RM, et al. The behavior of gestating swine housed in the Hurnik-Morris system. J Anim Sci 1993;71:3280-3284.
59. Spoolder HA, Burbidge JA, Edwards SA, et al. Provision of straw as a foraging substrate reduces the development of excessive chain and bar manipulation in food restricted sows. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1995;43:249-262.
60. Cronin GM, Wiepkema PR. An analysis of stereotyped behaviour in tethered sows. Ann Rech Vet 1984;15:263-270.
61. Schouten W, Rushen J. Effects of naloxone on stereotypic and normal behaviour of tethered and loose-housed sows. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1992;33:17-26.
62. Rushen JP. Stereotyped behaviour, adjunctive drinking and the feeding periods of tethered sows. Anim Behav 1984;32:1059-1007.
63. Rushen JP. Stereotypies, aggression and the feeding schedules of tethered sows. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1985;14:137-147.
64. Robert S, Matte JJ, Farmer C, et al. High-fibre diets for sows: effects on stereotypies and adjunctive drinking. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1993;37:297-309.
65. McGlone JJ, Fullwood SD. Behavior, reproduction, and immunity of crated pregnant gilts: effects of high dietary fiber and rearing environment. J Anim Sci 2001;79:1456-1474.
66. Brouns F, Edwards SA, English PR. Effect of dietary fibre and feeding system on activity and oral behaviour of group housed gilts. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1994;39:215-223.
67. Bergeron R, Bolduc J, Ramonet Y, et al. Feeding motivation and stereotypies in pregnant sows fed increasing levels of fibre and/or food. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2000;70:27-40.
68. Zanella AJ, Broom DM, Hunter JC, et al. Brain opioid receptors in relation to stereotypies, inactivity, and housing in sows. Physiol Behav 1996;59:769-775.
69. Wechsler B. Coping and coping strategies: a behavioural view. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1995;43:123-124.
70. von Borell E, Hurnik JF. Stereotypic behavior and productivity of sows. Can J Anim Sci 1990;70:953-956.
71. Mason GJ. Forms of stereotypic behavior. In: Lawrence AB, Rushen J, eds. Stereotypic animal behaviour: fundamentals and applications to welfare. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, 1993;7-40.
72. Stolba A, Baker N, Wood-Gush DGM. The characterization of stereotyped behaviour in stalled sows by informational redundancy Behavior 1984;87:157-182.
73. Vestergaard K. An evaluation of ethological criteria and methods in the assessment of well-being in sows. Ann Rech Vet 1984;15:227-235.
74. Spoolder HAM, Burbidge JA, Edwards SA, et al. Effects of food level on performance and behaviour of sows in a dynamic group-housing system with electronic feeding. Anim Sci 1997;65: 473-482.
75. Vestergaard K, Hansen LL. Tethered versus loose sows: ethological observations and measures of productivity. I. Ethological observations during pregnancy and farrowing. Ann Rech Vet 1984;15:245-258.
76. Barnett JL, Hemsworth PH, Cronin GM, et al. Effects of design of individual cage-stalls on the behavioural and physiological responses related to the welfare of pregnant pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1991;32:23-33.
77. Jensen KH, Sorensen LS, Bertelsen D, et al. Management factors affecting activity and aggression in dynamic group housing systems with electronic sow feeding: a field trial. Anim Sci 2000;71:535-545.
78. Weng RC, Edwards SA, English PR. Behaviour, social interactions and lesion scores of group-housed sows in relation to floor space allowance. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1998;59:307-316.
79. Rizvi S, Nicol CJ, Green LE. Risk factors for vulva biting in breeding sows in south-west England. Vet Rec 1998;143:654-658.
80. van Putten G, van de Burgwal JA. Vulva biting in group-housed sows: preliminary report. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1990;26:181-186.
81. Kroneman A, Vellenga L, van der Wilt FJ, et al. Review of health problems in group-housed sows, with special emphasis on lameness. Vet Q 1993;15:26-29.
82. Blackshaw JK, Blackshaw AW, McGlone JJ. Startle-freeze behaviour in weaned pigs. Int J Comp Physiol 1998;99:30-39.
83. Anil L, Bhend KM, Baidoo SK, et al. Comparison of injuries in sows housed in gestation stalls versus group pens with electronic sow feeders. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003;223:1334-1338.
84. Gjein H, Larssen RB. Housing of pregnant sows in loose and confined systems-a field study. 2. Claw lesions: morphology, prevalence, location and relation to age. Acta Vet Scand 1995;36:433-442.
85. England DC, Spurr DT. Litter size of swine confined during gestation. J Anim Sci 1969;28:220-223.
86. Schmidt WE, Stevenson JS, Davis DL. Reproductive traits of sows penned individually or in groups until 35 days after breeding. J Anim Sci 1985;60:755-759.
87. Hemsworth PH, Salden NTCJ, Hoogerbrugge A. The influence of the post-weaning social environment on the weaning to mating interval of the sow. Anim Prod 1982;35:41-48.
88. Peltoniemi OA, Love RJ, Heinonen M, et al. Seasonal and management effects on fertility of the sow: a descriptive study. Anim Reprod Sci 1999;55:47-61.
89. Love RJ, Klupiec C, Thornton EJ, et al. An interaction between feeding rate and season affects fertility of sows. Anim Reprod Sci 1995;39:275-284.
90. Lynch PB, O'Grady JF, Kearney PA. Effect of housing system on sow productivity. Ann Rech Vet 1984;15:181-184.
91. den Ouden M, Nijsing JT, Dijkhuizen AA, et al. Economic optimization of pork production marketing chains. I. Model input on animal welfare and costs. Livestock Prod Sci 1997;48:23-37.
92. Jensen P, von Borell E, Broom DM, et al. The welfare of intensively kept pigs. Report of the Scientific Veterinary Committee, Animal Welfare Section, to the Commission of the European Union. Doc XXIV/B3/ScVC/0005/1997. Adopted September 30, 1997. Available at: europa.eu.int/comm/dg24/health/sc/oldcomm4/ out17_en.pdf.
93. Turner J. The welfare of Europe's sows in close confinement stalls. Hampshire, UK: Compassion in World Farming Trust, 2000.
94. van Heugten E. Housing of sows and gilts in Denmark. Swine News 2003;26(3):3-4.
95. Edwards SA, Fraser D. Housing systems for farrowing and lactation. Pig J 1997;39:77-89.