Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.12750/JET.2017.32.4.305

The Effect of Preferable Enrichments in the Laboratory Minipigs  

Jeon, Ryoung-Hoon (College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University)
Kim, Seung-Joon (College of Veterinary Medicine, Kyungpook National University)
Lee, Won-Jae (College of Veterinary Medicine, Kyungpook National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Embryo Transfer / v.32, no.4, 2017 , pp. 305-310 More about this Journal
Abstract
Miniature pig (minipig) has been considered as an important laboratory animal in the developmental biotechnology researches with respect to xenotransplantation, stem cell, somatic cell nuclear transfer and embryo transfer. Given that the laboratory minipigs are normally housed at an indoor facility, they pass the time with lying or sleeping unless it is feeding time. Therefore, it is necessary to provide environmental enrichments to satisfy their innate needs and to lessen atypical behaviors caused by stress, on the purpose of welfare. We quantitatively investigated the type of preferable enrichment for the laboratory minipigs as well as its effect on their daily life. They presented a great interest to the pliable pail but a rapid loss of attraction to non-preferable enrichments. When the daily life of the single housed minipigs was quantified based on duration of playing or resting, they were more actively engaged in lively activities in the presence of enrichments. In addition, the provision of enrichments could effectively alleviate the conflicts during group housing when new pen mate was introduced, resulting in reduction of wound cases. We believe the considerations of animal welfare are essential to the conduct of better research because animals in the non-stressful environment will be more physiologically stable and provide more reliable results in the animal experiments.
Keywords
Laboratory minipigs; Welfare; Enrichment; Stress; Housing;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Van de Weerd A, Docking M, Day L, Avery J and Edwards A. 2003. A systematic approach towards developing environmental enrichment for pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 84:101-118.   DOI
2 Apple K and Craig V. 1992. The influence of pen size on toy preference of growing pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 35: 49-155.
3 Berridge KC and Kringelbach ML. 2008. Affective neuroscience of pleasure: Reward in humans and animals. Psychopharmacology 199:457-480.   DOI
4 Blackshaw JK, Swain AJ, Blackshaw AW, Thomas FJM and Gillies KJ. 1997. The development of playful behaviour in piglets from birth to weaning in three farrowing environments. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 55:37-49.   DOI
5 Burgdorf J and Panksepp J. 2007. The neurobiology of positive emotions. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 30:173-187.
6 Day JEL, Kyriazakis I and Lawrence AB. 1995. The effect of food deprivation on the expression of foraging and exploratory behaviour in the growing pig. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 42:193-206.   DOI
7 Ellegaard L, Cunningham A, Edwards S, Grand N, Nevalainen T, Prescott M and Schuurman T. 2010. Welfare of the minipig with special reference to use in regulatory toxicology studies. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Methods 62:167-183.   DOI
8 Gifford K, Clotier S and Newberry C. 2007. Objects as enrichment: effects of object exposure time and delay interval on object recognition memory of the domestic pig. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 107:206-217.   DOI
9 Horback K. 2014. Nosing Around: Play in Pigs. Anim. Behav. Cogn. 1:186-196.
10 Huntsberry ME, Charles D, Adams KM and Weed JL. 2008. The foraging ball as a quick and easy enrichment device for pigs (Sus scrofa). Lab Anim (NY) 37:411-414.   DOI
11 Hur CG, Yang HY, Lee EK, Han JH, Park CG, Shin TS, Lee HG, Kang HS, Ahn JD and Cho SK. 2012. Production of Cloned Miniature Pig by Surrogate Mother Conditions. J. Emb. Trans. 27:1-7.
12 Hutchinson E, Avery A and Vandewoude S. 2005. Environmental enrichment for laboratory rodents. ILAR J. 46:148-161.   DOI
13 Jensen MB and Pedersen LJ. 2007. The value assigned to six different rooting materials by growing pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 108:31-44.   DOI
14 Kanitz E, Tuchscherer M, Puppe B, Tuchscherer A and Stabenow B. 2004. Consequences of repeated early isolation in domestic piglets on their behavioural, neuroendocrine and immunological responses. Brain Behav. Immun. 18:35-45.   DOI
15 Smith AC and Swindle MM. 2006. Preparation of swine for the laboratory. ILAR J. 47:358-363.   DOI
16 Lutz CK and Novak MA. 2005. Environmental enrichment for nonhuman primates: theory and application. ILAR J. 46: 78-191.
17 Munsterhjelm C, Valros A, Heinonen M, Halli O, Siljanderasi H and Peltoniemi OA. 2010. Environmental enrichment in early life affects cortisol patterns in growing pigs. Animal 4:242-249.   DOI
18 Newberry RC. 1995. Environmental enrichment: increasing the biological relevance of captive environments. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 44:229-243.   DOI
19 Smith ME, Gopee NV and Ferguson SA. 2009. Preferences of minipigs for environmental enrichment objects. J. Am. Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci. 48:391-394.
20 Telkanranta H, Swana K, Hirvonenb H and Valros A. 2014. Chewable materials before weaning reduce tail biting in growing pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 157:14-22.   DOI