Effect of Stocking Density on Behavior and Pen Cleanliness of Grouped Growing Pigs
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Experimental Design and Feeding Management
2.2. Pig Pen Area Division and Behavior Observation
2.2.1. Excreting Behavior
2.2.2. Lying Behavior
2.3. Floor Cleanliness Score for Pig Pens
2.4. Statistical Analyses
3. Results
3.1. Excreting Behavior
3.1.1. Circadian Rhythm of Excreting Behavior
3.1.2. Excretion Location and Pen Area Distribution
3.2. Lying Behavior
3.2.1. Circadian Rhythm of the Lying Behavior
3.2.2. Lying Position and Its Distribution in the Pens
3.3. The Interactive Pattern of Excretion and Lying Behavior in Pigs
3.3.1. Pig Excretion in the Lying Area
3.3.2. Pig Lying in the Excretion Area
3.4. Floor Cleanliness of the Pig Pen
3.4.1. Stocking Density and Pen Floor Cleanliness
3.4.2. Pig Behavior and Floor Cleanliness
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Aarnink, A.J.A.; Swierstra, D.; van den Berg, A.J.; Speelman, L. Effect of Type of Slatted Floor and Degree of Fouling of Solid Floor on Ammonia Emission Rates from Fattening Piggeries. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 1997, 66, 93–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ni, J.Q.; Vinckier, C.; Coenegrachts, J.; Hendriks, J. Effect of manure on ammonia emission from a fattening pig house with partly slatted floor. Livest. Prod. Sci. 1999, 59, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Næss, G.; Bøe, K.E.; Ruud, L.E. Floor cleanliness dairy freestall barns. In Proceedings of the 10th International Livestock Environment Symposium (ILES X), Omaha, NE, USA, 25–27 September 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Cai, L.; Yu, J.; Zhang, J.; Qi, D. The effects of slatted floors and manure scraper systems on the concentrations and emission rates of ammonia, methane and carbon dioxide in goat buildings. Small Rumin. Res. 2015, 132, 103–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fraley, S.M.; Fraley, G.S.; Karcher, D.M.; Makagon, M.M.; Lilburn, M.S. Influence of plastic slatted floors compared with pine shaving litter on Pekin Duck condition during the summer months. Poult. Sci. 2013, 92, 1706–1711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Svennerstedt, B. Drainage Properties and Ammonia Emissions in Slatted Floor Systems for Animal Buildings. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 1999, 72, 19–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Von Borell, E.; Hurnik, J.F. Stereotypic behavior, adrenocortical function, and open field behavior of individually confined gestating sows. Physiol. Behav. 1991, 49, 709–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wegner, K.; Lambertz, C.; Das, G.; Reiner, G.; Gauly, M. Effects of temperature and temperature-humidity index on the reproductive performance of sows during summer months under a temperate climate. Anim. Sci. J. 2016, 87, 1334–1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pertagnol, J. Untersuchung zu Verschiedenen Zuluftführungs-und Kühlungsmöglichkeiten in Mastschweineställen. Dissertation, Universität Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Steffen, H. Nutztierhaltung und—Hygiene; Utb Gmbh: Willmering, Germany, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Peter, E.; Manuel, S.K.; Büscher, W. Feasibility Study: Improving Floor Cleanliness by Using a Robot Scraper in Group-Housed Pregnant Sows and Their Reactions on the New Device. Animals 2019, 9, 185. [Google Scholar]
- Bøe, K.E.; Hall EJ, S.; Cronin, G.M. The effect of pen design on pen floor cleanliness in farrowing pens for loose housed lactating sows. Livest. Sci. 2019, 229, 37–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huynh, T.T.; Aarnink, A.J.; Gerrits, W.J.; Heetkamp, M.J.; Canh, T.T.; Spoolder, H.A.; Kemp, B.; Verstegen, M.W. Thermal behaviour of growing pigs in response to high temperature and humidity. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005, 91, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aarnink, A.J.; Schrama, J.W.; Heetkamp, M.J.; Stefanowska, J.; Huynh, T.T. Temperature and body weight affect fouling of pig pens. J. Anim. Sci. 2006, 84, 2224–2231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Savary, P.; Gygax, L.; Wechsler, B.; Hauser, R. Effect of a synthetic plate in the lying area on lying behaviour, degree of fouling and skin lesions at the leg joints of finishing pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2009, 118, 20–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marko, O.; Conor, M.G.; Busančić, M.; Aarnink AJ, A. Drinker position influences the cleanness of the lying area of pigs in a welfare-friendly housing facility. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2018, 198, 44–51. [Google Scholar]
- Andersen, M.L.; Pedersen, L.J. The effect of feed trough position on choice of defecation area in farrowing pens by loose sows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2011, 131, 48–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vermeer, H.M.; Altena, H.; Vereijken, P.F.G.; Bracke, M.B.M. Rooting area and drinker affect dunging behaviour of organic pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2015, 165, 66–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Randall, J.M.; Armsby, A.W.; Sharp, J.R. Cooling gradients across pens in a finishing piggery: II. Effects on excretory behaviour. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 1983, 28, 247–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baxter, S. Intensive Pig Production: Environmental Management and Design; Great Britain: Granada, Spain, 1984; pp. 240–244. [Google Scholar]
- Guo, Y.; Lian, X.P.Y. Diurnal rhythms, locations and behavioural sequences associated with eliminative behaviours in fattening pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2015, 168, 18–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buchenauer, D.; Luft, C.; Grauvogl, A. Investigations on the eliminative behaviour of piglets. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 1982, 9, 153–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wechsler, B.; Bachmann, I. A sequential analysis of eliminative behaviour in domestic pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1998, 56, 29–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cornale, P.; Macchi, E.; Miretti, S.; Renna, M.; Lussiana, C.; Perona, G.; Mimosi, A. Effects of stocking density and environmental enrichment on behavior and fecal corticosteroid levels of pigs under commercial farm conditions. J. Vet. Behav. 2015, 10, 569–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nasirahmadi, A.; Edwards, S.A.; Matheson, S.M. Using automated image analysis in pig behavioural research: Assessment of the influence of enrichment substrate provision on lying behaviour. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2017, 196, S1737238366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hillmann, E.; Mayer, C.; Gygax, L. Effects of space allowance on behavioural and adrenocortical reactions to elevated temperatures in fattening pigs. Landbauforsch. Völkenrode 2005, 55, 255–260. [Google Scholar]
- Spoolder, H.A.; Aarnink, A.A.; Vermeer, H.M.; van Riel, J.; Edwards, S.A. Effect of increasing temperature on space requirements of group housed finishing pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2012, 138, 229–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fu, L.; Li, H.; Liang, T.; Zhou, B.; Chu, Q.; Schinckel, A.P.; Yang, X.; Zhao, R.; Li, P.; Huang, R. Stocking density affects welfare indicators of growing pigs of different group sizes after regrouping. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016, 174, 42–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, T.; Kold Nielsen, C.; Vinther, J.; D’Eath, R.B. The effect of space allowance for finishing pigs on productivity and pen hygiene. Livest. Sci. 2012, 149, 33–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bate, L.A.; Hacker, R.R.; Phillips, P.A. Effect of growth on porcine defecation patterns. Can. Agric. Eng. 1988, 30, 107. [Google Scholar]
- Yan, X.; Zhang, Q.; Connor, L. Effect of slatted floor configuration on air quality and floor cleanliness in a sow barn. In Proceedings of the 10th International Livestock Environment Symposium (ILES X), Omaha, NE, USA, 25–27 September 2018. [Google Scholar]
Score | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
---|---|---|---|---|
Feces or not | None | Yes | / | / |
Fecal state | / | Dry manure | Patches of moist feces | Large tracts of moist feces |
Area covered by feces | / | <1/3 | 1/3–2/3 | >2/3 |
Scoring Standard | Sample Image | Covered Area | Sample Image |
---|---|---|---|
Dry manure | <1/3 | ||
Patches of moist feces | 1/3–2/3 | ||
Large tracts of moist feces | >2/3 |
Feeding Age | Stocking Densities | I1 | I2 | I3 | I | II1 | II2 | II3 | II |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
d1 | 0.5 m2/pig | 16.55 ± 2.32 | 15.33 ± 1.61 | 15.1 ± 4.62 | 46.98 ± 5.37 | 18.01 ± 2.02 | 13.17 ± 4.04 | 21.84 ± 2.86 | 53.02 ± 5.37 |
0.7 m2/pig | 15.47 ± 3.22 | 15.44 ± 1.24 | 18.1 ± 5.28 | 49.01 ± 4.99 | 18.39 ± 2.55 | 14.26 ± 4.74 | 18.34 ± 4.11 | 50.99 ± 4.99 | |
0.9 m2/pig | 15.98 ± 5.51 | 10.24 ± 3.27 | 13.92 ± 5.17 | 40.15 ± 5.92 | 22.63 ± 3.18 | 17.66 ± 5.06 | 19.57 ± 2.2 | 59.85 ± 5.92 | |
d7 | 0.5 m2/pig | 16.66 ± 3.5 | 17.12 ± 4.42 | 16.42 ± 1 | 50.2 ± 4.82 | 16.15 ± 2.11 | 15.41 ± 4.74 | 18.24 ± 0.87 | 49.8 ± 4.82 |
0.7 m2/pig | 16.71 ± 1.15 | 19.88 ± 3.68 | 19.16 ± 3.36 | 55.74 ± 6.2 | 15.25 ± 3.03 | 13.93 ± 3.13 | 15.07 ± 0.83 | 44.26 ± 6.2 | |
0.9 m2/pig | 16.83 ± 7.47 | 9.95 ± 4.06 | 18.15 ± 4.27 | 44.93 ± 3.92 | 20.56 ± 1.88 | 17.18 ± 3.34 | 17.33 ± 2.02 | 55.07 ± 3.92 | |
d35 | 0.5 m2/pig | 18.17 ± 8.29 | 8.4 ± 1.37 | 22.42 ± 7.69 | 48.99 ± 9.8 | 14.13 ± 7.71 | 15.74 ± 13.67 | 21.14 ± 7 | 51.01 ± 9.8 |
0.7 m2/pig | 17.18 ± 4.22 | 12.82 ± 5.06 | 21.83 ± 4.54 | 51.83 ± 2.19 | 14.1 ± 5.22 | 20.15 ± 13.14 | 13.92 ± 11.71 | 48.17 ± 2.19 | |
0.9 m2/pig | 13.94 ± 9.87 | 11.63 ± 6.63 | 18.83 ± 8.38 | 44.4 ± 9.95 | 16.08 ± 10.89 | 22.74 ± 10.4 | 16.78 ± 6.25 | 55.6 ± 9.95 |
Feeding Age | Area | 0.5 m2/Pig | 0.7 m2/Pig | 0.9 m2/Pig |
---|---|---|---|---|
7 d | II1 | 1.1 | 1.4 | 0.9 |
II2 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.5 | |
II3 | 1.1 | 1.3 | 1.0 | |
35 d | II1 | 2.6 | 2.2 | 0.8 |
II2 | 1.9 | 1.3 | 1.0 | |
II3 | 2.4 | 1.6 | 1.5 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zeng, Y.; Wang, H.; Ruan, R.; Li, Y.; Liu, Z.; Wang, C.; Liu, A. Effect of Stocking Density on Behavior and Pen Cleanliness of Grouped Growing Pigs. Agriculture 2022, 12, 418. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12030418
Zeng Y, Wang H, Ruan R, Li Y, Liu Z, Wang C, Liu A. Effect of Stocking Density on Behavior and Pen Cleanliness of Grouped Growing Pigs. Agriculture. 2022; 12(3):418. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12030418
Chicago/Turabian StyleZeng, Yaqiong, Hao Wang, Rongdan Ruan, Yongzhen Li, Zuohua Liu, Chaoyuan Wang, and Anfang Liu. 2022. "Effect of Stocking Density on Behavior and Pen Cleanliness of Grouped Growing Pigs" Agriculture 12, no. 3: 418. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12030418
APA StyleZeng, Y., Wang, H., Ruan, R., Li, Y., Liu, Z., Wang, C., & Liu, A. (2022). Effect of Stocking Density on Behavior and Pen Cleanliness of Grouped Growing Pigs. Agriculture, 12(3), 418. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12030418