Special Issue "Behaviour of Pigs in Relation to Housing Environment"

A special issue of Animals (ISSN 2076-2615). This special issue belongs to the section "Pigs".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 30 November 2021.

Special Issue Editor

Dr. Michaela Fels
E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Institute for Animal Hygiene, Animal Welfare and Farm Animal Behaviour, Bischofsholer Damm 15, 30173 Hannover, Germany
Interests: pig; swine; rabbit; farm animal behavior; animal behavior; ethology; animal welfare

Special Issue Information

A precise knowledge of animal behavior is a prerequisite for assessing animal welfare in modern farming systems. Despite increasing interest in this research field in recent years, there are still many questions to be answered, especially with regard to pigs’ behavior and welfare. Current problems such as tail biting or piglet crushing still have to be solved, and the impact of the pigs’ environment on their behavior and welfare should be further elucidated, aiming to increase animal welfare. Therefore, more research on pig behavior in different (housing) environments is necessary, and the relation of behavioral aspects to stress and welfare needs to be explored. There may also be ways to positively influence pigs’ behavior and welfare, for example, by new methods of environmental enrichment, using also the pigs’ cognitive abilities. This Special Issue focuses on new insights into the behavior and welfare of pigs depending on their environment. For that, animals’ housing and social environment can be considered. Research papers on domestic pigs in intensive livestock systems are as welcome as studies from free-ranging or other alternative systems. Research articles on wild boars are also encouraged when investigating fundamental environmental influences on their behavior and welfare.

Dr. Michaela Fels
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Animals is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1800 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • swine
  • domestic pig
  • wild boar
  • behavior
  • welfare
  • environment
  • housing

Published Papers (6 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

Article
Effects of Different Housing Systems during Suckling and Rearing Period on Skin and Tail Lesions, Tail Losses and Performance of Growing and Finishing Pigs
Animals 2021, 11(8), 2184; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11082184 - 23 Jul 2021
Viewed by 711
Abstract
Feasible alternatives to stressful weaning and tail-docking are needed to inhibit tail biting. Therefore, we investigated the effects of housing systems for 1106 pigs that were weaned from: (1) conventional farrowing crates (FC), (2) free-farrowing pens (FF), or (3) group housing of lactating [...] Read more.
Feasible alternatives to stressful weaning and tail-docking are needed to inhibit tail biting. Therefore, we investigated the effects of housing systems for 1106 pigs that were weaned from: (1) conventional farrowing crates (FC), (2) free-farrowing pens (FF), or (3) group housing of lactating sows (GH) into (1) conventional rearing pens (Conv) or (2) piglets remained in their farrowing pens for rearing (Reaf). Tails were docked or left undocked batchwise. All pigs were regrouped for the fattening period. Pigs were scored for skin lesions, tail lesions and losses. After weaning, Conv-GH pigs had significantly less skin lesions than Conv-FC and Conv-FF pigs. After regrouping for fattening, Reaf-GH pigs had significantly less skin lesions than Conv pigs, Reaf-FC and Reaf-FF. The frequency of tail lesions of undocked Conv pigs peaked in week 4 (66.8%). Two weeks later, Reaf undocked pigs reached their maximum (36.2%). At the end of fattening, 99.3% of undocked Conv pigs and 43.1% of undocked Reaf pigs lost parts of their tail. In conclusion, the co-mingling of piglets during suckling reduced the incidence of skin lesions. Rearing in the farrowing pen significantly reduced the incidence of tail lesions and losses for undocked pigs. No housing system negatively affected the performance. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Behaviour of Pigs in Relation to Housing Environment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
One Is the Coldest Number: How Group Size and Body Weight Affect Thermal Preference in Weaned Pigs (3 to 15 kg)
Animals 2021, 11(5), 1447; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11051447 - 18 May 2021
Viewed by 325
Abstract
Housing pigs within their thermal comfort zone positively impacts productivity and performance. However, fundamental information on behavioral thermoregulatory responses of individual and group-housed pigs is meager. As a gregarious species, pigs prefer to be near one another, touching and often huddling. As pigs [...] Read more.
Housing pigs within their thermal comfort zone positively impacts productivity and performance. However, fundamental information on behavioral thermoregulatory responses of individual and group-housed pigs is meager. As a gregarious species, pigs prefer to be near one another, touching and often huddling. As pigs huddle together, they decrease their heat loss to the environment by decreasing exposed surface area and increasing mass. Additionally, pigs gain weight rapidly as they age. As an individual grows, their ability to withstand lower temperatures increases. We hypothesized that group size would alter pig thermal preference and that thermal preference would change based upon body weight. Thirty-six groups of pigs (n = 2 pigs/group) were tested in a factorial design based on group size (1, 2, or 4) and weight category (small: 5.20 ± 1.15 kg; medium: 8.79 ± 1.30 kg; and large: 13.95 ± 1.26 kg) in both sexes. Treatment groups were placed inside a chamber with a controlled thermal gradient (4.6 m × 0.9 m × 0.9 m; L × W × H) that ranged in temperature from 18 to 30 °C. Pigs habituated to the gradient for 24 h. The following 24 h testing period was continuously video recorded and each pig’s location during inactivity (~70% daily budget) within the thermal apparatus was recorded every 10 min via instantaneous scan sampling. Data were analyzed using a GLM and log10 + 0.001 transformed for normality. Tukey tests and Bonferroni-corrected custom tests were used for post hoc comparisons. Peak temperature preference was determined by the maximum amount of time spent at a specific temperature. Both group size (p = 0.001) and weight category (p < 0.001) influenced the thermal location choice of pigs. Individual pigs preferred 30.31 °C, which differed from a group of 2 (20.0 °C: p = 0.003) and 4 pigs (20.0 °C: p < 0.001). The peak temperature preference of the small pigs (30.2 °C) differed from the large pigs (20.0 °C: p < 0.001) but did not differ from the medium-sized pigs (28.4 °C: p > 0.05). Overall, heavier pigs and larger groups preferred cooler temperatures. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Behaviour of Pigs in Relation to Housing Environment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Is There a Link between Suckling and Manipulation Behavior during Rearing in Pigs?
Animals 2021, 11(4), 1175; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11041175 - 20 Apr 2021
Viewed by 484
Abstract
Inadequate possibilities to perform oral manipulation behavior for pigs can lead to misdirection and thus tail biting. Our study aimed to analyze manipulation behaviors of weaner pigs with focus on tail biting and the relationship with agonistic characteristics of the piglets during suckling. [...] Read more.
Inadequate possibilities to perform oral manipulation behavior for pigs can lead to misdirection and thus tail biting. Our study aimed to analyze manipulation behaviors of weaner pigs with focus on tail biting and the relationship with agonistic characteristics of the piglets during suckling. We analyzed the individual manipulation behavior of 188 weaner pigs. General health condition and tail lesions were determined weekly. Correlations were estimated between weight at weaning and at the end of rearing period, frequency of manipulative rearing behaviors and Dominance and social tension index based on suckling behavior. Principal component and cluster analyses were performed to identify groups of piglets which showed similar suckling and rearing behaviors. Tail biting increased at the middle and end of rearing with switching roles of biters and victims. Tail lesions were correlated with received tail biting behavior but occurred with a delay of more than a week. The frequency of performed tail biting was correlated with dominance index (rs = −0.256, p < 0.01) and weaning weight (rs = −0.199, p < 0.05). We assume that performed tail biting is more often observed in pigs who show mainly submissive behavior in teat disputes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Behaviour of Pigs in Relation to Housing Environment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Impact of Duration of Farrowing Crate Closure on Physical Indicators of Sow Welfare and Piglet Mortality
Animals 2021, 11(4), 969; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11040969 - 31 Mar 2021
Viewed by 647
Abstract
This study examines effects of opening hinged farrowing crates 4 or 7 days post-farrowing. Sows (n = 696) allocated to 3 treatments: PC—crate closed, T4—crate opened day 4, and T7—crate opened day 7 were assessed for body condition score (BCS), lameness, shoulder [...] Read more.
This study examines effects of opening hinged farrowing crates 4 or 7 days post-farrowing. Sows (n = 696) allocated to 3 treatments: PC—crate closed, T4—crate opened day 4, and T7—crate opened day 7 were assessed for body condition score (BCS), lameness, shoulder lesions and teat lesions. Piglet mortality was higher in T4 (27.8%) compared to T7 (23.9%) and PC (25.9%) (p < 0.05) which did not differ with T7 (p > 0.05). No difference in risk of being laid on was found 1–3 days post-farrowing with all crates closed (p > 0.05). Day 4–6, piglets in T4, experienced higher risk of being laid on compared to PC (IRR = 2.5, p < 0.05), and T7 (IRR = 2.3, p < 0.05). Days 7–15 post-farrowing, risk of piglets dying from being laid on was higher in open crates, T4 and T7, versus PC (T4: IRR = 3.89, T7: IRR = 3.5, p < 0.05). We found higher risk for teat lesions in PC sows at weaning (p < 0.05). With crates open, risk of piglets being laid on increased between 7 days and weaning, but total piglet mortality did not differ and the sow’s risk for teat lesions decreased. Our results, therefore, support opening crates at day 7. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Behaviour of Pigs in Relation to Housing Environment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Article
Compressed Brown Algae as a Potential Environmental Enrichment Material in Growing Pigs
Animals 2021, 11(2), 315; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020315 - 27 Jan 2021
Viewed by 539
Abstract
In barren housing conditions, enrichment materials are given to pigs to improve their welfare. Here, we assessed the suitability of an algae-based cylinder as an enrichment material on the behavioral, physiological, health and productivity welfare indicators of pigs. Algae was compared with metal [...] Read more.
In barren housing conditions, enrichment materials are given to pigs to improve their welfare. Here, we assessed the suitability of an algae-based cylinder as an enrichment material on the behavioral, physiological, health and productivity welfare indicators of pigs. Algae was compared with metal chains and wood logs. The study involved 444 pigs from two successive batches on one single farm. During the suckling period, half of the pigs received algae and the control pigs received no material. After weaning and until the end of fattening, algae, wood or chains were equally distributed among the pigs. Consumption of algae cylinders was different between pens and between batches. After weaning and during the fattening period, although the results differed between batches, no significant difference was observed in the object manipulations. Salivary cortisol, used as biomarker to measure the stress levels after pig transfers, were similar between the treatments. Enrichment material made from algae had no negative effect on pig health and no effect on performance and body condition. Regarding their characteristics and according to Commission Recommendation (EU) 2016/336 classification, algae cylinders can be categorized as suboptimal enrichment materials, although the present results suggest that it does not significantly improve pig welfare compared to a metal chain, which is categorized as a material of marginal interest. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Behaviour of Pigs in Relation to Housing Environment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

Review
Soiling of Pig Pens: A Review of Eliminative Behaviour
Animals 2020, 10(11), 2025; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112025 - 03 Nov 2020
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 1190
Abstract
This is a comprehensive review on the pigs’ normal eliminatory behaviour (i.e., defaecation and urination) and pen soiling. This review is aimed primarily at solving issues with pen soiling in current systems, and ultimately at the future design of a well-functioning pig toilet, [...] Read more.
This is a comprehensive review on the pigs’ normal eliminatory behaviour (i.e., defaecation and urination) and pen soiling. This review is aimed primarily at solving issues with pen soiling in current systems, and ultimately at the future design of a well-functioning pig toilet, which we intend to elaborate on in a subsequent publication. In this paper, first, normal elimination is described in relation to what is known about its phylogeny, ontogeny, causation, and function, i.e., according to Tinbergen’s four why questions concerning animal behaviour. Then, pen soiling is described as if it were a medical disorder, highlighting its importance, aetiology, symptoms, diagnosis, pathogenesis, treatment, and prevention. Due to its negative consequences in terms of animal welfare, health, workload, and environmental emissions, possible methods to address pen soiling in current systems are described. Probably, pigs do not choose a specific place to eliminate but rather choose the most comfortable place for resting, and avoid eliminating there. We identified four main strategies to reduce pen soiling: (1) reducing the suitability of the designated elimination area to be used for other functions, especially resting or thermoregulation; (2) improving the suitability of other functional areas in the pen to be used for their specific function, such as resting and activity; (3) reducing the suitability of other functional areas to be used for elimination; and (4) improving the suitability of the elimination area for elimination. These prevention strategies and the encompassing disease framework provide a structured approach to deal with pen soiling in existing systems and to support the future design, development, and implementation of a well-functioning pig toilet that can help to achieve some of the main goals of modern pig production, namely reducing environmental emissions as well as substantially improving pig welfare. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Behaviour of Pigs in Relation to Housing Environment)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Planned Papers

The below list represents only planned manuscripts. Some of these manuscripts have not been received by the Editorial Office yet. Papers submitted to MDPI journals are subject to peer-review.

Comparative assessment of compressed algae as a potential manipulable material in growing pigs

 Pol, A. Huneau-Salaun, S. Gallien, Y. Ramonet and N. Rose

Pigs are naturally motivated to explore their environment, but this behavior, involving searching and chewing, is thwarted under commercial rearing conditions because of a global poor environment when pigs are reared on slatted floor. To prevent pigs to redirect their exploratory behavior to the housing equipment or to their penmates and so to prevent tail biting, the Council Directive 2008/120/EC mandatories environmental enrichment. Here, we assessed the qualities of a material made of an algae-based cylinder according to the requirements of the EU recommendation. Assessment of pig welfare was made on a set of behavioral, physiological, health and productivity indicators. The algae material was compared with metal chains and with wood logs to appreciate the potential advantage of this new material on pig welfare. The study involved 444 pigs from two successive batches of 20 litters each. During the suckling period, half of the farrowing pens received a 380 g algae cylinder and control pens received no material. From weaning to fattening period, algae cylinders, wood blocks or metal chains were provided to the pigs and distributed equally across the pens. Consumption of the algae cylinders increased from less than one cylinder during the suckling period to 1.4±0.6 cylinders in nursery pens and finally to 3.5±1.5 cylinders in fattening pens. Behavioral observations showed that material manipulations were different between batches. During the first weeks after weaning, pigs from the first batch manipulated more frequently the enrichments than those of second batch and manipulated more frequently the metal chain than the other materials (3.9 % observations vs 1.2 % for algae and 2.5 % for wood, first week, P < 0.001). No difference was observed in second batch between materials. During fattening period, pigs from the second batch manipulated more frequently the enrichments, with no differences between materials. No difference was observed in the first batch. Up to five pigs were observed manipulating the material at the same time, whatever it is, and the majority of pigs came to manipulate the materials. Enrichment material made from algae and given during the suckling period did not appear to promote manipulating behavior in piglets after weaning. Salivary cortisol, used as biomarker to measure stress levels before and after transfers from farrowing to nursery pen and from nursery to fattening pen, were similar between pig groups which were given different materials. No negative effect was noticed on pig health. Performance and body condition were similar between groups, which were given different materials. According to Commission Recommendation (EU) 2016/336 and regarding their characteristics, algae cylinders can be categorized as suboptimal enrichment materials while metal chains or wood blocks are materials of marginal interest. However, observations of pig behavior showed that the algae cylinders, despite their higher ranking, were found less attractive for pigs than these other materials in this study.

Back to TopTop