Season effects on the suckling behavior of piglets

Sows confined to farrowing crates are restricted in performing natural behaviour such as maternal behaviour. Loose-housing farrowing pens (LH) and farrowing pens with crates (FC) were compared regarding sows’ nursing behaviour via video analyses over four weeks per batch (one day per week). Nursing frequency was similar in LH and FC pens (1.25 ± 0.82 vs. 1.19 ± 0.75 nursings/sow/hour; p > 0.05). However, nursing duration differed between the two systems (LH: 5.7 ± 4.6 min vs. FC: 7.0 ± 5.0 min; odds ratio (OR) 1.168, p = 0.011). In LH pens, more nursing bouts were sow-terminated than in FC pens (OR 0.427, p = 0.001). The probability of sow-terminated nursing occurring increased from week 1 to week 4 (OR 3.479, adjusted p (padj) < 0.001), while that of observing unnursed piglets decreased from week 1 to week 4 (OR 0.301, padj < 0.001) and rose with increasing litter size (OR 1.174, p = 0.010). We conclude that nursing behaviour was affected by the farrowing system, with shorter nursing duration and more nursing terminations by the sow in LH than in FC pens. Since this corresponds to the nursing behaviour of sows in semi-natural conditions, it can be assumed that sows in LH pens are more likely to exhibit natural nursing behaviour.

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Does Nursing Behaviour of Sows in Loose-Housing Pens Differ from That of Sows in Farrowing Pens with Crates?

Wiechers

Herbrandt

Kemper

2022

“…The data that did not present normal distribution were normalized by the PROC RANK in the SAS (9.3) software [18]. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare nonnormalized data at a 5% probability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…number, interval, and duration of sucklings were evaluated when 50% + 1 the litter began suckling, and ended when more than half of the litter left sented inactive behavior, as recommended by Moreira et al [18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The behavior of the litter was monitored for 24 h at 7 and 15 days of lactation. The number, interval, and duration of sucklings were evaluated when 50% + 1 of the piglets of the litter began suckling, and ended when more than half of the litter left the teats or presented inactive behavior, as recommended by Moreira et al [18].…”

Section: Piglet Behavioral Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Phytogenic Bioactive Compounds in the Diet of Lactating Sows, Litter Performance, and Milk Characteristics

Santos,

Oliveira,

Oliveira

et al. 2023

Self Cite

The objective was to evaluate the effect of phytogenic supplementation in the feed of lactating sows on the performance parameters of sows and suckling piglets. Ninety-three lactating sows of commercial lines (sows TN70) were distributed in a completely randomized design. The treatments adopted were a control diet without phytogenics (control) and a control diet with phytogenic supplementation in the feed. Performance parameters and the behaviors of sows and piglets were evaluated, in addition to milk composition and the biochemical parameters of the animals. The use of phytogenics did not affect the feed intake or tissue mobilization of the sows. However, it improved the production and quality of milk and reduced the possibility of light piglets at weaning by 22.16 percentage points. Regarding biochemical parameters, phytogenics improved animal recovery in the lactation period, as proven by an increase in the serum concentration of total protein and urea. Sows that received phytogenics exhibited increased behaviors of inactivity (3.16%), breastfeeding (1.15%), and water consumption (0.95%). In conclusion, using phytogenics in the feed of lactating sows improves the performance of the litters without affecting the body condition of the sows, with increased milk production and enhanced protein and lactose concentration.

“…Undoubtedly, temperature plays a key role in animal activity, and animals become more lethargic in warmer environments. Moreira et al [25] observed the effect of temperature on the suckling behavior of piglets and found that the duration of the suckling behavior was shorter in summer than in winter, and the piglets suckled more often during the night. This strategy and others such as adapting their lying or eating behaviors are used by pigs to counterbalance the effects of being out of their thermoneutral zone.…”

Section: Series Decomposition and Analysis Of The Trend And Seasonality Componentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-Term Measurement of Piglet Activity Using Passive Infrared Detectors

Besteiro¹,

Arango²,

Ortega

et al. 2021

Measuring animal activity is useful for monitoring animal welfare in real time. In this regard, passive infrared detectors have been used in recent years to quantify piglet activity because of their robustness and ease of use. This study was conducted on a commercial farm in Northwest Spain during six complete breeding cycles. The hourly average activity of weaned piglets with a body mass of 6–20 kg was recorded and further analyzed by using a multiplicative decomposition of the series followed by a wavelet analysis. Finally, the real series were compared to the theoretical models of activity. Results showed a high level of movement immediately after weaning and a sustained level of activity throughout the cycles. The daily behavior of the piglets followed a clear circadian pattern with several peaks of activity. No differences in behavior were observed between spring–summer cycles and autumn–winter cycles. Single-peak models achieved the best predictive results. In addition, the installed sensors were found to underestimate mild activity.