Clearer understanding is needed of the premises underlying SI and how it relates to food-system priorities.

No abstract

To determine the relationship between within-litter birth weight variation and pre-weaning survival and weight gain, and to provide practical guidance on fostering low-birth-weight piglets, we analyzed piglet survival and weight gain in litters of piglets from 52 sows followed through eight consecutive parities. Litters with high variation in birth weight had more deaths, especially if the litter's mean birth weight was low. High variation in birth weight was also associated with high variation in weaning weight, but was not significantly related to mean weaning weight. Piglets with birth weights well below the range of most of the litter ('low-birth-weight piglets') were more likely to die than their litter-mates, but their weight gains were normal for their birth weight if they survived. These piglets experienced particularly low survival in larger litters and litters from sows of sixth parity or older. Litters containing low-birth-weight piglets started, on average, with more piglets born alive and had a lower pre-weaning survival (with the majority of deaths being low-birth-weight piglets), but did not wean significantly more piglets than litters without low-birth-weight piglets. The majority of litters had a negatively skewed distribution of birth weights, with more piglets well below the mean than well above it. Our data are consistent with the hypothesis that high variation in birth weight contributes to reduced survival, at least for litters of low mean birth weight, and to variable weaning weights. Our data also support the hypothesis that in terms of survival, small piglets have a competitive disadvantage compared to their heavier litter-mates, a disadvantage that is exacerbated in large litters and litters from older sows. Our data suggest that selection for increased litter size that results in more low-birth-weight piglets per litter may not be beneficial unless measures are undertaken to improve the survival of low-birth-weight piglets.

Animals are routinely subjected to painful procedures, such as tail docking for puppies, castration for piglets, dehorning for dairy calves, and surgery for laboratory rats. Disease and injury, such as tumours in mice and sole ulcers on the feet of dairy cows, may also cause pain. In this paper we describe some of the ways in which the pain that animals experience can be recognized and quantified. We also describe ways in which pain can be avoided or reduced, by reconsidering how procedures are performed and whether they are actually required. Ultimately, reducing the pain that animals experience will require scientific innovation paired with changed cultural values, and willingness to address regulatory, technological and economic constraints.

One important criterion in choosing appropriate housing systems for dairy cattle is that the freestall provides a comfortable surface for the cow. This paper describes two experiments testing the effects of commonly used lying surfaces on stall preference and stall usage by Holstein cows. In both experiments, 12 cows were housed individually in separate pens. Each pen contained three free stalls with a different surface: deep-bedded sawdust, deep-bedded sand, and a geotextile mattress covered with 2 to 3 cm of sawdust. The animals were restricted to each surface in turn, in a random order for either 2 (Experiment 1) or 3 d (Experiment 2). Both before and after this restriction phase, the animals were allowed access to all three surfaces, and preference was determined, based on lying times. Of the 12 cows used in Experiment 1, 10 preferred sawdust before and nine after the restriction phase. During the restriction phase, average lying times and number of lying events during the restriction phase were significantly lower for the sand-bedded stalls (P < or = 0.05), and standing times were higher on mattresses (P < or = 0.05), compared with sawdust. Although these cows had some experience with all three surfaces during the experiment, they had been housed in sawdust-bedded stalls during their previous lactation. Cows used in Experiment 2 had spent their previous lactation in sand bedded stalls. In this experiment, about half the cows preferred sand and half sawdust, after the restriction phase. During the restriction phase of experiment, lying times and number of lying events were lower, and standing times were higher when the animals were restricted to the mattresses compared to either sand or sawdust (P < or = 0.05). These results indicate that (1) free stall surface can affect both stall preferences and stall usage, and (2) mattresses are less preferred.

Human-wildlife

No abstract

Individual daily consumption of supplementary solid food ('creep feed') was measured from Day 10 to weaning at Day 28 for 39 piglets in four litters, and its relationship to body weight and weight gain up to Day 42 was investigated. Individual consumption was measured by combining the weight of the feed removed from the dispensers (monitored electronically) and a video image of piglet activity at the feeder. Creep feed consumption varied greatly, both between and within litters. On average, pigs began feeding on Day 12 (range Day 10-28), intake was relatively low (usually < 5 g day-1) until Day 20 but increased considerably in the week before weaning, with a mean intake of 63 g day-1 (range 2-205 g day-1) during that week. Over the entire creep-feeding period, total feed consumption ranged from 13-1911 g per pig. Within litters, intake was positively correlated with birth weight (P < 0.05) and the correlation with weight gains to Day 20 tended to be positive rather than negative. This suggests that greater creep feed intake was typical of the larger and more mature piglets, rather than serving as compensation for poor milk intake among the more deprived litter-mates. However, one exceptional pig began, on Day 14 after several days of weight loss, to eat more creep feed than any other piglet studied, suggesting that compensatory creep feeding can occur at a young age in exceptional cases. In a multiple regression analysis, creep feed intake accounted for 37% of the variation in weight gain in the week before weaning (P < 0.001) and 7% of the variation in gain from Day 10 to weaning (P < 0.01) after variation attributable to antecedent variables had been taken into account. Within-litter differences in weight gain during the 2 weeks after weaning were correlated with weight at birth and weight gain before weaning (P < 0.05), but not with pre-weaning creep feed intake. Hence, creep feed intake appeared to contribute to pre-weaning gains and these in turn were correlated with post-weaning gains; however, a more direct effect of pre-weaning creep feed intake on post-weaning gain could not be detected.