1 |
Anil SS, Anil L, Deen J, Baidoo SK, Walker RD. Factors associated with claw lesions in gestating sows. J. Swine Health Prod 2007;15:78-83.
|
2 |
Li YZ, Gonyou HW. Comparison of management options for sows kept in pens with electronic feeding stations. Can J Anim Sci 2013;93:445-52. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjas2013-044
DOI
|
3 |
Strawford ML, Li YZ, Gonyou HW. 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;88:559-67. https://doi.org/10.4141/CJAS07114
DOI
|
4 |
Huang JK, Bouis H. Structural changes in the demand for food in Asia: empirical evidence from Taiwan. Agric Econ 2001;26:57-69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2001.tb00054.x
DOI
|
5 |
Harper GC, Makatouni A. Consumer perception of organic food production and farm animal welfare. Br Food J 2002; 104:287-99. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700210425723
DOI
|
6 |
Arey D, Brooke P. Animal welfare aspects of good agricultural practice: pig production. Petersfield, UK: Compassion in World Farming Trust; 2006.
|
7 |
Jang JC, Jung SW, Jin SS, Ohh SJ, Kim JE, Kim YY. The effects of gilts housed either in group with the electronic sow feeding system or conventional stall. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2015; 28:1512-8. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.14.0819
DOI
|
8 |
Scientific Veterinary Committee. 1997. The welfare of intensively kept pigs. In: Report of the Scientific Veterinary Committee, Animal Welfare Section, to the Comission of the European Union. Doc. XXIV/ScVc/0005/1997; 1997 September 30;Brussels, Belgium.
|
9 |
Bates RO, Edwards DB, Korthals RL. Sow performance when housed either in groups with electronic sow feeders or stalls. Livest Prod Sci 2003;79:29-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00119-7
DOI
|
10 |
Spoolder HAM, Burbidge JA, Edwards SA, Simmins PH, Lawrence AB. 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: 249-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(95)00566-B
DOI
|
11 |
Brouns F, Edwards SA. Social rank and feeding behaviour of group-housed sows fed competitively or ad libitum. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1994;39:225-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(94)90158-9
DOI
|
12 |
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;137:268-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2010.10.014
DOI
|
13 |
Bruce JM, Clark JJ. Models of heat production and critical temperature for growing pigs. Anim Sci 1979;28:353-69. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100023266
DOI
|
14 |
Guise HJ, Riches HL, Hunter EJ, Jones TA, Warriss PD, Kettlewell PJ. The effect of stocking density in transit on the carcass quality and welfare of slaughter pigs: 1. Carcass measurements. Meat Sci 1998;50:439-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1740(98)00056-4
DOI
|
15 |
Fernandez X, Meunier-Salaun MC, Mormede P. Agonistic behavior, plasma stress hormones, and metabolites in response to dyadic encounters in domestic pigs: interrelationships and effect of dominance status. Physiol Behav 1994;56:841-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9384(94)90313-1
DOI
|
16 |
Fernandez X, Meunier-Salaun MC, Ecolan P, Mormede P. Interactive effect of food deprivation and agonistic behavior on blood parameters and muscle glycogen in pigs. Physiol Behav 1995;58:337-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9384(94)00364-b
DOI
|
17 |
Ville H, Bertels S, Geers R, et al. Electrocardiogram parameters of piglets during housing, handling and transport. Anim Sci 1993;56:211-6. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100021280
DOI
|
18 |
Perez MP, Palacio J, Santolaria MP, et al. Effect of transport time on welfare and meat quality in pigs. Meat Sci 2002;61:425-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0309-1740(01)00216-9
DOI
|
19 |
Reichlin S. Williams textbook of endocrinology. In: Wilson JD, Foster DW, Kronenberg HM, Larsen PR. editors. Williams textbook of endocrinology. 10. Philadelphia PA, USA: WB Saunders Co; 1998. p. 165-248.
|
20 |
Sellier P. Genetics of meat and carcass traits. In: Rothschild MF, Ruvinski A, editors. The Genetics of the Pig. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing; 1998. 463 p.
|
21 |
Bracke MBM, Metz JHM, Spruijt BM, Schouten WGP. Decision support system for overall welfare assessment in pregnant sows. B. Validation by expert opinion. J Anim Sci 2002;80:1835-45. https://doi.org/10.2527/2002.8071835x
DOI
|
22 |
Stookey JM, Gonyou HW. The effects of regrouping on behavioral and production parameters in finishing swine. J Anim Sci 1994;72:2804-11. https://doi.org/10.2527/1994.72112804x
DOI
|
23 |
Tawse J. Consumer attitudes towards farm animals and their welfare: a pig production case study. Biosci Horiz 2010;3: 156-65. https://doi.org/10.1093/biohorizons/hzq020
DOI
|
24 |
Blokhuis HJ, Jones RB, Geers R, Miele M, Veissier I. Measuring and monitoring animal welfare: transparency in the food product quality chain. Anim Welf 2003;12:445-55.
DOI
|
25 |
Fraser D. Assessing animal welfare at the farm and group level: the interplay of science and values. Anim Welf 2003; 12:433-43.
DOI
|
26 |
Marchant JN, Broom DM. Factors affecting posture-changing in loose-housed and confined gestation sows. Anim Sci 1996;63:477-85. https://doi.org/10.1017/S135772980001537X
DOI
|
27 |
Winter M, Fry C, Carruthers SP. European agricultural policy and farm animal welfare. Food Policy 1998;23:305-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-9192(98)00036-0
DOI
|
28 |
Mormede P, Lemaire V, Castanon N, Dulluc J, Laval M, Le Moal M. Multiple neuroendocrine responses to chronic social stress: interaction between individual characteristics and situational factors. Physiol Behav 1990;47:1099-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9384(90)90358-B
DOI
|
29 |
Losinger WC, Heinrichs AJ. Management practices associated with high mortality among preweaned dairy heifers. J Dairy Res 1997;64:1-11. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022029996001999
DOI
|
30 |
Wan R-Q, Pang K, Olton DS. Hippocampal and amygdaloid involvement in nonspatial and spatial working memory in rats: effects of delay and interference. Behav Neurosci 1994; 108:866-82. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7044.108.5.866
DOI
|
31 |
Barnett JL, Hemsworth PH, Cronin GM, Jongman EC, Hutson GD. A review of the welfare issues for sows and piglets in relation to housing. Aust J Agric Res 2001;52:1-28. https://doi.org/10.1071/AR00057
DOI
|
32 |
Barnett JL, Hemsworth PH, Newman EA, McCallum TH, Winfield CG. The effect of design of tether and stall housing on some behavioural and physiological responses related to the welfare of pregnant pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1989;24: 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(89)90120-2
DOI
|
33 |
von Borell EH, Morris JR, Hurnik JF, Mallard BA, Buhr MM. The performance of gilts in a new group housing system: endocrinological and immunological functions. J Anim Sci 1992;70:2714-21. https://doi.org/10.2527/1992.7092714x
DOI
|
34 |
Brambell Report. Report of the Technical Committee to enquire into the welfare of animals kept under intensive livestock husbandry systems. London, UK: Her Majesty's Stationery Office; 1965.
|
35 |
Jensen KH, Pedersen BK, Pedersen LJ, Jorgensen E. Wellbeing in pregnant sows: Confinement versus group housing with electronic sow feeding. Acta Agric Scand A, Anim Sci 1995;45:266-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064709509413086
DOI
|
36 |
Verdon M, Hansen CF, Rault JL, et al. Effects of group housing on sow welfare: a review. J Anim Sci 2015;93:1999-2017. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-8742
DOI
|
37 |
Van der Mheen H, Spoolder HAM, Kiezebrink MC. Stable versus dynamic group housing systems for pregnant sows and the moment of introduction. In: Proc. 37th. Int. Cong. Appl. Etho.; 2003 June 24-28: Albano, Terme, Italy; 2003. 90 p. https://edepot.wur.nl/25834
|
38 |
Anil L, Anil SS, Deen J, Baidoo SK, Walker RD. Effect of group size and structure on the welfare and performance of pregnant sows in pens with electronic sow feeders. Can J Vet Res 2006; 70:128-36.
|
39 |
Meunier-Salaun MC, Edwards SA, Robert S. Effect of dietary fibre on the behaviour and health of the restricted fed sow. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2001;90:53-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-8401(01)00196-1
DOI
|
40 |
Huebner ES. Burnout among school psychologists: An exploratory investigation into its nature, extent, and correlates. Sch Psychol Q 1992;7:129-36. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0088251
DOI
|
41 |
Salleh MR. Live events, stress and illness. Malays J Med Sci 2008;15:9-18.
|
42 |
Spoolder HAM, Geudeke MJ, van der Peet-Schwering CMC, Soede NM. Group housing of sows in early pregnancy: a review of success and risk factors. Livest Sci 2009;125:1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2009.03.009
DOI
|
43 |
Carenzi C, Verga M. Animal welfare : review of the scientific concept and definition. Ital J Anim Sci 2007;8(suppl. 1):21-30. https://doi.org/10.4081/ijas.2009.s1.21
DOI
|
44 |
Broom DM. Indicators of poor welfare. Br Vet J 1986;142:524-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-1935(86)90109-0
DOI
|
45 |
Dockes AC, Kling-Eveillard F. Farmers' and advisers' representations of animals and animal welfare. Livest Sci 2006;103: 243-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.05.012
DOI
|
46 |
McGlone JJ, Newby BE. Space requirements for finishing pigs in confinement: behavior and performance while group size and space vary. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1994;39:331-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(94)90166-X
DOI
|
47 |
Bench CJ, Rioja-Lang FC, Hayne SM, Gonyou HW. Group gestation housing with individual feeding-II: How space allowance, group size and composition, and flooring affect sow welfare. Livest Sci 2013;152:218-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2012.12.020
DOI
|
48 |
Rodenburg B, Koene P. The impact of group size on damaging behaviours, aggression, fear and stress in farm animals. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2007;103:205-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.05.024
DOI
|
49 |
Welfare Quality®. Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for pigs (sows and piglets, growing and finishing pigs). Lelystad, Netherlands: Welfare Quality® Consortium; 2009.
|
50 |
Ulrich-Lai YM, Herman JP. Neural regulation of endocrine and autonomic stress responses. Nat Rev Neurosci 2009;10:397-409. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2647
DOI
|
51 |
McGlone JJ, Borell EH, von Deen J, et al. Compilation of the scientific literatures comparing housing systems for gestating sows and gilts using measures of physiology, behavior, performance and health. Prof Anim Sci 2004;20:105-17. https://doi.org/10.15232/S1080-7446(15)31285-7
DOI
|
52 |
Remience V, Wavreille J, Canart B, et al. Effects of space allowance on the welfare of dry sows kept in dynamic groups and fed with an electronic sow feeder. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2008;112:284-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2007.07.006
DOI
|
53 |
Bergeron R, Gonyou HW. Effects of increasing energy intake and foraging behaviours on the development of stereotypies in pregnant sows. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1997;53:259-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(96)01169-0
DOI
|
54 |
Bench CJ, Rioja-Lang FC, Hayne SM, Gonyou HW. Group gestation housing with individual feeding-I: How feeding regime, resource allocation, and genetic factors affect sow welfare. Livest Sci 2013;152:208-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2012.12.021
DOI
|
55 |
EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare on a request from the Commission related to welfare of weaners and rearing pigs: effects of different space allowances and floor. EFSA J 2005;268:1-19. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2005.268
DOI
|
56 |
Barnett JL, Hemsworth PH, Cronin GM, Newman EA, McCallum TH, 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;34:207-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(05)80116-9
DOI
|
57 |
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;59:307-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(97)00143-3
DOI
|
58 |
Hemsworth PH, Rice M, Nash J, et al. Effects of group size and floor space allowance on grouped sows: Aggression, stress, skin injuries, and reproductive performance. J Anim Sci 2013;91:4953-64. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2012-5807
DOI
|
59 |
Spoolder HAM, Burbidge JA, Edwards SA, Lawrence AB, Simmins PH. Effects of food level on performance and behaviour of sows in a dynamic group housing system with electronic feeding. Anim Sci 1997;65:473-82. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1357729800008675
DOI
|
60 |
McMahon M, Gerich J, Rizza R. Effects of glucocorticoids on carbohydrate metabolism. Diabetes Metab Rev 1988;4: 17-30. https://doi.org/10.1002/dmr.5610040105
DOI
|
61 |
Marchant-Forde JN. Welfare of dry sows. In: Marchant-Forde JN, editor. The welfare of pigs. New York, USA: Springer; 2009. pp. 95-139.
|
62 |
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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(98)00144-4
DOI
|
63 |
Tempel DL, Leibowitz SF. Adrenal steroid receptors: interactions with brain neuropeptide systems in relation to nutrient intake and metabolism. J Neuroendocrinol 1994;6:479-501. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2826.1994.tb00611.x
DOI
|
64 |
Hay M, Meunier-Salaun MC, Brulaud F, Monnier M, Mormede 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;78:420-8. https://doi.org/10.2527/2000.782420x
DOI
|
65 |
Rushen J. A difference in weight reduces fighting when unacquainted newly weaned pigs first meet. Can J Anim Sci 1987;67:951-60. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjas87-100
DOI
|
66 |
Dantzer R, Kelley KW. Twenty years of research on cytokineinduced sickness behavior. Brain Behav Immun 2007;21:153-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2006.09.006
DOI
|
67 |
Leshin LS, Barb C, Kiser TE, Rampacek GB, Kraeling RR. Growth hormone-releasing hormone and somatostatin neurons within the porcine and bovine hypothalamus. Neuroendocrinology 1994;59:251-64. https://doi.org/10.1159/000126666
DOI
|
68 |
Day JEL, Burfoot A, Docking C, Whittaker X, Spoolder HA, Edwards SA. The effects of prior experience of straw and the level of straw provision on the behaviour of growing pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2002;76:189-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00017-5
DOI
|
69 |
Cook CJ, Mellor DJ, Harris PJ, Ingram JR, Mathews LR. Hands-on and hands-off measurement of stress. In: Moberg GP, Mench JA, editors. The Biology of Animal Stress: Basic Principles and Implications for Animal Welfare. Cambridge, MA, USA: CABI Publishing; 2000. p. 123-46. https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851993591.0123
DOI
|
70 |
Mason GJ, Latham NR. Can't stop, won't stop: is stereotypy a reliable animal welfare indicator? Anim Welf 2004;13 (Suppl):S57-69.
DOI
|
71 |
Armstrong DP. Aggressiveness of breeding territorial honeyeaters corresponds to seasonal changes in nectar availability. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 1991;29:103-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00166484
DOI
|
72 |
Guy JH, Rowlinson P, Chadwick JP, Ellis M. Behaviour of two genotypes of growing-finishing pig in three different housing systems. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2002;75:193-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00197-6
DOI
|
73 |
McGlone JJ. Influence of resources on pig aggression and dominance. Behav Processes 1986;12:135-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(86)90052-5
DOI
|
74 |
Ewald PW, Carpenter FL. Territorial responses to energy manipulations in the Anna hummingbird. Oecologia 1978; 31:277-92.
DOI
|
75 |
Chapman MR, Kramer DL. Guarded resources: the effect of intruder number on the tactics and success of defenders and intruders. Anim Behav 1996;52:83-94. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0154
DOI
|
76 |
Jang JC, Hong JS, Jin SS, Kim YY. Comparing gestating sows housing between electronic sow feeding system and a conventional stall over three consecutive parities. Livest Sci 2017;199:37-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2017.02.023
DOI
|
77 |
Barnett JL. Measuring pain in animals. Aust Vet J 1997;75: 878-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-0813.1997.tb11256.x
DOI
|
78 |
Andersen IL, Boe KE, Kristiansen AL. The influence of different feeding arrangements and food type on competition at feeding in pregnant sows. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1999;65:91-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00058-1
DOI
|
79 |
Arey DS. The effect of bedding on the behaviour and welfare of pigs. Anim Welf 1993;2:235-46.
DOI
|
80 |
Algers B, Jensen P, Steinwall L. Behaviour and weight changes at weaning and regrouping of pigs in relation to teat quality. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1990;26:143-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(90)90094-T
DOI
|
81 |
Bergeron R, Badnell-Waters AJ, Lambton S, Mason G. Stereotypic oral behaviour in captive ungulates: foraging, diet and gastrointestinal function. In: Mason G, Rushen J, editors. Stereotypic animal behaviour: fundamentals and applications to welfare, 2nd Edition. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing; 2006. p. 19-57.
|
82 |
Cannon WB. Organization for physiological homeostasis. Physiol Rev 1929;9:399-431. https://doi.org/10.1152/physrev.1929.9.3.399
DOI
|
83 |
Moberg GP. Problems in defining stress and distress in animals. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1987;191:1207-11.
|
84 |
Tuyttens FAM. The importance of straw for pig and cattle welfare: a review. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2005;92:261-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2005.05.007
DOI
|
85 |
Sapolsky RM, Romero LM, Munck AU. How do glucocorticoids influence stress response? Integrating permissive, suppressive, stimulatory, and preparative actions. Endocr Rev 2000;21: 55-89. https://doi.org/10.1210/edrv.21.1.0389
DOI
|
86 |
Fraser AF, Broom DM. Farm animal behaviour and welfare. London, UK: Balliere Tindall. Print; 1990.
|
87 |
Gregory NG. Animal welfare and meat science. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing; 1998. pp. 53-74.
|
88 |
Jones RB, Boissy A. Fear and other negative emotions. In: Appleby MC, Mench JA, Olsson IAS, Hughes BO, editors. Animal welfare. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing; 2011. p. 78-97.
|
89 |
Gonyou HW. Experience with alternative methods of sow housing. In: Animal Welfare Forum: Sow Housing and Welfare. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005;226:1336-9.
DOI
|
90 |
Tuchscherer M, Manteuffel G. The effect of psycho stress on the immune system. Another reason for pursuing animal welfare (Review). Arch Anim Breed 2000;43:547-60. https://doi.org/10.5194/aab-43-547-2000
DOI
|
91 |
Baxter M. Social space requirements of pigs. In: Zayan R, editors. Social space for domestic animals. Dordrecht, the Netherlands; Martinus Nijhoff Publishers; 1985. pp. 116-27.
|
92 |
Salak-Johnson JL, Niekamp SR, Rodriguez-Zas SL, Ellis M, Curtis SE. Space allowance for dry, pregnant sows in pens: Body condition, skin lesions, and performance. J Anim Sci 2007;85:1758-69. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2006-510
DOI
|
93 |
Salak-Johnson JL, DeDecker AE, Horsman MJ, RodriguezZas SL. Space allowance for gestating sows in pens: Behavior and immunity. J Anim Sci 2012;90:3232-42. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2011-4531
DOI
|
94 |
Tsuma VT, Einarsson S, Madej A, Kindahl H, Lundeheim N, Rojkittikhun T. Endocrine changes during group housing of primiparous sows in early pregnancy. Acta Vet Scand 1996; 37:481-90. https://doi.org/10.1186/BF03548088
DOI
|
95 |
Taylor IA, Barnett JL, Cronin GM. Optimum group size for pigs. In: Bottcher RW, Hoff SJ, editors. Livestock Environment V, (vol. 2). Proc. 5th. Int. Symp. Am. Soc. Agri. Eng., St Joseph, MI, USA; 1997. pp. 965-71.
|
96 |
Meese GB, Ewbank RA. A note on instability of the dominance hierarchy and variations in level of aggression within groups of fattening pigs. Anim Sci 1972;14:359-62. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100011090
DOI
|