Effects of straw and unfamiliarity on fighting between newly mixed growing pigs

Arey, D.S.; Franklin, M. F.

doi:10.1016/0168-1591(95)00600-w

Cited by 87 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Andersen and Bøe (1999) reported that the provision of straw may not be an important element in reducing aggression within stable groups of loose-housed sows. According to Arey and Franklin (1995), the provision of straw in group housing systems did not lead to a reduction of fighting in newly mixed groups either. The relation between straw and undesirable behaviour is further complicated by the level of feed restriction.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of straw for pig and cattle welfare: A review

Tuyttens

2005

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

229

156

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of straw for pig and cattle welfare: A review

Tuyttens

2005

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

229

156

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…instigator moves away from focal piglet) (e.g. pushing, biting) − 'Manipulative social behaviour' (agonistic) can be harmful (Arey and Franklin, 1995) and is associated with distress in piglets (Blecha et al, 1983;Dybkjaer, 1992;de Jong et al, 2000 stimuli, and the balance is strongly dependent on the magnitude of the novelty (Chaloupková et al, 2007b). When supplied with basic necessities (food, water and shelter), domestic pigs in commercial production continue to express exploratory behaviours and preferentially select environments (pens) with novel objects to investigate (Stolba, 1984).…”

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

“…Variation in the indicators used could also potentially explain differences in model outcomes For example, different indicators of injuries in pigs result in differences in the final conclusion, even if the studies use otherwise similar experimental designs and methods for inferential analysis. In relation to the provision of straw for pigs, different indicators of aggression have lead to different conclusions; for example, Lahrmann et al (2015) found reduced shoulder injuries for straw-housed pigs, whereas Morgan et al (1998) found that straw-housed pigs performed more aggressive interactions and Statham et al (2011) and Arey and Franklin (1995) have both reported no significant effect of the provision of straw on outbreaks of aggression. Aggression can, and indeed, has been described and measured using a wide variety of indicators.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%