Feeding behaviour of growing pigs using single or multi-space feeders

Nielsen, Birte L.; Lawrence, A. S. C.; Whittemore, C. T.

doi:10.1016/0168-1591(95)00649-4

Cited by 61 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The increase in synchronized feeding despite competition in the environment may be attributed to social facilitation, with the strength of social cues greater than motivation to avoid competitive interactions. It is also possible that calves actually prefer to feed socially, as has been demonstrated in pigs (Nielsen et al, 1996). These results indicate that synchronized feeding time is relatively inflexible, either due to strength of external cues or preference for social feeding, and that providing multiple feeding positions to allow for synchronized feeding may encourage intake in group-housed calves.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 53%

Competition during the milk-feeding stage influences the development of feeding behavior of pair-housed dairy calves

Miller-Cushon

Bergeron

Leslie

et al. 2014

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated how the feeding behavior of pair-housed calves develops in response to reduced teat and feed place availability. Twenty Holstein bull calves were pair housed and provided with milk replacer (MR) and grain concentrate ad libitum via either (1) 1 teat and feed bucket/pen, such that calves could not feed simultaneously [competitive feeding (CF)] or (2) 2 teats and feed buckets/pen [noncompetitive feeding (NCF)]. The calves were weaned during wk 7 of life by incrementally diluting the MR. Postweaning, all pens were managed identically and offered a complete pelleted diet ad libitum via 2 feed buckets/pen (NCF) in period 1 (wk 8 and 9) and period 3 (wk 12 and 13) and exposed to a competitive challenge with CF in period 2 (wk 10 and 11). Feeding times and competitive interactions were recorded from video for 3 d/wk in wk 2, 4, and 6 and 2 d/wk in wk 8 to 13. Meal criteria were used to calculate daily meal frequency, meal time, and synchronized meal time (the percentage of meal time when calves within the pen were engaged in simultaneous meals). Milk replacer intake was subject to a treatment × week interaction, with calves in CF pens having lower MR intake (wk 2: 8.3 vs. 10.0 L/calf per day for CF vs. NCF), but compensating by increasing intake to a greater extent over time (wk 4-5: 13.3 vs. 11.7 L/d for CF vs. NCF). Corresponding to MR intake, meal frequencies and feeding times evolved differently over this period, increasing in CF pens and decreasing in NCF pens (wk 2: 5.8 vs. 11.1 and wk 4-6: 6.2 vs. 5.1 meals/d for CF vs. NCF). Calves in CF pens also spent less time engaged in synchronized meals (28 vs. 51% of meal time; standard error=7.1) and displaced each other 5 times more frequently during synchronized eating. Postweaning, calves in previously CF pens maintained 5 times greater displacement frequencies and had fewer overlapping meals than calves in previously NCF pens (34.5 vs. 40.7% of meals, respectively). Postweaning, when calves were all fed noncompetitively (2 buckets/pen in periods 1 and 3), calves previously fed CF had greater intakes in period 3 (4.87 vs. 4.44 kg/d) and a tendency for greater intake in period 1 (2.80 vs. 2.63 kg/d), greater rates of intake in period 3 (87.8 vs. 72.0 g/min) and a tendency for greater rates of intake in period 1 (44.3 vs. 38.9 g/min), and greater meal frequencies in both periods (11.1 vs. 9.9 meals/d). In the competitive challenge period (1 bucket/pen in period 2), intake, rates of intake, and meal frequencies were subject to treatment × week interactions: calves in NCF pens had lower intake and meal frequencies, but increased meal frequency, intake, and rate of intake over time to a greater extent than calves previously in CF pens. These results indicate that calves are able to adapt to moderate competition by increasing meal frequency and that behavioral responses to competition persist postweaning.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 53%

Competition during the milk-feeding stage influences the development of feeding behavior of pair-housed dairy calves

Miller-Cushon

Bergeron

Leslie

et al. 2014

Journal of Dairy Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The cost and the need to modify the facilities make experiments with different types of feeders difficult to conduct [21]. Studies that have related the performance parameters between two type of feeders have included comparisons between those that simultaneously provide feed and water to feed animals with those that offer only dry feed [14, 22, 23], comparisons between feeders with a single space for animals versus those that offer multiple spaces [14, 22–24], and evaluations of the effects of changing the type of feeder between the growing and finishing phases [25]. Changing feeder when animals are transferred to GF housing leads to reduced feed intake and performance in the first week after the change, but no negative effect on performance over the entire finishing phase [25].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors affecting the daily feed intake and feed conversion ratio of pigs in grow-finishing units: the case of a company

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to use mathematical modeling to identify and quantify the main factors that affect daily feed intake (DFI) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) in grow-finishing (GF) pig units. We evaluated the production records of 93 GF farms between 2010 and 2013, linked to a company, working in a cooperative system, located in western Paraná State, Brazil. A total of 683 batches, consisting of approximately 495,000 animals, were used. Forty production factors related to the management, health, plant and equipment, nutrition, genetics and environment were considered. The number of pigs per pen, type of feeder, origin and sex (the last two variables were combined in the models) of the animals and initial and final body weights were included in the final models to predict DFI and FCR (dependent variables). Additionally, the duration of the GF phase was included for the parameter FCR. All factors included in the final models had significant effects for both dependent variables.ResultsThere was a reduction in DFI (0.04 kg) (P < 0.001) and an improvement in FCR (6.0 points) (P < 0.001) in batches from pens with less than 20 animals compared with batches from pens with more than 20 animals. In barns with “other” feeder types (mostly the linear dump type) different of conical semiautomatic feeder, a reduction of DFI (0.03 kg) (P < 0.05) and improved FCR (3.0 points) (P < 0.05) were observed. Batches of barrows from units specialized for producing piglets (SPU) had higher DFI (approximately 0.02 kg) (P < 0.01) than batches of females and batches of mixed animals from SPU, and batches of mixed animals from farms not specialized for piglet production (farrow-to-finish farms). Batches of females from SPU and mixed batches from SPU had better FCR (5.0 and 3.0 points respectively) (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively) than batches of piglets originating from farrow-to-finish farms. The variables selected for the final models explained approximately 50 and 64 % of the total variance in DFI and FCR, respectively.ConclusionsThe models are tools for the interpretation of the factors related to the evaluated parameters, aiding in the identification of critical aspects of production. The main parameters affecting DFI and FCR in this company during the GF period were the number of pigs per pen, the type of feeder used and the combination origin-sex of the animals.

show abstract

“…Information on behavior of wild pigs at bait stations is lacking, though documented behaviors of domestic pigs at feeding stations suggest that challenges exist for overcoming aggressive behaviors by dominant individuals that limit feeding by subordinates (Nielsen et al , ). When feeding as a group, domestic pigs express aggressive behaviors that enable them to feed based on social ranking (Held et al , ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and evaluation of a bait station for selectively dispensing bait to invasive wild pigs

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Populations of invasive wild pigs (Sus scrofa; hereafter, wild pigs) are expanding, requiring costeffective tools for control, and disease prevention, such as toxic or vaccine baits. Specifically, development of a novel and humane toxicant is underway for control of wild pigs in the United States and Australia. A speciesspecific bait station for delivering the toxic bait must be used to protect nontarget animals. Further, a bait station must be designed to maximize feeding by wild pigs by accommodating their group-feeding behaviors. We sought to develop a bait station that delivered bait to the maximum proportion of wild pigs and excluded the most ubiquitous nontarget species, specifically white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and raccoons (Procyon lotor). We used direct observations and cameras during 2015 to evaluate wild pig feeding behavior and nontarget access for various sizes, arrangements, and construction materials of prototype bait stations in pen and field settings in Texas, USA. We found that a bait station constructed of 2 back-to-back troughs, 1.1 m in length, without a divider was sufficient for feeding the largest proportion of wild pigs in pens. Using this design of bait station at 30 field sites, we found that wild pigs fed more frequently from plastic than metal bait stations, although both bait stations reduced feeding by wild pigs compared with control sites. From near-video imagery at 3 field sites, we identified that 80% of wild pigs (33 of 41), 0% of white-tailed deer (0 of 7), and 17% of raccoons (1 of 6) accessed the bait stations on the final night of testing following a 2-week acclimation and training period. Future steps toward development of a wild pig-specific bait station include adding resistance to the lids of bait stations to completely exclude raccoons and identify baiting strategies that most efficiently acclimate wild pigs to using bait stations. Published 2018. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

show abstract

Feeding behaviour of growing pigs using single or multi-space feeders

Cited by 61 publications

References 18 publications

Competition during the milk-feeding stage influences the development of feeding behavior of pair-housed dairy calves

Competition during the milk-feeding stage influences the development of feeding behavior of pair-housed dairy calves

Factors affecting the daily feed intake and feed conversion ratio of pigs in grow-finishing units: the case of a company

Development and evaluation of a bait station for selectively dispensing bait to invasive wild pigs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About