Effect of group size and structure on the welfare and performance of pregnant sows in pens with electronic sow feeders

Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research

Volumn 70, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 128-136

  Anil, Leena ^a   Anil, Sukumarannair S ^a   Deen, John ^a   Baidoo, Samuel K ^b   Walker, Roger D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HYDROCORTISONE;

AGGRESSION; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL FOOD; ANIMAL HOUSING; ANIMAL WELFARE; ARTICLE; BREEDING; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; ELECTRONICS; FEMALE; FREQUENCY ANALYSIS; HORMONE DETERMINATION; INJURY; LONGEVITY; NONHUMAN; SALIVA ANALYSIS; SCORING SYSTEM; SOCIAL INTERACTION;

ANIMAL FEED; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ANIMAL WELFARE; ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; FEMALE; HOUSING, ANIMAL; HYDROCORTISONE; LONGEVITY; POPULATION DENSITY; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; SALIVA; SWINE; TIME FACTORS;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 33646336876     PISSN: 08309000     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. den Hartog LA, Backus GBC, Vermeer HM. Evaluation of housing systems for sows. J Anim, Sci 1993;71:1339-1344.
2. Broom DM, Mendl MT, Zanella AJ. A comparison of the welfare of sows in different housing conditions. Anim Sci 1995;61: 369-385.
3. Anil L, Anil SS, Baidoo SK, Deen J. Injury levels in gestating sows housed in pens with electronic sow feeders. Proc 18th Intl Pig Vet Soc Congr 2004:701.
4. Gonyou HW. Group housing: alternative systems, alternative management. Proc Allen D. Leman Swine Conf 2002:198-201.
5. Simmins PH. Reproductive performance of sows entering stable and dynamic groups after mating. Anim Prod 1993;57:293-298.
6. Gonyou HW. The social behavior of pigs. In: Keeling LJ, Gonyou HW, eds. Social Behaviour in Farm Animals. Wallingford, England: CABI Publishing, 2001:163-164.
7. Code of Accepted Farming Practice for the Welfare of Pigs. Attwood, Australia: Bureau of Animal Welfare, 2001. Available: www.dpi.vic.gov.au/dpi/nreninf.nsf/93a98744f6ec41bd4a256c8e00013aa9 /556839921ef4c453ca256f0f0009b553/$FILE/AG0002.pdf (accessed 2005 Sep 9).
8. Ruis MAW, TeBrake JHA, Engel B, et al. The circadian rhythm of salivary cortisol in growing pigs: effects of age, gender and stress. Physiol Behav 1997;62:623-630.
9. Anil L, Bhend KMG, Baidoo SK, Morrison R, Deen J. Comparison of injuries in sows housed in gestation stalls and group pens with electronic sow feeders. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003;223: 1334-1338.
10. Jensen P. An ethogram of social interaction patterns in group-housed dry sows. Appl Anim Ethol 1980;6:341-350.
11. Jensen KH, Pedersen BK, Pedersen LJ, Jorgensen E. Well-being in pregnant sows: confinement versus group housing with electronic sow feeding. Acta Agric Scand A Anim Sci 1995;45: 266-275.
12. Morrison RS, Hemsworth PH, Cronin GM, Campbell RG. The social and feeding behaviour of growing pigs in deep-litter, large group housing systems. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2003;82: 173-188.
13. Giersing MH, Studnitz M. Characterization and investigation of aggressive behaviour in the pig. Acta Agric Scand A Anim. Sci 1996;Suppl 27:56-60.
14. Gonyou HW, Chapple RP, Frank GR. Productivity, time budgets and social aspects of eating in pigs penned in groups of 5 or individually. Appl Anim. Behav Sci 1992;34:291-301.
15. Olsson AC, Andersson M, Rantzer D, Svendsen J, Hellstrom T. Group Housing Sows in Gestation - Comparison of a Computer Controlled Individual Feeding System with Group System Based on Biological Fixation [Report 51]. Lund, Sweden: Swedish University, Department of Farm Buildings, Division of Planning and Environment, 1986:22-34.
16. van Putten G, van de Burgwal JA. Vulva biting in group-housed sows: preliminary report. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1990;26:181-186.
17. Allen CE, Bradley ST, Chilcott RP. "Four legs good" - a review of pig behaviour. The Pig Journal 2002;49:7-51.
18. Bokma S, Kersjes GJK. The introduction of pregnant sows in an established group. Proc Intl Congr Appl Ethol Farm Anim 1988:166-169.
19. Hunter EJ, Edwards SA, Simmins PH. Social activity and feeder use by a 'dynamic group' of 40 sows using a computerized feeder. Anim Prod 1989;48:643-644.
20. Ewbank R, Meese GB. Aggressive behaviour in groups of domestic pigs on removal and return of individuals. Anim Prod 1971;13:685-693.
21. Parrott RF, Misson BH. Changes in pig salivary cortisol in response to transport simulation, food and water deprivation, and mixing. Br Vet J 1989;145:501-505.
22. Hessing MJC. Individual Behavioural Characteristics in Pigs and Their Consequences for Pig Husbandry [PhD thesis]. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Agricultural University, 1993.
23. Jensen P. An analysis of agonistic interaction patterns in group-housed dry sows - aggression regulation through an 'avoidance order'. Appl Anim Ethol 1982;9:47-61.
24. 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.
25. Baxter M. Social space requirements of pigs. In: Zayan R, ed. Social space for domestic animals. Boston, Massachusetts: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1985:116-127.
26. Edwards SA, Simmins PH, Walker AJ, Beckett MP. Behaviour of 400 sows in a single group with electronic individual feeding. Proc Intl Congr Appl Ethol Farm Anim 1986:69-73.
27. Oldigs B, Schlichting MC, Ernst E. Trial on grouping of sows. Proc 23rd Intl Congr Appl Ethol 1992:109-120.
28. Moore SA, Gonyou RK Ghent AW. Integration of newly introduced and resident sows following grouping. Appl Anim. Behav Sci 1993;38:257-267.
29. Spoolder HAM, Burbidge IA, Edwards SA, Lawrence AB, Simmins PH. Social recognition in gilts mixed into a dynamic group of 30 sows [abstract]. Anim Sci 1996;62:630.
30. Arey DS. Time course for the formation and disruption of social organisation in group-housed sows. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1999;62:199-207.
31. Arey DS, Edwards SA. Factors influencing aggression between sows after mixing and the consequences for welfare and production. Livest Prod Sci 1998;56:61-70.
32. Petherick CJ, Blackshaw JK. A review of the factors influencing the aggressive and agonistic behaviour of the domestic pig. Aust J Exp Agric 1987;27:605-611.
33. Lindberg AC. Group life. In: Keeling LJ, Gonyou HW, eds. Social Behaviour in Farm Animals. Wallingford, England: CABI Publishing, 2001:37-58.
34. Drickamer LC, Arthur RD, Rosenthal TL. Predictors of social dominance and aggression in gilts. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1999;63:121-129.
35. Bryant MJ, Ewbank R. Some effects of stocking rate and group size upon agonistic behaviour in groups of growing pigs. Br Vet J 1972;128:64-69.
36. Ewbank R, Bryant MJ. Aggressive behaviour amongst groups of domesticated pigs kept at various stocking rates. Anim Behav 1972;20:21-28.
37. Mendl MT, Broom DM, Zanella AJ. The effects of three types of dry housing on sow welfare. In: Collins E, Boon C, eds. Livestock Environment IV. St. Joseph, Michigan: American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 1993:461-467.
38. Moore SA, Gonyou HW, McLaren DG, Curtis SE. Collar losses and missed feedings in group-housed gilts using an electronic sow feeder [abstract]. J Anim Sci 1989;67(Suppl 1):469.
39. Hodgkiss NJ, Eddison JC, Brooks PH, Bugg P. Assessment of the injuries sustained by pregnant sows housed in groups using electronic feeders. Vet Rec 1998;143:604-607.
40. Rushen J. Changing concepts of farm animal welfare: bridging the gap between applied and basic research. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2003;81:199-214.
41. Olsson AC, Svendsen J, Andersson M, Rantzer D, Lenskens P. Group housing systems for sows. Swed J Agric Res 1992;22: 153-162.
42. Anil L, Anil SS, Deen J, Baidoo SK, Wheaton JE. Evaluation of well being, productivity, and longevity of pregnant sows housed in groups in pens with electronic sow feeder or separately in gestation stalls. Am J Vet Res 2005;66:1630-1638.