Body condition, live weight and success in agonistic encounters in mixed parity groups of sows during gestation

Norring, Marianna; Valros, Anna; Bergman, Paula; Marchant‐Forde, Jeremy N.; Heinonen, Mari

doi:10.1017/s1751731118001453

Cited by 23 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among the subordinate sows, half of them were able to avoid fighting around mixing (i.e., the Avoiders). Also, agonistic interactions at the individual level seemed less frequent in this study compared to other studies with smaller group size [ 20 , 26 , 29 ]. For instance, when focusing on the total frequency of agonistic acts (reciprocal and non-reciprocal) during the first two hours post-mixing, Dominant and Subdominant sows were engaged in approximately 4.9 to 6.8 agonistic acts per hour while Loser and Avoider sows were engaged in approximately 2.1 to 3.5 agonistic acts per hour.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 82%

“…Indeed, previous studies performed with groups of 4 to 26 animals indicated that low-ranking sows had lower risk to develop stereotypies but they spent less time in resting areas (i.e., suggesting that their access to preferred resting areas was denied), they fed later than higher-ranking sows and they showed more body lesions throughout gestation than high-ranking sows [ 20 , 24 – 26 ]. Investigating sow welfare within groups is also important because low-ranking sows were reported to have a significantly lower body weight, farrowing rate, and total litter size, and their offspring had lower weight gain and lean tissue in groups of less than 15 animals [ 21 , 27 – 29 ] and lower litter size in groups of 100 animals [ 28 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social status and previous experience in the group as predictors of welfare of sows housed in large semi-static groups

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mixing gestating sows implies hierarchy formation and has detrimental consequences on welfare. The effects of social stress on the most vulnerable individuals may be underestimated and it is therefore important to evaluate welfare between individuals within groups. This study aimed at investigating the impact of social status and previous experience in the group on well-being of sows housed in large semi-static groups. We assessed aggression (d0 (mixing), d2, d27, d29), body lesions (d1, d26, d84) and feeding order on 20 groups of 46–91 animals. Social status was based on the proportion of fights won during a 6-hr observation period between d0 and d2. Dominants (29%) were those who won more fights than they lost, Subdominants (25%) won fewer fights than they lost, Losers (23%) never won any fight in which they were involved while Avoiders (23%) were never involved in fights. Resident sows (70%) were already present in the group in the previous gestation while New sows (30%) were newly introduced at mixing. Subdominants and Dominants were highly involved in fights around mixing but this was more detrimental for Subdominants than Dominants, Losers and Avoiders since they had the highest body lesion scores at mixing. Avoiders received less non-reciprocal agonistic acts than Losers on d2 (P = 0.0001) and had the lowest body lesion scores after mixing. However, Avoiders and Losers were more at risk in the long-term since they had the highest body lesions scores at d26 and d84. They were followed by Subdominants and then Dominants. New sows fought more (P<0.0001), tended to be involved in longer fights (P = 0.075) around mixing and had more body lesions throughout gestation than Resident sows. Feeding order from one-month post-mixing was influenced both by the previous experience in the group and social status (P<0.0001). New sows, especially with a low social status, are more vulnerable throughout gestation and could serve as indicators of non-optimal conditions.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social status and previous experience in the group as predictors of welfare of sows housed in large semi-static groups

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By targeted selection at the end of the 19th century, the Landrace breed was created in Denmark. In recent decades, the commercial pig breeding industry has triggered significant changes in selection programs with a focus on the cost effectiveness of production [ 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Homozygous-by-Descent (HBD) Segments for Purebred and Crossbred Pigs in Russia

Bakoev

Kolosov

Bakoev

et al. 2021

Life

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intensive selection raises the efficiency of pig farming considerably, but it also promotes the accumulation of homozygosity, which can lead to an increase in inbreeding and the accumulation of deleterious variation. The analysis of segments homozygous-by-descent (HBD) and non-HBD segments in purebred and crossbred pigs is of great interest. Research was carried out on 657 pigs, of which there were Large White (LW, n = 280), Landrace (LR, n = 218) and F1 female (♂LR × ♀LW) (F1, n = 159). Genotyping was performed using the GeneSeek® GGP Porcine HD Genomic Profiler v1 (Illumina Inc., USA). To identify HBD segments and estimate autozygosity (inbreeding coefficient), we used the multiple HBD classes model. LW pigs exhibited 50,420 HBD segments, an average of 180 per animal; LR pigs exhibited 33,586 HBD segments, an average of 154 per animal; F1 pigs exhibited 21,068 HBD segments, an average of 132 per animal. The longest HBD segments in LW were presented in SSC1, SSC13 and SSC15; in LR, in SSC1; and in F1, in SSC15. In these segments, 3898 SNPs localized in 1252 genes were identified. These areas overlap with 441 QTLs (SSC1—238 QTLs; SSC13—101 QTLs; and SSC15—102 QTLs), including 174 QTLs for meat and carcass traits (84 QTLs—fatness), 127 QTLs for reproduction traits (100 QTLs—litter traits), 101 for production traits (69 QTLs—growth and 30 QTLs—feed intake), 21 QTLs for exterior traits (9 QTLs—conformation) and 18 QTLs for health traits (13 QTLs—blood parameters). Thirty SNPs were missense variants. Whilst estimating the potential for deleterious variation, six SNPs localized in the NEDD4, SEC11C, DCP1A, CCT8, PKP4 and TENM3 genes were identified, which may show deleterious variation. A high frequency of potential deleterious variation was noted for LR in DCP1A, and for LW in TENM3 and PKP4. In all cases, the genotype frequencies in F1 were intermediate between LR and LW. The findings presented in our work show the promise of genome scanning for HBD as a strategy for studying population history, identifying genomic regions and genes associated with important economic traits, as well as deleterious variation.

show abstract

“…However, even a decade later, there are no specific requirements for pigs with a significantly higher weight than 100 kg in Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2005. Nowadays, breeding sows already reach weights of about 300 kg in the course of their lives (see weight recordings of Norring et al [17]). It is not known whether the European requirements are also suitable for sows of such weights.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Planimetric Determination of the Static Space of Cull Sows as the First Step towards a Recommendation of Loading Densities for Cull Sows during Road Transportation in the European Union

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The available floor space is an important welfare factor for cull sows during transportation. Sows of modern genetics reach a size and weight far exceeding those of fattening pigs. In most countries, there are no binding, consistent regulations for the maximum loading densities, especially for sows during road transportation. As a first step towards such recommendations, the physical floor space requirement (static space) of 100 sows of a current breed, while standing and lying down, were determined using contrast-based planimetry. An average sow covered about 0.42–0.47 m2 (standing postures) up to 0.53–0.63 m2 (lying postures). The largest measured area was 0.72 m2 for a sow lying in the belly-chest position. We detected a significant dependency of the covered floor area and the live weight, which supports the common practice to derive space requirements and recommendations based on live weight. Also, our results suggest that especially heavy sows, under currently usual loading densities, are at risk of having insufficient floor space requirements during transport. The results cannot be used to define the space required by a sow to carry out movements or sustain the individual need for distance (social/dynamic space) but provide data on the static space covered by sows of current breeds.

show abstract

Body condition, live weight and success in agonistic encounters in mixed parity groups of sows during gestation

Cited by 23 publications

References 34 publications

Social status and previous experience in the group as predictors of welfare of sows housed in large semi-static groups

Social status and previous experience in the group as predictors of welfare of sows housed in large semi-static groups

Analysis of Homozygous-by-Descent (HBD) Segments for Purebred and Crossbred Pigs in Russia

Planimetric Determination of the Static Space of Cull Sows as the First Step towards a Recommendation of Loading Densities for Cull Sows during Road Transportation in the European Union

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About