Pigs with but not without access to pieces of recently harvested wood show reduced pen-mate manipulation after a provision of feed and straw

Abstract

In barren environments of commercial farms, pig often redirect their rooting and chewing behaviours at other pigs, which can lead to tail biting. When materials such as straw are provided, the quantity is usually too small to have an effect. The aim of this study was to test whether small provisions of straw and species-relevant point-source objects would have an additive effect in reducing pen-mate manipulation. The animals were 167 gilts with undocked tails on a commercial farm in Finland, housed in 12-m2 pens with partly slatted floors, on average 7 pigs/pen. Liquid feed and 20 g/pig of long straw were provided once a day. The pigs had continuous access to suspended objects: in each control pen (N = 12), a 40 cm x 10 cm x 2 cm piece of commercially sourced wooden board and a 60-cm metal chain, and in each experimental pen (N = 12), an 80-cm piece and two 40-cm pieces of birch trees with a diameter of 5 to 7 cm, harvested 1 month earlier. After 2 months of exposure, frequencies of pig-and object-directed manipulation before and after consuming the feed and straw were recorded by continuous observation on video. Pre-consumption pig-directed manipulation did not differ between the treatments (means: 39.3 events/pig/hour (SD = 11.7) in the experimental pens and 42.1 events/pig/hour (SD = 12.1) in the control pens; t = -0.6, df = 21, P > 0.1), but post-consumption manipulation was significantly lower in frequency in the experimental treatment (means: 31.5 events/pig/hour (SD = 10.4) in the experimental pens and 41.0 events/pig/hour (SD = 8.6) in the control pens; t = 2.4, df = 21, P < 0.05). Object-directed manipulation was higher in the experimental treatment both pre-and post-consumption (preconsumption medians: 9.7 events/pig/hour (min = 2.0, max = 14.9) in the experimental pens and 3.1 events/pig/hour (min = 0.9, max = 13.7) in the control pens (U = 18.5, P < 0.01); post-consumption means: 9.2 events/hour/pig (SD = 2.7) in the experimental pens and 4.8 events/pig/hour (SD = 2.0) in the control pens (t = 4.5, df = 20, P < 0.001). It was concluded that the experimental objects with improved material, quantity, shape and location had an additive effect with straw in reducing pen-mate manipulation, whereas objects ordinarily used on the farm had no beneficial effect. Further research is needed on the effects of the odour, taste and consistency of optimal objects. Keywords Enrichment; Manipulable materials; Fresh wood; Exploratory behaviour; Oral-nasal manipulation; Pig welfare Highlights We tested whether improvements in available objects reduced oral behaviours at pen-mates..In pens with pieces of recently harvested wood, receiving feed and a small daily provision of straw reduced manipulation of pigs.In pens with pieces of dry wood and metal chain, receiving feed and a small daily provision of straw increased ear manipulation.

Effect of Enrichment Items on the Physiology and Behavior of Sows in the Third Trimester of Pregnancy

“…In the present study, enrichment items (pine and scented wood) could significantly reduce the stereotypical behavior and physiological stress in sows, but with no significant difference between the two enrichment items in their effects. This is consistent with previous reports that fresh wood could reduce tail biting, ear biting and manipulation behavior, and the use of natural flavors in objects suitable for nibbling can encourage weaned piglets to maintain a longer strong interest [ 8 , 31 ]. Based on the frequency and duration of enrichment items manipulation by pregnant sows, there is no difference in the degree of interest in the two enrichment items (pine and scented wood) for the sows in the third trimester of pregnancy in the confinement stalls, suggesting that artificial scented wood has the same effect of pine wood.…”

A Practical Approach to Providing Environmental Enrichment to Pigs and Broiler Chickens Housed in Intensive Systems

“…A review of the literature indicated that possible issues that may be associated with some environmental enrichments are waste management problems, biosecurity concerns, sourcing the materials or possible composting problems [13]. Managers of swine facilities with concrete slatted floors and liquid manure systems are concerned that straw will clog their systems [14]. The amount of straw required to reduce tail biting may cause waste management problems.…”

“…To avoid problems with waste management, pigs on partially slatted floors can be given up to 20 g of straw per pig each day. Unfortunately, this small amount of straw may not be effective for reducing tail biting [14]. One study showed that the amount of straw could be reduced by providing birch wood pieces [14].…”

“…Unfortunately, this small amount of straw may not be effective for reducing tail biting [14]. One study showed that the amount of straw could be reduced by providing birch wood pieces [14]. Unfortunately, this material would be difficult and expensive to source in many countries.…”

Fly in the coop : How black soldier fly larvae improve broiler and pig welfare

“…In T3, the occurrence of oral manipulation of pen mates was higher in pigs that had access to balls attached to chains than pigs that had access to any other enrichment material. Previous studies found that enrichment material that facilitates rooting, such as straw or peat, is of high interest and reduces manipulation behaviour directed towards other pigs (Oostindjer et al, 2011b;Telkänranta and Valros, 2020;Vanheukelom et al, 2011). Balls on chains provide relatively little opportunity for rooting behaviour (Day et al, 2002), which may explain the higher level of oral manipulation of pen mates when pigs only had access to this enrichment.…”