Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2009.80249

Effect of Individual, Group or ESF Housing in Pregnancy and Individual or Group Housing in Lactation on the Performance of Sows and Their Piglets  

Weng, R.C. (Department of Biological Science and Technology, Meiho Institute of Technology)
Edwards, S.A. (School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University)
Hsia, L.C. (Department of Biological Science and Technology, Meiho Institute of Technology)
Publication Information
Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences / v.22, no.9, 2009 , pp. 1328-1333 More about this Journal
Abstract
To evaluate different housing systems, 80 gilts were randomly allocated at puberty to four treatments: i) sow stall in gestation followed by farrowing crate (SC), ii) group housing with individual feeding in gestation followed by farrowing crate (GC), iii) ESF (Electronic Sow Feeding) system in gestation followed by farrowing crate (EC), and iv) ESF system followed by group farrowing pen (EG). The results showed that stalled sows had a longer interval between puberty and second estrus (p<0.001). The sows kept in the ESF system gained more body weight (p<0.01) and backfat (p<0.05) prior to service, and more backfat during gestation (p<0.05), but also had greater backfat losses in the subsequent lactation (p<0.01). Sows changing from loose housing to confinement at farrowing had longer gestation length (p<0.001). Total litter size did not differ significantly between gestation treatments, but the number of stillborn piglets was significantly higher in the SC treatment (p<0.01). After weaning, SC sows had the longest interval for rebreeding (p<0.001). Some EG sows came into heat before weaning, giving this treatment the shortest interval. These results indicate that gestation confinement in sow stalls had several detrimental effects on sow performance relative to group housing.
Keywords
Individual; Group; ESF; Sow; Piglet;
Citations & Related Records

Times Cited By Web Of Science : 0  (Related Records In Web of Science)
Times Cited By SCOPUS : 0
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Baxter, M. R. and J. C. Petherick. 1980. The effect of restraint on parturition in the sow. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Congress Pig Veterinary Society. Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 84
2 Weng, R. C. 2000. Factors influencing mother-young interactions in intensive pig production systems. PhD Thesis. Aberdeen University, UK
3 Vestergaard, K. and L. L. Hansen. 1984. Tether versus loose sows: ethological observations and measures of productivity. I. Ethological observations during pregnancy and farrowing. Annales de Recherches Veterinaires 15:245-256
4 Randall, G. C. 1972a. Observations on parturition in the sow. I. Factors associated with the delivery of the piglets and their subsequent behaviour. Vet. Rec. 90(7):178-182   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
5 Fraser, A. F. and D. M. Broom. 1997. Farm animal behaviour and welfare. 3rd. edition, Center of Agriculture and Biosciences International, Wallingford, UK
6 Svendsen, J., L. A. Svendsen and A. C. Bengtsson. 1986. Reducing perinatal mortality in pigs. In: Current therapy in theriogenology 2 (Ed. D. A. Morrow). W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp. 939-946
7 SVC. 1997. The Welfare of intensively kept pigs. European Scientific Veterinary Committee
8 Lawrence, A. B., J. C. Petherick, K. A. McLean, L. A. Deans, J. Chirnside, A. Vaughan, E. Clutton and E. M. C. Terlouw. 1994. The effect of environment on behaviour, plasma cortisol and prolactin in parturient sows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 39:313-330   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Arey, D. S. and S. A. Edwards. 1998. Factors influencing aggression between sows after mixing and the consequences for welfare and production. Livest. Prod. Sci. 56:61-70   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Randall, G. C. 1972b. Observations on parturition in the sow. II. Factors influencing stillbirth and perinatal mortality. Vet. Rec. 90(7):183-186   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
11 Spoolder, H. A. M., J. A. Burbidge, S. A. Edwards, A. B. Lawrence and P. H. Simmins. 1997. Effects of food level on performance and behaviour of sows in a dynamic grouphousing system with electronic feeding. Anim. Sci. 65:473-482   DOI
12 Terlouw, E. M. C., A. B. Lawrence and A. W. Illius. 1991. Influences of feeding level and physical restriction on development of stereotypies in sows. Anim. Behav. 42:981-991   DOI
13 Bates, R. O., D. B. Edwards and R. L. Korthals. 2003. Sow performance when housed either in groups with electronic sow feeders or stalls. Livest. Prod. Sci. 79(1):29-35   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Geuyen, T. P. A., J. M. F. Verhagen and M. W. A. Verstegen. 1984. Effect of housing and temperature on metabolic rate of pregnant sows. Anim. Prod. 38:477   DOI   ScienceOn
15 SAS. 2004. SAS/STAT user's guide. SAS Institute, Cary, NC