Reproductive performance, offspring characteristics, and injury scores according to the housing system of gestating gilts

Cunha, Evandro César Pereira; Menezes, Tila de Alcantara; Bernardi, Mari Lourdes; Mellagi, Ana Paula Gonçalves; Ulguim, Rafael da Rosa; Wentz, Ivo; Bortolozzo, Fernando Pandolfo

doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2018.02.008

Cited by 11 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cunha et al. (2018) found that re‐grouping on days 7 and 30 resulted in significantly lower farrowing rates than for sows continuously housed in stalls. In contrast, Bates et al.…”

Section: Assessment Of the Welfare Of Gilts And Dry Sowsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Welfare of pigs on farm

Nielsen¹,

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2022

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This scientific opinion focuses on the welfare of pigs on farm, and is based on literature and expert opinion. All pig categories were assessed: gilts and dry sows, farrowing and lactating sows, suckling piglets, weaners, rearing pigs and boars. The most relevant husbandry systems used in Europe are described. For each system, highly relevant welfare consequences were identified, as well as related animal-based measures (ABMs), and hazards leading to the welfare consequences. Moreover, measures to prevent or correct the hazards and/or mitigate the welfare consequences are recommended. Recommendations are also provided on quantitative or qualitative criteria to answer specific questions on the welfare of pigs related to tail biting and related to the European Citizen's Initiative 'End the Cage Age'. For example, the AHAW Panel recommends how to mitigate group stress when dry sows and gilts are grouped immediately after weaning or in early pregnancy. Results of a comparative qualitative assessment suggested that long-stemmed or long-cut straw, hay or haylage is the most suitable material for nest-building. A period of time will be needed for staff and animals to adapt to housing lactating sows and their piglets in farrowing pens (as opposed to crates) before achieving stable welfare outcomes. The panel recommends a minimum available space to the lactating sow to ensure piglet welfare (measured by live-born piglet mortality). Among the main risk factors for tail biting are space allowance, types of flooring, air quality, health status and diet composition, while weaning age was not associated directly with tail biting in later life. The relationship between the availability of space and growth rate, lying behaviour and tail biting in rearing pigs is quantified and presented. Finally, the panel suggests a set of ABMs to use at slaughter for monitoring on-farm welfare of cull sows and rearing pigs.

show abstract

“…Cunha et al. (2018) found that re‐grouping on days 7 and 30 resulted in significantly lower farrowing rates than for sows continuously housed in stalls. In contrast, Bates et al.…”

Section: Assessment Of the Welfare Of Gilts And Dry Sowsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Welfare of pigs on farm

Nielsen¹,

Álvarez²,

Bicout³

et al. 2022

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Apart from the concerns raised, related to the impact of housing of pregnant sows in pig industry [5,6], it should be also noted that keeping breeding sows is a process of increased costs that is reflected in the final product. In this context, early and precise diagnosis of pregnancy in sows is crucial for the cost effective management of a pig farm [7], in an effort to avoid unnecessary treatment of erroneous characterized animals as pregnant.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This need for confirmation is on account of to the high mortality rate observed up to the 30th day of gestation [15]. After the 23rd -24th day post-mating, the real time ultrasound (RTU) is considered to give the most accurate results for pregnancy diagnosis in farmed sows [6,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Swine Ultrasonography Numerical Modeling for Pregnancy Diagnosis and Prediction of Litter Size

Kousenidis

Giantsis

Karageorgiou

et al. 2021

International Journal of Biology and Biomedical Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early and reliable diagnosis of pregnancy in sows is considered one of the most crucial parameters for the proper management in pig farming. Reproductive activity of the sows is directly correlated with the overall productivity of the enterprise. The best and most precise methodology to diagnose pregnancy in farm animals, including pigs, is ultrasonography. For getting optimal outputs of real-time ultrasonography application in pigs, both gestation status and litter size of sows is of high importance. Hence, a detailed evaluation and careful reading of the retrieved ultrasonic image could serve to the prediction of the sow’s litter size, providing valuable information to the producer. In the present article we studied the ultrasonic typification of sows in an effort to develop a methodology for the precise pregnancy diagnosis and the prediction of the litter size. To achieve this goal, 1214 matings and 1010 pregnancies were recorded and evaluated over a period of 20 months, in a pig unit in Northern Greece. Two thorough scans were performed on each sow, classifying the ultrasonic image in a scale of 0 to 10, 0 being ‘non pregnant’ and 10 given to the most reassuring image of pregnancy. Evaluations took place in a wide range of time since mating, hence between days 16 (the earliest first scan) and 68 (the latest that a second scan was performed) and the mean values obtained were 8,36 and 8,83 for the first and second scan respectively. Furthermore, the litter size of each subsequent parturition was recorded (mean: 12.22) and correlated to the score of each of the two scans performed during pregnancy. The results showed that more reassuring images and higher scores for both examinations of pregnancy were achieved with increasing time interval from mating (P<0.05). It is therefore suggested that a detailed real-time ultrasonic scanning, can provide a very useful tool, not only for pregnancy diagnosis, but also for the prediction of litter size and eventually the precise management of pregnant sows.

show abstract

“…PEN1 system females were more susceptible to injuries and fights since they stayed longer in group housed situations. Usually group housed animals present higher numbers of body injury (Cunha et al 2018), due to territorial disputes and post-breed stress that may impair in welfare indicators, however, without influencing fertility (Jansen et al, 2007). This can be justified, since the stressing factors of the regrouping have effect in the first 48 hours, stabilizing after this period (Anil et al, 2006).…”

Section: Evaluation Of Reproductive…mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of reproductive and animal welfare parameters of swine females of different genetic lines submitted to different reproductive management and housing systems during pregnancy

Bampi

Borstnez

Dias

et al. 2020

Arq. Bras. Med. Vet. Zootec.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate swine females of different genetic lines submitted to different reproductive management and housing systems during pregnancy on reproductive performance and animal welfare parameters. After artificial insemination protocol, 524 females were divided into two gestation housing systems: PEN1=animals housed in individual stalls during the breeding and after group-housed; PEN32=animals housed in individual stalls from breeding until 32 days of pregnancy and after group-housed. The number of piglets born, and the pregnancy and farrowing rates were evaluated. Welfare parameters related to the pregnancy phase were used. Females who weaned more piglets in the previous farrowing had a higher number of piglets born at the next farrowing. The pregnancy rate was affected by the number of semen doses. The farrowing rate was not influenced by the evaluated parameters, with average value of 91.36%. There was no effect of the gestation housing system and the genetic lines on pregnancy and farrowing rates, with values above 90.0%. The animal welfare indicators showed more compromised parameters in PEN1 system. PEN1 system did not impair the reproductive performance although it presented more compromised animal welfare parameters.

show abstract

Reproductive performance, offspring characteristics, and injury scores according to the housing system of gestating gilts

Cited by 11 publications

References 32 publications

Welfare of pigs on farm

Welfare of pigs on farm

Swine Ultrasonography Numerical Modeling for Pregnancy Diagnosis and Prediction of Litter Size

Evaluation of reproductive and animal welfare parameters of swine females of different genetic lines submitted to different reproductive management and housing systems during pregnancy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About