Effects of stage of gestation at mixing on aggression, injuries and stress in sows

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

Volumn 165, Issue , 2015, Pages 40-46

  Stevens, Bronwyn ^a   Karlen, G Marcus ^a   Morrison, Rebecca ^b   Gonyou, Harold W ^c   Butler, Kym L ^a,d   Kerswell, Keven J ^a   Hemsworth, Paul H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^b RIVALEA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD   (Australia)

^c PRAIRIE SWINE CENTRE INC   (Canada)

^d Biometrics Group   (Australia)

Author keywords

Aggression; Housing; Reproduction; Sow; Stress; Welfare

Indexed keywords

AGGRESSION; ANIMAL WELFARE; BLOOD; BREEDING POPULATION; CONCENTRATION (COMPOSITION); CONCRETE; INJURY; PIG; PREGNANCY; REPRODUCTION; RICE;

EID: 84925175029     PISSN: 01681591     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2015.02.002     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Anil L., Anil S.S., Deen J., Baidoo S.K., Wheaton J.E. 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, 66:163-1638.
2. Arey D.S., Edwards S.A. Factors affecting aggression between sows after mixing and the consequences for welfare and production. Livest. Prod. Sci. 1998, 56:61-70.
3. Barnett J.L., Winfield C.G., Cronin G.M., Hemsworth P.H., Dewar A.M. The effect of individual and group housing on behavioural and physiological responses related to the welfare of pregnant pigs. App. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1985, 14:149-161.
4. 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-housed pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1992, 34:207-220.
5. Barnett J.L., Hemsworth P.H., Cronin G.M., Jongman E.C., Hutson G.D. A review of the welfare issues for sows and piglets in relation to housing. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 2001, 52:1-28.
6. 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. Livest. Sci. 2013, 152:218-227.
7. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 1977, 368-369. Academic Press, New York. H.H. Cole, P.T. Cupps (Eds.).
8. de Koning R. Sow welfare: ekesbo assessment and planning. Pig J. 1993, 30:30-40.
9. Fraile I.G., McEwen B.S., Pfaff D.W. Progesterone inhibition of aggressive behaviors in hamsters. Physiol. Behav. 1987, 39:225-229.
10. Fraser D. Assessing animal welfare at the farm and group level: the interplay of science and values. Anim. Welfare 2003, 12:433-443.
11. Hay M., Meunier-Salaün M.-C., Brulaud F., Monnier M., Mormède P. Assessment of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and sympathetic nervous system activity in pregnant sows through the measurement of glucocorticoids and catecholamines in urine. J. Anim. Sci. 2000, 78:420-428.
12. Hemsworth P.H., Mellor D.J., Cronin G.M., Tilbrook A.J. Scientific assessment of animal welfare. New Zeal. Vet. J. 2015, 63:24-30.
13. Hemsworth P.H., Rice M., Nash J., Giri K., Butler K.L., Tilbrook A.J., Morrison R.S. Effects of group size and floor space allowance on grouped sows: Aggression, stress, skin injuries, and reproductive performance. J. Anim. Sci. 2013, 91:4953-4964.
14. Karlen G.A.M., Hemsworth P.H., Gonyou H.W., Farega E., Strom A.D., Smits R.J. The welfare of gestating sows in conventional stalls and large groups on deep litter. App. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2007, 105:87-101.
15. Kohlert J.G., Meisel R.L. Inhibition of aggression by progesterone and its metabolites in female Syrian hamsters. Aggressive Behav. 2001, 27:372-381.
16. Knox R., Salak-Johnson J., Hopgood M., Greiner L., Connor J. Effect of day of mixing gestating sows on measures of reproductive performance and animal welfare. J. Anim. Sci. 2014, 92:1698-1707.
17. Krauss V., Hoy S. Dry sows in dynamic groups: An investigation of social behaviour when introducing new sows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2011, 130:20-27.
18. Li Y.Z., Gonyou H.W. Comparison of management options for sows kept in pens with electronic feeding stations. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 2013, 93:445-452.
19. Marchant-Forde J.N. Welfare of dry sows. The Welfare of Pigs 2009, 95-139. Springer Science and Business Media, Dordrecht, the Netherlands. J.N. Marchant-Forde (Ed.).
20. Martin P., Bateson P. Measuring Behaviour. An Introductory Guide 2007, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
21. Meese G.B., Ewbank R. The establishment and nature of dominance hierarchy in the domestic pig. Anim. Behav. J. 1973, 21:326-334.
22. The Guide to GenStat® Release 15. Part 2: Statistics 2012, VSN International, Hertfordshire, UK. R.W. Payne (Ed.).
23. 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. Livestock Sci. 2009, 125:1-14.
24. Strawford M.L., Li Y.Z., Gonyou H.W. The effect of management strategies and parity on the behaviour and physiology of gestating sows housed in an electronic sow feeding system. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 2008, 88:559-567.
25. Turner A.I., Hemsworth P.H., Tilbrook A.J. Susceptibility of reproduction in female pigs to impairment by stress or elevation of cortisol. Domest. Anim. Endocrinol. 2005, 29:398-410.
26. Van der Mheen H.W., Spoodler H.A.M., Kiezebrinki M.C. Stable versus dynamic group housing systems for pregnant sows and the moment of introduction. Proceeding of the 37th International Congress of the International Society of Applied Ethology (Abano Therme, Italy), Fondazione Iniziative Zooprofilattiche e Zootecniche 2003, 90. Brescia, Italy. V. Ferrante (Ed.).
27. Velarde A. Agonistic behaviour. On Farm Monitoring of Pig Welfare 2007, 53-56. Wageningen Academic Press, Wageningen, The Netherlands. A. Velarde, R. Geers (Eds.).