Effects of early contact between non-littermate piglets and of the complexity of farrowing conditions on social behaviour and weight gain

Kutzer, Tanja Miriam; Bünger, Beate; Kjaer, Joergen; Schrader, Lars

doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2009.08.004

Cited by 77 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Mixing litters before 2 weeks of age generally results in little aggression and few skin lesions (Wattanakul et al, 1997;Kutzer et al, 2009), which is in contrast with the vigorous fighting and skin damage that is reported for pigs mixed at weaning after 4 weeks p.p. (Melotti et al, 2011).…”

Section: Piglet (Social) Developmentmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…(Melotti et al, 2011). Compared with piglets that were first mixed at weaning at an age of 3 to 4 weeks, piglets that could interact with one or more litters before weaning showed less aggression (Weary et al, 2002;Hessel et al, 2006;Kutzer et al, 2009) and skin lesions (Parratt et al, 2006) after weaning when kept with familiar piglets. This was likely because new hierarchies did not need to be established.…”

Section: Piglet (Social) Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Potential factors contributing to a better adaptation to the post-weaning situation are improved social skills, the absence of mixing of piglets at weaning, increased experience with solid feed or a higher weaning age (Berkeveld et al, 2009). For instance, piglets mingled with other litters during lactation gained 0.8 to 1.0 kg more in the 5 weeks post-weaning compared with housing without contact possibilities (Hessel et al, 2006;Kutzer et al, 2009).…”

Section: Piglet (Social) Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The latter may facilitate social learning and development of the piglets (Kutzer et al, 2009;Oostindjer et al, 2011) and may consequently facilitate adaptation to weaning. Despite these possible benefits of group housing during lactation, commercial use of such systems is limited.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A review of sow and piglet behaviour and performance in group housing systems for lactating sows

Nieuwamerongen

Bolhuis

Peet–Schwering

et al. 2014

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Commercial use of group housing systems for lactating sows is limited, but the recent transition to group housing during gestation in the EU may result in a renewed interest in such systems. Therefore, this review aims to identify key factors that may contribute to the success or failure of group housing of lactating sows in comparison with individual housing by describing the variety in group housing systems and discussing animal behaviour and performance compared with individual housing. Group housing systems can be divided in multi-suckling (MS) systems, in which sows are grouped with their litters, and get-away (GA) systems, which include a separate communal area accessible to sows only. These systems differ in many aspects regarding management and layout but, compared with individual housing, generally provide more environmental complexity, more freedom of movement for the sows and more freedom to express behaviours related to, for example, maternal care and social interactions. Group housing poses several risks, such as disrupted nursing and an increased level of crushing during the MS phase, and in the GA systems there is a risk for early cessation of nursing. On the other hand, pre-weaning mingling of litters clearly benefits piglet social development and may improve adaptation to the post-weaning situation. In addition, group-housed sows may show lactational ovulation, which provides opportunities for insemination during an extended lactation period, which benefits the piglets. Gradual transitions in social and physical environment around gestation, farrowing, grouping and weaning seem to be key success factors for group housing systems during lactation. In addition, selection of suitable sows and quality of stockmanship seem important.

show abstract

Section: Piglet (Social) Developmentmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Piglet (Social) Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Piglet (Social) Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A review of sow and piglet behaviour and performance in group housing systems for lactating sows

Nieuwamerongen

Bolhuis

Peet–Schwering

et al. 2014

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…where they have been allowed contact between litters during the suckling period) demonstrate more positive social interactions than piglets raised in single-litter farrowing systems. For example, there is decreased incidence of injuries (Pluske and Williams, 1996;Wattanakul et al, 1997;Kutzer et al, 2009), greater hierarchy stabilisation (De Jonge et al, 1996;Pitts et al, 2000;Hillmann et al, 2003;D'Eath, 2005), reduced latency to approach an unfamiliar pig upon first contact (Hillmann et al, 2003) and also reduced levels of aggression (Erhard et al, 1997). The introduction of another piglet (social encounter test), therefore, tested the social interaction skills of these piglets.…”

Section: Lau Pluske and Flemingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does the environmental background (intensive v. outdoor systems) influence the behaviour of piglets at weaning?

Lau

Pluske

Fleming

2015

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Under intensive pig husbandry, outdoor systems offer a more complex physical and social environment compared with indoor systems (farrowing sheds). As the rearing environment affects behavioural development, it can, therefore, influence behavioural responses of pigs to stressful environments in later stages of production. We tested how the rearing environment influenced behavioural responses to a novel arena test in piglets on the day that they were weaned and mixed into large groups. We recorded video footage and compared the behavioural responses of 30 outdoor-raised and 30 farrowing shed-raised piglets tested in an experimental arena and sequentially exposed to four challenges (each for 5 min) on the day of weaning. Quantitative and qualitative behavioural measures were recorded using time budgets and scoring demeanour or 'qualitative behavioural expression' (using Qualitative Behavioural Assessment (QBA)). When held in isolation (challenge 1), both groups were scored as more 'scared/ worried', while outdoor-raised piglets spent more time eating and jumping against the arena walls. Both groups interacted with a plastic ball (challenge 2: exposure to a novel object) during which they were scored as more 'playful/curious' than other challenges. When a food bowl was introduced (challenge 3), farrowing shed-raised piglets were more interested in playing with the food bowl itself, whereas outdoor-raised piglets spent more time eating the feed. Finally, there were no significant differences in social behaviour (challenge 4: introduction of another piglet) between the two groups in terms of the latency to contact each other, amount of time recorded engaged in aggressive/non-aggressive social interactions or QBA scores. Although piglets spent 30% of their time interacting with the other piglet, and half of this time (47%) was engaged in negative interactions (pushing, biting), the levels of aggression were not different between the two groups. Overall, outdoor-raised piglets ate more and were scored as more 'calm/passive', whereas farrowing shed-raised piglets spent more time investigating their environment and were scored as more 'playful/inquisitive'. In conclusion, we did not find differences in behaviour between outdoor-raised and farrowing shed-raised piglets that would highlight welfare issues. The differences found in this study may reflect conflicting affective states, with responses to confinement, neophobia and motivation for exploration evident.Keywords: assessment, behaviour, free-range, piggery, piglet ImplicationsThe day of weaning is particularly challenging both physiologically and psychologically for piglets, and the behaviour of piglets towards their environment and each other affects their overall welfare. One of the concerns for the pork industry is that confinement housing can detrimentally influence social behaviour; however, we found no differences in aggressive or non-aggressive social interactions. Piglets raised under the confinement system demonstrated more exploratory behaviour, whereas ou...

show abstract

Early socialisation in group lactation system reduces post‐weaning aggression in piglets

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Pre-weaning group housing for sows and their litters is expected to enhance animal welfare. However, knowledge of potential benefits of preweaning socialisation for piglets after weaning is still lacking. Methods: Weaner pigs were mixed in groups of 10, using littermates (LM) from pre-weaning group housing (Gr) and from farrowing pens with crates (Co). Groups were formed as follows: Gr/Gr (5 LM from Gr + 5 LM from Gr), Gr/Co (5 LM from Gr + 5 LM from Co), Co/Co (5 LM from Co + 5 LM from Co). Results: During 24 h after mixing, piglets in Co/Co fought more than in Gr/Co and Gr/Gr. Piglets in Co/Co had more unclear fighting results than in Gr/Co and Gr/Gr. Four days after mixing, piglets in Co/Co were more injured than in Gr/Co and Gr/Gr. Conclusion: Early socialised piglets may have better social skills when meeting familiar and unfamiliar conspecifics after weaning.

show abstract

Effects of early contact between non-littermate piglets and of the complexity of farrowing conditions on social behaviour and weight gain

Cited by 77 publications

References 26 publications

A review of sow and piglet behaviour and performance in group housing systems for lactating sows

A review of sow and piglet behaviour and performance in group housing systems for lactating sows

Does the environmental background (intensive v. outdoor systems) influence the behaviour of piglets at weaning?

Early socialisation in group lactation system reduces post‐weaning aggression in piglets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About