Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5187/jast.2020.62.6.875

Improving behavior characteristics and stress indices of gestating sows housed with group housing facility  

Jeong, Yongdae (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration)
Choi, Yohan (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration)
Kim, Doowan (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration)
Kim, Joeun (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration)
Min, Yejin (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration)
Jung, Hyunjung (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration)
Kim, Younghwa (Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration)
Publication Information
Journal of Animal Science and Technology / v.62, no.6, 2020 , pp. 875-883 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study was conducted to investigate the effects of group-housing facility (GHF), compared to an individual confinement stall (CON), on the reproductive performance, behavior, and stress hormones of gestating sows. A total of 50 primiparous sows (Landrace × Yorkshire) were randomly allocated into either CON (n = 25) or GHF (n = 25) during the gestation period. One week before parturition, the sows were transferred into conventional farrowing crates, and cross-fostering was conducted within 1 d of delivery. Blood was collected for analyses of stress indices at 75 d of gestation and postpartum. Reproductive performance was estimated during the period of birth to weaning. Behavior patterns were identified at 90 d of gestation. Litter size was not different between the CON and GHF treatments. Weaning to estrus interval, however, tended to be lower in the GHF than in the CON (p < 0.1). Activity, treating, belly nosing, and exploring behaviors were observed only in the GHF group, whereas rubbing was shown only with the CON. Serum cortisol concentration was lower in the GHF than in the CON at 75 d of gestation (p < 0.05). Sows housed in the GHF showed lower epinephrine and norepinephrine concentrations than those housed in the CON at postpartum (p < 0.05). The GHF sows demonstrated more natural behavior characteristics associated with stress relief than the CON sows with no adverse effects on reproductive performance. Therefore, these results suggest that GHF could be applied as an alternative housing facility to improve animal welfare on swine farms.
Keywords
Behavior; Gestating sows; Group housing; Stress index;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 4  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Kim KH, Hosseindoust A, Ingale SL, Lee SH, Noh HS, Choi YH, et al. Effects of gestational housing on reproductive performance and behavior of sows with different backfat thickness. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci. 2016;29:142-8. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.14.0973   DOI
2 Geverink NA, Heetkamp MJW, Schouten WGP, Wiegant VM, Schrama JW. Backtest type and housing condition of pigs influence energy metabolism. J Anim Sci. 2004;82:1227-33. https://doi.org/10.2527/2004.8241227x   DOI
3 Karlen GAM, Hemsworth PH, Gonyou HW, Fabrega E, Strom AD, Smits RJ. The welfare of gestating sows in conventional stalls and large groups on deep litter. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2007;105:87-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.05.014   DOI
4 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
5 Zverina LR, Kane J, Crenshaw TD, Salak-Johnson JL. A pilot study: behavior and productivity of gestating sows in width-adjustable stalls. Austin J Vet Sci Anim Husb. 2015;2:1012.
6 Verdon M, Hansen CF, Rault JL, Jongman E, Hansen LU, Plush K, 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
7 Smulders D, Verbeke G, Mormede P, Geers R. Validation of a behavioral observation tool to assess pig welfare. Physiol Behav. 2006;89:438-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2006.07.002   DOI
8 Choi Y, Min Y, Kim Y, Jeong Y, Kim D, Kim J, et al. Effects of loose farrowing facilities on reproductive performance in primiparous sows. J Anim Sci Technol. 2020;62:218-26. https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2020.62.2.218   DOI
9 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
10 Bench CJ, Rioja-Lang FC, Hayne SM, Gonyou HW. Group gestation sow housing with individual feeding-II: how space allowance, group size and composition, and flooring affect sow welfare. Livest Sci. 2013;152:218-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2012.12.020   DOI
11 Salak‐Johnson JL. Social status and housing factors affect reproductive performance of pregnant sows in groups. Mol Reprod Dev. 2017;84:905-13. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrd.22846   DOI
12 Tuyttens FAM, Van Gansbeke S, Ampe B. Survey among Belgian pig producers about the introduction of group housing systems for gestating sows. J Anim Sci. 2011;89:845-55. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-2978   DOI
13 Morgan L, Klement E, Novak S, Eliahoo E, Younis A, Sutton GA, et al. Effects of group housing on reproductive performance, lameness, injuries and saliva cortisol in gestating sows. Prev Vet Med. 2018;160:10-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.09.026   DOI
14 Jang JC, Hong S, 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
15 Harris MJ, Pajor EA, Sorrells AD, Eicher SD, Richert BT, Marchant-Forde JN. Effects of stall or small group gestation housing on the production, health and behaviour of gilts. Livest Sci. 2006;102:171-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2005.12.004   DOI
16 Martinez-Miró S, Tecles F, Ramón M, Escribano D, Hernández F, Madrid J, et al. Causes, consequences and biomarkers of stress in swine: an update. BMC Vet Res. 2016;12:171. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-016-0791-8   DOI
17 Chapinal N, de la Torre JLR, Cerisuelo A, Gasa J, Baucells MD, Coma J, et al. Evaluation of welfare and productivity in pregnant sows kept in stalls or in 2 different group housing systems. J Vet Behav. 2010;5:82-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2009.09.046   DOI
18 McGlone JJ. Updated scientific evidence on the welfare of gestating sows kept in different housing systems. Prof Anim Sci. 2013;29:189-98. https://doi.org/10.15232/S1080-7446(15)30224-2   DOI
19 Levis D. Housing alternatives for gestating sows and gilts. In: Proceeding of the AD Leman Swine Conference; 2004 Sep 18-21; Minneapolis, MN.
20 Levis DG, Connor L. Group housing systems: choices and designs [Internet]. National Pork Board. 2013 [cited 2020 Aug 3]. https://porkcdn.s3.amazonaws.com/sites/all/files/documents/2013SowHousingWebinars/1%20-%20Group%20Housing%20Systems.Choices%20and%20Designs%20-03643.pdf
21 Madzingira O. Animal welfare considerations in food-producing animals. In: Abubakar M, Manzoor S, editors. Animal welfare. London, UK: IntechOpen; 2018. p. 99-122.
22 Park SK, Lee YK, Cho ES, Jeong YD. Coefficient of standardized total tract digestibility of phosphorus in oilseed meals and distillers dried grains in growing-finishing pigs. S Afr J Anim Sci. 2017;47:41-8. https://doi.org/10.4314/sajas.v47i1.7   DOI
23 NRC [National Research Council]. Nutrient requirements of swine. 11th rev. ed. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2012.
24 Hulbert LE, McGlone JJ. Evaluation of drop versus trickle-feeding systems for crated or grouppenned gestating sows. J Anim Sci. 2006;84:1004-14. https://doi.org/10.2527/2006.8441004x   DOI
25 Park S, Cho E, Chung H, Cho K, Sa S, Balasubramanian B, et al. Digestibility of phosphorous in cereals and co-products for animal feed. Saudi J Biol Sci. 2019;26:373-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2018.12.003   DOI