Comparing gestating sows housing between electronic sow feeding system and a conventional stall over three consecutive parities

Improving behavior characteristics and stress indices of gestating sows housed with group housing facility

“…Loss of BW and BFT for lactation during lactation was not different between the two housing systems. These results were concurrent with those of Jang et al [ 1 ], who reported no adverse effects on BW and BFT of primiparous sows between group-housing and individual stall at gestation and lactation. Another study reported that the BW of sows during gestation was not different between individual stall and group-housing pen [ 18 ].…”

“…According to reviews of Spoolder et al [ 22 ] and Bench et al [ 5 ], reproductive productivity of group-housed sows is not as good as that in individual stall because of leg injury, aggression, and stress by mixing, group sizes, parities, or feeding types. Furthermore, Jang et al [ 1 ] reported that group-housed sows, as compared to that with individual stall, showed lower tendency of farrowing duration and stillborn piglets, over three consecutive parities. Given these results, further study will be required for comprehensive assessments in the longer-term rather than fragmentary or short-term evaluations.…”

“…The swine industry still maintains intensive housing systems in many countries. Particularly, individual confinement stall (CON) has merits in reducing labor intensity, aggression, injury, and space requirements for gestating sows [ 1 – 6 ]. However, this method of production is changing worldwide due to animal welfare considerations that are being legalized in some countries including the European Union and parts of the United States.…”

Comparison of the Productivity of Primiparous Sows Housed in Individual Stalls and Group Housing Systems

“…Regarding sow reproduction, several studies have reported sows in GS had similar or improved reproductive performance compared with those in IS [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ]. The findings of these studies may be a result of the poorer body condition of sows in IS, which could be a consequence of raised lower critical temperature [ 14 , 15 ], while activity increments could reduce farrowing time or birth intervals in GS [ 16 , 17 , 18 ].…”

“…The productivity of sows can change depending on the type of selected GS [ 10 , 11 , 18 ]. The commonly used GS include short stalls (SS), free access stalls (FAS), electronic sow feeders (ESF), and floor feeding (FF).…”