Assessment of the injuries sustained by pregnant sows housed in groups using electronic feeders

Abstract

The incidence of injuries to pregnant sows kept in dynamic groups in a commercial herd was recorded over a period of 18 months. The sows were maintained in a solid-floored building with a straw-bedded lying area allowing 1.7 m2 per sow and fed by means of electronic feeders. Injuries on 12 possible areas of the body were assessed every week, and graded on the scale of 0 to 3 (maximum body score 36). The lesion scores sustained by the sows were very low, with a maximum of 19 and a median of 4. Lesions of the greatest severity constituted only 0.16 per cent of all the recorded injuries. The injuries were not distributed uniformly over the body, most being on the shoulders, flanks and hindquarters, with very few on the head or in the vulval region. The total injury score was related to parity, with sows in parities one, two and three sustaining more injuries than sows in later parities, and it was also related negatively to bodyweight. More agonistic interactions were observed between sows in the lying area and in the vicinity of the feeders than in the dunging area.

The effect of management strategies and parity on the behaviour and physiology of gestating sows housed in an electronic sow feeding system

“…Previous literature has found that younger sows sustain higher levels of injuries than older sows (Spoodler et al 1997;Hodgkiss et al 1998;Anil et al 2004) and this study had similar findings as the young sows tended to have a higher scratch score than the intermediate and old sows. Based upon the aggression data one would expect the older sows to have more scratches due to their high level of aggressiveness.…”

Group space allowance has little effect on sow health, productivity, or welfare in a free-access stall system1,2

“…The minimum score of 1 corresponded to an emaciated sow; scores 2 through 4 were given to thin, ideal, and fat sows respectively; and the maximum score of 5 indicated an overly fat sow. Skin lesions were evaluated using a scale (Table 2) adapted from Hodgkiss et al (1998) and Arey (1999) on GD 35 (baseline), 38, and 41 and once weekly thereafter until the treatment ended. Seven regions of the body were lesion scored independently for a total possible score of 35.…”

“…Cluster of differentiation (CD) 14, a component of the lipopolysaccharide receptor, is a marker for monocytes and macrophages (Wright et al, 1990; Piriou-Guzylack and Salmon, 2008), and CD18, an Hodgkiss et al (1998) and Arey (1999).…”

Growth and reproductive development of male piglets are more vulnerable to midgestation maternal stress than that of female piglets12

“…Female anogenital distance was measured between the anus and genital papilla using calipers Absolute Digimatic Calipers, Aurora, IL). The researchers collecting piglet measurements were familiar with the experimental design, but were effectually blind to Hodgkiss et al (1998) and Arey (1999).…”

“…Sow BW was recorded on ED 0 (baseline), ED 21, 2 d after farrowing, and at weaning. Skin lesions were evaluated on ED -1 (baseline), 4, 11, and 18 using a 6-point scale (Table 2) adapted from Hodgkiss et al (1998) and Arey (1999). Seven body regions, 1) head, neck, and shoulders; 2) body and udder; 3) rump, tail, and vulva; 4) upper leg; 5) hock, knee, and pasterns; 6) hooves and toes; and 7) dewclaws, were independently scored for a total possible score of 35.…”