Group gestation housing with individual feeding-I: How feeding regime, resource allocation, and genetic factors affect sow welfare

Livestock Science

Volumn 152, Issue 2-3, 2013, Pages 208-217

  Bench, C J ^a   Rioja Lang, F C ^b   Hayne, S M ^b   Gonyou, H W ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b PRAIRIE SWINE CENTRE INC   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

Author keywords

Genetics; Gestation sows; Group housing; Individual feeding; Resource allocation; Welfare

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875529001     PISSN: 18711413     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.livsci.2012.12.021     Document Type: Review

References (56)

1. Backus, G.B.C., Vermeer, H.M., Roelofs, P.F.M.M., Vesseur, P.C., Adams, J.H.S.N., Binnendijk, G.P., Smeets, J.J.J., Peet-Schwering, C.M.C., van der Wilt, F.J., 1997. Comparison of four housing systems for non-lactating sows. Research Institute For Pig Husbandry, Rosmalen. Report P1, 171.
2. Barnett J.L., Hemsworth P.H., Cronin G.M., Newman E.A., McCallum T.H., Chilton D. Effects of pen size, partial stalls and method of feeding on welfare-related behavioural and physiological responses of group-housing sows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1992, 34:207-220.
3. Barnett J.L., Cronin G.M., McCallum T.H., Newman E.A., Henessy D.P. Effects of grouping unfamiliar adult pigs after dark, after treatment with amperozide and by using pens with stalls, on aggression, skin lesions and plasma cortisol concentrations. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1996, 50:121-133.
4. Bench, C.J., 2005. Environmental and Genetic Factors Influencing the Development of Belly-Nosing Behaviour in the Early-Weaned Pig. PhD. Diss. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
5. Bench, C.J., Rioja-Lang, F.C., Hayne, S.M., Gonyou, H.W. Group gestation sow housing with individual feeding. II: How space allowance, group size and composition, and flooring affect sow welfare. Livestock Science, , in press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livisci.2012.12.02012.
6. Bressers H.P.M., Te Brake J.H.A., Engel B., Noordhuizen J.P.T.M. Feeding order of sows at an individual electronic feed station in a dynamic group-housing system. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1993, 36:123-134.
7. Breuer K., Sutcliffe M.E.M., Mercer J.T., Rance K.A., Beattie V.E., Sneddon I.A., Edwards S.A. The effect of breed on the development of adverse social behaviours in pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2003, 84:59-74.
8. Breuer K., Sutcliffe M.M., Mercer J.T., Rance K.A., O'Connell N.E., Sneddon I.A., Edwards S.A. Heritability of clinical tail-biting and its relation to performance traits. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2005, 93:87-94.
9. Broom D., Mendl M., Zanella A. A comparison of the welfare of sows in different housing conditions. Anim. Sci. 1995, 61:369-385.
10. Brouns F., Edwards S.A., English P.R. Effect of dietary fibre and feeding system on activity and oral behaviour of group housed gilts. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1994, 39:215-223.
11. Chapinal N., Ruiz-de-la-Torre J.L., Cerisuelo A., Baucells M.D., Gasa J., Manteca X. Feeder use patterns in group-housed pregnant sows fed with an unprotected electronic sow feeder (Fitmix). J. Appl. Anim. Welfare Sci. 2008, 11:319-336.
12. Chapinal N., Ruiz-de-la-Torre J.L., Cerisuelo A., Gasa J., Baucells M.D., Manteca X. Aggressive behaviour in two different group-housing systems for pregnant sows. J. Appl. Anim. Welfare Sci. 2010, 13:137-153.
13. Council Directive 2001/88/EC of 23 October 2001 amending Directive 91/630/EEC laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs., European Union.
14. Csermely D. Feeding behaviour in pregnant sows of different social rank. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1989, 22:84-85.
15. Csermely D., Wood-Gush D.G.M. Agonistic behaviour in grouped sows. II. How social rank affects feeding and drinking behaviour. Bull. Zool. 1990, 57:55-58.
16. Dailey J.W., McGlone J.J. Pregnant gilt behavior in outdoor and indoor intensive production systems. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1997, 52:45-52.
17. de Leeuw J.A., Jongbloed A.W., Verstegen M.W.A. Dietary fibre stabilizes blood glucose and insulin levels and reduces activity in sows (Sus scrofa). J. Nutr. 2004, 134:1481-1486.
18. de Leeuw J.A., Zonderland J.J., Altena H., Spoolder H.A.M., Jongbloed A.W., Verstegen M.W.A. Effects of levels and sources of dietary fermentable non-starch polysaccharides on blood glucose stability and behaviour of group-housed pregnant gilts. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005, 94:15-29.
19. Durrell J., Sneddon I.A., Beattie V.E. Effects of enrichment and floor type on behaviour of cubicle loose-housed dry sows. Anim. Welfare 1997, 6:297-308.
20. Edwards S.A., Armsby A.W., Lange J.W. Effects of feed station design on the behaviour of group-housed sows using an electronic individual feeding system. Livest. Prod. Sci. 1988, 19:511-522.
21. Gjein H., Larssen R.B. 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.
22. Hulbert L.E., McGlone J.J. Evaluation of drop versus trickle-feeding systems for crated or group penned gestating sows. J. Anim. Sci. 2006, 84:1004-1014.
23. Hunter E.J., Broom D.M., Edwards S.A., Sibly R.M. Social hierarchy and feeder access in a group of 20 sows using a computer-controlled feeder. Anim. Prod. 1988, 47:139-148.
24. Jensen K.H., Sørensen L.S., Bertelsen D., Pedersen A.R., Jørgensen E., Nielsen N.P., Vestergaard K.S. Management factors affecting activity and agression in dynamic group housing systems with electronic sow feeding: a field trial. Anim. Sci. 2000, 71:535-545.
25. Kongsted A.G. A review of the effect of energy intake on pregnancy rate and litter size-discussed in relation to group-housed non-lactating sows. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2005, 97:13-26.
26. Kongsted A.G., Hermansen J.E., Kristensen T. Relation between parity and feed intake, fear of humans and social behaviour in non-lactating sows group-housed under various on-farm conditions. Anim. Welfare 2007, 16:263-266.
27. Krause M., van 'T Klooster C.E., Buré R.G., Metz J.H.M., Sambraus H.H. The influence of sequential and simultaneous feeding and the availability of straw on the behaviour of gilts in group housing. Netherlands J. Agric. Sci. 1997, 45:33-48.
28. Kroneman A., Vellenga L., van der Wilt F.J., Vermeer H.M. Field research on veterinary problems in group-housed sows-A survey of lameness. J. Vet. Med. A 1993, 40:704-712.
29. Kroneman A., Vellenga L., van der Wilt F.J., Vermeer H.M. Review of health problems in group-housed sows, with special emphasis on lameness. Vet. Q. 1993, 15:26-29.
30. Leeb B., Leeb Ch., Troxler J., Schuh M. Skin lesions and callosities in group-housed pregnant sows: animal-related welfare indicators. Acta Agric. Scand. Sect. A-Anim. Sci. 2001, 51(Suppl. 30):S82-S87.
31. Lembeck V.J., Wassmuth R., Glodek P. Comparison of performance, body condition, and behaviour of sows in different housing systems. Züchtungskunde 1996, 68(3):204-217.
32. Lovendahl P., Damgaard L.H., Nielsen B.L., Thodberg K., Su G., Rydhmer L. Aggressive behaviour of sows at mixing and maternal behaviour are heritable and genetically correlated traits. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2005, 93:73-85.
33. Marchant J.N., Broom D.M. Factors affecting posture-changing in loose-housed and confined gestating sows. Anim. Sci. 1996, 63:477-485.
34. Marchant J.N., Mendl M.T., Rudd A.R., Broom D.M. The effect of agonistic interactions on the heart rate of group-housed sows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1995, 46:49-56.
35. Martin J.E., Edwards S.A. Feeding behaviour of outdoor sows: the effects of diet quantity and type. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1994, 41:63-74.
36. Meunier-Salaün M.C., Edwards S.A., Robert S. Effect of dietary fibre on the behaviour and health of the restricted sow. Anim. Feed Sci. Tech. 2001, 90:53-69.
37. O'Connell N.E. Influence of access to grass silage on the welfare of sows introduced to a large dynamic group. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2007, 107:45-57.
38. Olsson A.-Ch, Andersson M., Botermans J., Rantzer D., Svendsen J. Animal interaction and response to electronic sow feeding (ESF) in 3 different herds and effects of function settings to increase capacity. Livest. Sci. 2011, 137:268-272.
39. Petherick J.C., Blackshaw J.K. A note on the effect of feeding regime on the performance of sows housed in a novel group-housing system. Anim. Prod. 1989, 49:523-526.
40. Pol F., Courboulay V., Cotte J., Martrenchar A., Hay M., Mormede P. Urinary cortisol as an additional tool to assess the welfare of pregnant sows kept in two types of housing. Vet. Res. 2002, 33:13-22.
41. Rizvi S., Nicol C.J., Green L.E. Risk factors for vulva biting in breeding sows in south-west England. Vet. Rec. 1998, 143:654-658.
42. Rodenburg B., Koene P. The impact of group size on damaging behaviours, aggression, fear and stress in farm animals. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2007, 103:205-214.
43. Ru Y.J., Bao Y.M. Feeding dry sows ad libitum with high fibre diets. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 2004, 17:283-300.
44. Scott K., Binnendijk G.P., Edwards S.A., Guy J.H., Kiezebrink M.C., Vermeer H.M. Preliminary evaluation of a prototype welfare monitoring system for sows and piglets (Welfare Quality project). Anim. Welfare 2009, 18:441-449.
45. Spoolder H.A.M., Burbidge J.A., Edwards S.A., Simmins P.H., Lawrence A.B. 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.
46. Spoolder H.A.M., Burbidge J.A., Edwards S.A., Simmins P.H., Lawrence A.B. Effects of food level and straw bedding during pregnancy on sow performance and responses to an ACTH challenge. Livest. Prod. Sci. 1996, 47:51-57.
47. Spoolder H.A.M., Burbudge J.A., Edwards S.A., Lawrence A.B., Simmins P.H. 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.
48. Spoolder H.A.M., Geudeke M.J., van der Peet-Schwering C.M.C., Soede N.M. Group housing of sows in early pregnancy: a review of success and risk factors. Livest. Sci. 2009, 125:1-14.
49. Stewart C.L., O'Connell N.E., Boyle L. Influence of access to straw provided in racks on the welfare of sows in large dynamic groups. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2008, 112:235-247.
50. Terlouw E.M.C., Lawrence A.B., Illius A.W. Influences of feeding level and physical restriction on development of stereotypies in sows. Anim. Behav. 1991, 42:981-991.
51. Turner S.P., Sinclair A.G., Edwards S.A. The interaction of liveweight and the degree of competition on drinking behaviour in growing pigs at different group sizes. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2000, 67:321-334.
52. van der Peet-Schering C.M.C., Spoolder H.A.M., Kemp B., Binnendijk G.P., den Hartog L.A., Verstegen M.W.A. Development of stereotypic behaviour in sows fed a starch diet or non-starch polysaccharide diet during gestation and lactation over two parities. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2003, 83:81-97.
53. Vieuille-Thomas C., Le Pape G., Signoret J.P. 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.
54. Webster A.J. Farm animal welfare: the five freedoms and the free market. Vet J. 2001, 161(3):229-237.
55. Zonderland J.J., de Leeuw J.A., Nolten C., Spoolder H.A.M. Assessing long-term behavioural effects of feeding motivation in group-housed pregnant sows; what, when and how to observe. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2004, 87:15-30.
56. Zurbrigg K., Blackwell T. Injuries, lameness and cleanliness of sows in four group-housing gestation facilities in Ontario. J. Swine Health Prod. 2006, 14(4):202-206.