Animal-based measures reflecting the welfare state of individuals are critical for ensuring the well-being of animals under human care. Anticipatory behavior is one potential animal-based measure that has gained traction in recent years, as it is theorized to relate to animals' reward sensitivity. It is of particular interest as an assessment for animals living under human care, as the predictability of the captive environment lends itself to the development of this class of behaviors. Animals are likely to exhibit anticipation in locations related to the anticipated event, often in temporally predictable time frames, and before specific contexts they experience in their day-to-day management. In this sense and under certain circumstances, anticipatory behaviors are likely to drive observed behavioral or space use patterns of animals under human care. Drawing conclusions from such data without identifying anticipation may result in misleading conclusions. Here we discuss how space, time, and context are related to patterns of anticipatory behaviors in animals under human care, how unidentified anticipation may alter conclusions regarding animal behavior or welfare under certain circumstances.
Social conflict is inevitable among group-housed sows and may contribute to poorer welfare among those sows experiencing more social stress. The degree of individual welfare is associated with social position within the group. Therefore, this study examined the effects of social status on behavior, immune, endocrine, and productivity of group-housed pregnant sows fed a diet supplemented with 30% wheat middlings and 15% soybean hulls (MID-SH) or 30% distillers dried grains with solubles and 30% corn germ meal (DDGS-GM) and in pens with individual feeding places made from short (58.4 cm) or long (203.2 cm) barriers. A 2 × 2 factorial design resulted in 4 experimental treatment groups (n = 9 sows/diet-length-block combination): (1) MID-SHshort; (2) MID-SHlong; (3) DDGS-GMshort; (4) DDGS-GMlong. Groups of sows equally representing all diet-length combinations across 4 blocks (n = 36 sows/block) were subjected to a feeding competition test to identify highest (dominant) and lowest (subordinate) ranked sows within each group resulting in 64 sows (n = 16 sows/treatment; n = 32 sows/social status). Data revealed 2- and 3-way interactive effects on aggressive behavior (P < 0.005), postural (P < 0.01), oral (P < 0.0001), and eating (P < 0.005) behaviors, sow mean body weights and gains (P < 0.05) and litter weaning weights (P < 0.05), especially among subordinates in pens with long barriers. Subordinates in pens with long barriers received 21% less aggression and were 73% less likely to be displaced than subordinates in pens with short ones (P < 0.0001). Dietary treatment also influenced some of these measures among the subordinates in pens with long barriers. For example, subordinates in DDGS-GMlong received 64 and 67% less aggression than subordinates in DDGS-GMshort and MID-SHshort (P < 0.005). Eat bouts were greatest among subordinates in MID-SHlong, and sitting and sham-chewing were less. However, those in DDGS-GMlong spent less time standing and laying, and their litters were 15.28 kg heavier (P = 0.01), but overall subordinates fed DDGS-GM diet were lightest and gained less total body weight than those fed MID-SH (P < 0.05). Other measures such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio were elevated among dominants in MID-SHlong (P < 0.05); whereas, cortisol (P = 0.06) was lowest and glucose (P = 0.09) highest for subordinates in DDGS-GMlong. These data imply that subordinates benefited from being housed in pens with long barriers, but the type of dietary fiber consumed differentially influenced behavioral budget and several sow- or litter-related traits among subordinates in pens with long barriers. In contrast, the subordinates in pens with short barriers had poorer welfare regardless of diet. Collectively, these data imply that social status is a crucial factor contributing to variation in individual well-being among group-housed sows and that sows of different social positions within a group may evoke different biological responses in an attempt to cope.
Aggression is one of the major welfare concerns among group-housed sows, especially during feeding and regrouping. There are no simple solutions, but any attempt to reduce aggression should be considered. Therefore, the aim was to reduce aggression among group-housed gestating sows by feeding sows different dietary fiber using individual feeding places made from either short- or long-length partitions. Five blocks (n = 36 sows/block) of primiparous and multiparous sows were fed a dietary treatment of either 30% wheat middlings and 15% soybean hulls (MIDD-SY) or 30% distillers dried grains and 30% corn germ meal (DDGS-GM) and housed in pens (9 sows/pen) with individual feeding partitions that were either shoulder (short) or full-body (long) in length. Sow behavior, skin lesions, immune status, and performance were measured. Sow behavior, including aggression and lesion severity scores, were mainly affected by partition length. Aggressive encounters were greater and remained elevated among sows in pens with short partitions until 9 weeks post-grouping but were reduced among sows in pens with long partitions by 3 weeks. During feeding, sows in pens with short ones were more likely to be displaced than were those in pens with long ones. Percentages of time spent lying, standing, eating, and oral–nasal–facial behaviors were also differentially influenced by partition length. Dietary fiber differentially influenced immune status and productivity. For example, sows fed MIDD-SY had higher lymphocyte proliferation and increased neutrophils, while those fed DDGS-GM had deeper backfat and weaned heavier piglets. Overall, the length of the feeding partitions influenced the aggressive encounters, other behaviors, and lesion scores; in turn, the fibrous source differentially influenced several immune measures and sow productivity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.