Space allowance and high fiber diet impact performance and behavior of group-kept gestating sows1

Abstract

Identifying and optimizing housing and management systems that improve the well-being of the gestating sow is essential to sustaining animal agriculture. Therefore, the impact of 2 floor-space allowances and a high-fiber gestation diet on dry group-housed sows were evaluated using multiple measures of well-being. Groups of 10 multiparous sows/pen (n = 221) were assigned randomly to treatments in a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement to either a corn-soybean meal diet (CTL) or corn-soybean meal diet supplemented with soybean hulls and wheat middlings (FBR), and floor-space allowance of either 1.7 or 2.3 m(2)/sow. Sow BW, backfat (BF), and body condition score (BCS) were all recorded on d 34, 65, 90, and 110 of gestation, whereas skin lesions were scored on d 34, every 2 d for the first 2-wk postmixing, and then biweekly throughout gestation. Blood sample was collected only on d 34 for cortisol (baseline), and samples were collected on d 90 of gestation for other measures including cortisol. Behavior was registered on multiple days throughout gestation. Sows fed FBR and kept at 1.7 m(2) produced heavier litter and weaning weights and greater number of piglets born alive, compared to sows fed FBR but kept at 2.3 m(2) of floor space (diet × floor space, P ≤ 0.04). Sows fed FBR and kept at 1.7 m(2) performed fewer oral-nasal-facial and sham-chew behaviors than sows fed CTL and kept at the same floor space (diet × floor space, P ≤ 0.044). Sows kept at 1.7 m(2) of floor space had a greater (P < 0.05) total lesion severity score than sows kept at 2.3 m(2)/sow, and vulva lesion scores were more (P < 0.02) severe among CTL-fed sows than FBR-fed sows. Parities 2 and 3 sows fed FBR and kept at 1.7 m(2) of floor space were heavier (P < 0.001) than sows fed the same diet but kept at 2.3 m(2). These results indicate that keeping small groups of pregnant sows at a minimum floor-space allowance of 1.7 m(2)/sow and floor feeding these sows a high-fiber diet can improve short-term sow well-being.

Individual variation in eating speed of dry sows1

“…Although individual rationing is more easily achieved when dry sows are individually housed in stalls compared to grouped in pens (Johnston and Li, 2013;Young et al, 2004), there is impetus for the industry to change from individual stalls to group housing. In advance of the change, research is occurring on group housing of dry sows, including sow feeding strategies (e.g., Schneider et al, 2007;DeDecker et al, 2014) and the potential impacts of group housing on sow welfare and production (e.g., Salak-Johnson et al, 2007; Gonyou et al, 2013;Hemsworth et al, 2013. Whereas Gonyou et al (2013) emphasized the importance of establishing sow groups based on nutritional requirements, the delivery of feed to the animal and the mean consumption rate was 1,859.8 g/min for the first 5 min and 1,060.7 g/min for the first 10 min.…”

A Review: Aggression Concerns with Group-Housed Sow Well-Being

“…[43][44][45] In an attempt to limit these behaviors, researchers have fed sows high-fiber gestational diets which are bulkier and increase feeding duration and improves satiety 46,47 and these diets have also been shown to reduce sham-chewing, bar biting, and foraging-like behaviors in sows. 32,42,46 Moreover, feeding fiber to group-housed sows increased time spent lying and decreased aggressive behavior. de Leeuw 48 found that sows fed a high-fiber diet spent less time active and made less frequent postural changes for several hours post-feeding and others reported not only a decrease in general activity but an increase in time spent lying.…”

“…Also, total lesion severity scores were higher for sows kept at 1.7m² as opposed to 2.3m² of floor-space per sow. 32 Anil 33 found that sows managed dynamically in pens with an electronic sow feeding system had higher injury scores compared to sows maintained in static groups or only mixed twice. Similarly, sows managed in a static group of 35-40 sows per group had less lesions than if sows were managed in a dynamic group with more than 100 sows per pen.…”

“…49,50 Furthermore, vulva lesion scores were less severe among sows fed a high-fiber diet compared to sows fed a low-fiber diet, which may be partly explained by the decrease in aggression among the group. 32,42 Fiber source and amount of fiber must be considered as well. Robert 49 found that feeding sows wheat bran and corn-cob fiber diet was more effective at reducing stereotypic behaviors and increasing time spent lying compared to feeding sows an oat hulls fiber diet.…”

Housing Pregnant Sows in Turnaround Stalls During Gestation Impacts Behavior, Immune and Well-Being

“…Pregnancy was confirmed at day 27±2 post-mating using ultrasound machine (Bantam, IE Medical Imaging) for transabdominal examinations. Sows were individually fed at 0800 h a fiber modified diet mainly of shelled corn and soybean meal with a portion of these ingredients being replaced with wheat middlings (15%) and soybean hulls (30%) as described in DeDecker et al (2014). All nutrients were present at concentrations that met or exceeded nutrient requirements (NRC, 1998).…”