Does Nursing Behaviour of Sows in Loose-Housing Pens Differ from That of Sows in Farrowing Pens with Crates?
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Animals, Housing and Handling
2.2. Video Analysis
2.3. Statistical Analysis
2.3.1. Nursing Frequency
2.3.2. Sow-Terminated Nursing and Unnursed Piglets
2.3.3. Duration of Nursing Bouts
3. Results
3.1. Nursing Frequencies
3.2. Nursing Termination by the Sow
3.3. Piglets Left Unnursed
3.4. Duration of Nursing Bouts
4. Discussion
4.1. Nursing Frequencies
4.2. Nursing Termination by the Sow
4.3. Duration of Nursing Bouts and Piglets Left Unnursed
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Robertson, J.; Laird, R.; Hall, J.; Forsyth, R.; Thomson, J.; Walker-Love, J. A comparison of two indoor farrowing systems for sows. Anim. Sci. 1966, 8, 171–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wechsler, B.; Weber, R. Loose farrowing systems: Challenges and solutions. Anim. Welf. 2007, 16, 295–307. [Google Scholar]
- KilBride, A.L.; Mendl, M.; Statham, P.; Held, S.; Harris, M.; Cooper, S.; Green, L.E. A cohort study of preweaning piglet mortality and farrowing accommodation on 112 commercial pig farms in England. Prev. Vet. Med. 2012, 104, 281–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wackermannová, M.; Goumon, S.; Illmann, G. Pens with temporary crating: A viable alternative housing system to improve the welfare of lactating sows—Review. Res. Pig Breed. 2017, 11, 22–26. [Google Scholar]
- Baxter, E.M.; Andersen, I.L.; Edwards, S.A. Sow welfare in the farrowing crate and alternatives. In Advances in Pig Welfare: A Volume in Herd and Flock Welfare; Špinka, M., Ed.; Woodhead Publishing: Oxford, UK, 2018; pp. 27–72. [Google Scholar]
- Communication from the Commission on the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) “End the Cage Age”. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/detail?ref=C(2021)4747&lang=en (accessed on 17 December 2021).
- Thodberg, K.; Jensen, K.H.; Herskin, M.S. Nursing behaviour, postpartum activity and reactivity in sows: Effects of farrowing environment, previous experience and temperament. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2002, 77, 53–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pedersen, M.L.; Moustsen, V.A.; Nielsen, M.B.F.; Kristensen, A.R. Improved udder access prolongs duration of milk letdown and increases piglet weight gain. Livest. Sci. 2011, 140, 253–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Illmann, G.; Chaloupková, H.; Melišová, M. Impact of sow prepartum behavior on maternal behavior, piglet body weight gain, and mortality in farrowing pens and crates. J. Anim. Sci. 2016, 94, 3978–3986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nicolaisen, T.; Lühken, E.; Volkmann, N.; Rohn, K.; Kemper, N.; Fels, M. The Effect of Sows’ and Piglets’ Behaviour on Piglet Crushing Patterns in Two Different Farrowing Pen Systems. Animals 2019, 9, 538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhang, X.; Li, C.; Hao, Y.; Gu, X. Effects of Different Farrowing Environments on the Behavior of Sows and Piglets. Animals 2020, 10, 320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dyck, G.W.; Swierstra, E.E. Causes of piglet death from birth to weaning. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 1987, 67, 543–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Passillé, A.M.B.; Rushen, J. Using early suckling behavior and weight gain to identify piglets at risk. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 1989, 69, 535–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baxter, E.M.; Lawrence, A.B.; Edwards, S.A. Alternative farrowing accommodation: Welfare and economic aspects of existing farrowing and lactation systems for pigs. Animal 2012, 6, 96–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Špinka, M.; Illmann, G.; de Jonge, F.; Andersson, M.; Schuurman, T.; Jensen, P. Dimensions of maternal behaviour characteristics in domestic and wild×domestic crossbred sows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2000, 70, 99–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valros, A.; Rundgren, M.; Špinka, M.; Saloniemi, H.; Algers, B. Sow activity level, frequency of standing-to-lying posture changes and anti-crushing behaviour—Within sow-repeatability and interactions with nursing behaviour and piglet performance. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2003, 83, 29–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whittemore, C.T.; Fraser, D. The nursing and suckling behaviour of pigs. II. Vocalization of the sow in relation to suckling behaviour and milk ejection. Br. Vet. J. 1974, 130, 346–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fraser, D. A review of the behavioural mechanism of milk ejection of the domestic pig. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 1980, 6, 247–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ellendorff, F.; Forsling, M.L.; Poulain, D.A. The milk ejection reflex in the pig. J. Physiol. 1982, 333, 577–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hartmann, P.E.; Smith, N.A.; Thompson, M.J.; Wakeford, C.M.; Arthur, P.G. The lactation cycle in the sow: Physiological and management contradictions. Livest. Prod. Sci. 1997, 50, 75–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harris, M.J.; Gonyou, H.W. Increasing available space in a farrowing crate does not facilitate postural changes or maternal responses in gilts. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1998, 59, 285–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wechsler, B.; Hegglin, D. Individual differences in the behaviour of sows at the nest-site and the crushing of piglets. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1997, 51, 39–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grimberg-Henrici, C.G.E.; Büttner, K.; Meyer, C.; Krieter, J. Does housing influence maternal behaviour in sows? Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016, 180, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, C.; Verdon, M.; Cronin, G.M.; Hemsworth, P.H. The behaviour and welfare of sows and piglets in farrowing crates or lactation pens. Animal 2017, 11, 1210–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing. 2021. Available online: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 1 November 2021).
- Kuznetsova, A.; Brockhoff, P.B.; Christensen, R.H.B. Lmertest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. J. Stat. Softw. 2017, 82, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lenth, R.V. Em Means: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means, R Package Version 1.5.3. 2020. Available online: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans (accessed on 1 November 2021).
- Holm, S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand. J. Stat. 1979, 6, 65–70. [Google Scholar]
- Barton, K. MuMIn: Multi-Model Inference, R Package Version 1.43.17. 2020. Available online: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn (accessed on 17 December 2021).
- Jensen, P. Observations on the maternal behaviour of free-ranging domestic pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1986, 16, 131–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Špinka, M.; Illmann, G.; Algers, B.; Štétková, Z. The role of nursing frequency in milk production in domestic pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 1997, 75, 1223–1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Loftus, L.; Bell, G.; Padmore, E.; Atkinson, S.; Henworth, A.; Hoyle, M. The effect of two different farrowing systems on sow behaviour, and piglet behaviour, mortality and growth. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2020, 232, 105102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, P. Maternal behaviour and mother-young interactions during lactation in free-ranging domestic pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1988, 20, 297–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weary, D.M.; Pajor, E.A.; Bonenfant, M.; Fraser, D.; Kramer, D.L. Alternative housing for sows and litters.: Part 4. Effects of sow-controlled housing combined with a communal piglet area on pre- and post-weaning behaviour and performance. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2002, 76, 279–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moreira, R.H.R.; Oliveira, R.F.; Palencia, J.Y.P.; Fonseca, L.S.; Garbossa, C.A.P.; Abreu, M.L.T.; Ferreira, R.A. Season effects on the suckling behavior of piglets. An. Acad. Bras. Cienc. 2020, 92, e20190155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, P.; Stangel, G.; Algers, B. Nursing and suckling behaviour of semi-naturally kept pigs during the first 10 days postpartum. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1991, 31, 193–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valros, A.; Rundgren, M.; Špinka, M.; Saloniemi, H.; Rydhmer, L.; Algers, B. Nursing behaviour of sows during 5 weeks lactation and effects on piglet growth. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2002, 76, 93–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Juthamanee, P.; Tummaruk, P. Factors associated with colostrum consumption in neonatal piglets. Livest. Sci. 2021, 251, 104630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, P.; Recén, B. When to wean—Observations from free-ranging domestic pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1989, 23, 49–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Algers, B.; Jensen, P. Communication during suckling in the domestic pig. Effects of continuous noise. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1985, 14, 49–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farmer, C. Prolactin and the swine mammary gland. Domest. Anim. Endocrinol. 2022, 78, 106672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hales, J.; Moustsen, V.A.; Nielsen, M.B.F.; Hansen, C.F. The effect of temporary confinement of hyperprolific sows in Sow Welfare and Piglet protection pens on sow behaviour and salivary cortisol concentrations. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016, 183, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Animal Health and Welfare on a request from the Commission on Animal health and welfare aspects of different housing and husbandry systems for adult breeding boars, pregnant, farrowing sows and unweaned piglets. EFSA J. 2007, 572, 1–13. [Google Scholar]
- de Passillé, A.M.B.; Robert, S. Behaviour of lactating sows: Influence of stage of lactation and husbandry practices at weaning. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1989, 23, 315–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lawrence, A.B.; Petherick, J.C.; McLean, K.A.; Deans, L.A.; Chirnside, J.; Gaughan, A.; Clutton, E.; Terlouw, E.M.C. The effect of environment on behaviour, plasma cortisol and prolactin in parturient sows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1994, 39, 313–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jarvis, S.; Calvert, S.K.; Stevenson, J.; van Leeuwen, N.; Lawrence, A.B. Pituitary-adrenal activation in pre-parturient pigs (Sus scrofa) is associated with behavioural restriction due to lack of space rather than nesting substrate. Anim. Welf. 2002, 11, 371–384. [Google Scholar]
- Oliviero, C.; Heinonen, M.; Valros, A.; Hälli, O.; Peltoniemi, O.A. Effect of the environment on the physiology of the sow during late pregnancy, farrowing and early lactation. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 2008, 105, 365–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wiechers, D.H.; Brunner, S.; Herbrandt, S.; Kemper, N.; Fels, M. Analysis of Hair Cortisol as an Indicator of Chronic Stress in Pigs in Two Different Farrowing Systems. Front. Vet. Sci. 2021, 8, 605078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.; Han, Q.; Liu, R.; Ji, W.; Bi, Y.; Wen, P.; Yi, R.; Zhao, P.; Bao, J.; Liu, H. Equipping Farrowing Pens with Straw Improves Maternal Behavior and Physiology of Min-Pig Hybrid Sows. Animals 2020, 10, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Illmann, G.; Goumon, S.; Šimečková, M.; Leszkowová, I. Effect of crate opening from day 3 postpartum to weaning on nursing and suckling behaviour in domestic pigs. Animal 2019, 13, 2018–2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milligan, B.N.; Fraser, D.; Kramer, D.L. Birth weight variation in the domestic pig: Effects on offspring survival, weight gain and suckling behaviour. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2001, 73, 179–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castrén, H.; Algers, B.; Jensen, P. Occurrence of Unsuccessful Sucklings in Newborn Piglets in a Semi-natural Environment. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1989, 23, 61–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yun, J.; Swan, K.-M.; Vienola, K.; Farmer, C.; Oliviero, C.; Peltoniemi, O.; Valros, A. Nest-building in sows: Effects of farrowing housing on hormonal modulation of maternal characteristics. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2013, 148, 77–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stangel, G.; Jensen, P. Behaviour of semi-naturally kept sows and piglets (except suckling) during 10 days postpartum. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1991, 31, 211–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
System | Day | Nursing Bouts per Sow per Hour |
---|---|---|
LH | 1 | 1.33 ± 0.84 |
2 | 1.42 ± 0.89 | |
3 | 1.22 ± 0.78 | |
4 | 1.03 ± 0.69 | |
Mean | 1.25 ± 0.82 | |
FC | 1 | 1.21 ± 0.75 |
2 | 1.33 ± 0.82 | |
3 | 1.15 ± 0.70 | |
4 | 1.09 ± 0.71 | |
Mean | 1.19 ± 0.75 |
Day/Week | Nursing Bouts n | Mean Duration (Min.) | Sow-Termination n | Sow-Terminated (Min.) | Piglet-Terminated (Min.) | Percentage of Nursing Bouts with Unnursed Piglets |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 684 **2,3,4 | 7.20 | 332 **2,3,4 (48.54%) | 4.35 **2,3,4 | 9.88 *4 | 10.86 **4 |
2 | 742 **1,3,4 | 5.99 | 470 **1,4 (63.34%) | 3.41 **1 | 10.44 | 8.47 *4 |
3 | 666 **1,2,4 | 6.21 | 435 *4, **1 (65,32% | 3.74 **1 | 10.85 | 6.93 |
4 | 575 **1,2,3 | 5.90 | 412 *3, **1,2 (71.65%) | 3.46 **1 | 12.08 *1 | 3.37 *2,**1 |
2667 | 6.33 | 1649 (61.83%) | 3.70 | 10.60 | 7.58 | |
(total) | (mean) | (total) | (mean) | (mean) | (mean) |
System | Day | Percentage of Nursing Bouts with Unnursed Piglets |
---|---|---|
LH | 1 | 11.15 |
2 | 10.60 | |
3 | 7.23 | |
4 | 3.77 | |
Mean | 8.46 | |
FC | 1 | 10.53 |
2 | 5.90 | |
3 | 6.56 | |
4 | 2.93 | |
Mean | 6.55 |
System | Day/Week | Sow-Terminated | Piglet-Terminated | Mean |
---|---|---|---|---|
(Min.) | (Min.) | (Min.) | ||
LH | 1 | 3.93 ± 2.88 | 8.88 ± 3.91 | 6.25 ± 4.20 |
2 | 3.27 ± 2.32 | 9.91 ± 4.68 | 5.44 ± 4.52 | |
3 | 3.59 ± 2.73 | 10.23 ± 4.88 | 5.70 ± 4.71 | |
4 | 3.23 ± 2.28 | 11.31 ± 5.24 | 5.28 ± 4.81 | |
Mean | 3.49 ± 2.56 | 9.83 ± 4.62 | 5.69 ± 4.56 | |
FC | 1 | 4.91 ± 2.57 | 10.79 ± 4.28 | 8.23 ± 4.66 |
2 | 3.58 ± 2.00 | 10.89 ± 4.17 | 6.57 ± 4.73 | |
3 | 3.92 ± 3.09 | 11.40 ± 3.97 | 6.75 ± 5.00 | |
4 | 3.69 ± 2.45 | 12.67 ± 4.57 | 6.49 ± 5.29 | |
Mean | 3.95 ± 2.59 | 11.27 ± 4.27 | 7.01 ± 4.96 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wiechers, D.-H.; Herbrandt, S.; Kemper, N.; Fels, M. Does Nursing Behaviour of Sows in Loose-Housing Pens Differ from That of Sows in Farrowing Pens with Crates? Animals 2022, 12, 137. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12020137
Wiechers D-H, Herbrandt S, Kemper N, Fels M. Does Nursing Behaviour of Sows in Loose-Housing Pens Differ from That of Sows in Farrowing Pens with Crates? Animals. 2022; 12(2):137. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12020137
Chicago/Turabian StyleWiechers, Dierck-Hinrich, Swetlana Herbrandt, Nicole Kemper, and Michaela Fels. 2022. "Does Nursing Behaviour of Sows in Loose-Housing Pens Differ from That of Sows in Farrowing Pens with Crates?" Animals 12, no. 2: 137. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12020137
APA StyleWiechers, D.-H., Herbrandt, S., Kemper, N., & Fels, M. (2022). Does Nursing Behaviour of Sows in Loose-Housing Pens Differ from That of Sows in Farrowing Pens with Crates? Animals, 12(2), 137. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12020137