The choice behaviour of pigs in a Y maze: Effects of deprivation of feed, social contact and bedding

Hemsworth, P.H.; Smith, Kenneth L.; Karlen, Marcus G.; Arnold, Naomi A.; Moeller, S. J.; Barnett, J.L.

doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2011.03.007

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sow’s motivation for food likely outweighs any other environmental factors when housed in groups. Interestingly, when in solitary conditions, Hemsworth et al (2011), who found that in a Y maze test, sows worked harder to be back with another pig than for food when in solitary conditions, showing the importance of social interaction to the animals [34]. Whilst the behavioral recordings in the present study were collected over a 6-h period, which commenced at feeding, aggression at feeding versus a later time in the presence and absence of the materials should be explored.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Provision Point-Source Materials Stimulates Play in Sows but Does Not Affect Aggression at Regrouping

Greenwood

Wettere

Rayner

et al. 2018

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryIn most intensive pig production systems, pigs are often mixed into new groups. Sows are important to a production system, as they are the driver behind the farms’ productivity. The aggression that results from sows being mixed into new groups and formation of hierarchy can detrimentally affect production and welfare. This study aimed to determine the effect of providing access to materials on aggressive and play behaviors in gestating sows. Play behaviors were observed in the ‘enhanced’ pen and no play was observed in standard housing (without materials present). Aggression measures, salivary free cortisol concentrations, and injury counts were unaffected by treatment. The provision of point-source materials to sows at mixing had no impact on aggression; however, their presence maintained sow interest over the course of the experiment. Additionally, play behavior was observed in their presence, which may suggest that a more positive affect was induced when the materials were provided.AbstractWhen sows are mixed into groups, hierarchies form and resulting aggression and stress can affect production and welfare. This study determined the effect of providing point-source materials on aggressive and play behaviors in gestating sows. Large white cross Landrace sows were mixed after insemination; six pens of 12 sows were housed in ‘standard’ pens, and six pens of 12 sows were housed in ‘enhanced’ pens. The ‘enhanced’ pens each contained two rubber mats, eight strands of 24 mm-thick sisal rope and two yellow plastic disks, suspended from the roof. The sows remained in these pens until pregnancy confirmation. Salivary cortisol concentration, injury counts, and sow behaviors were recorded the day before mixing (day 1), mixing (day 0) and post-mixing day 1, day 4, day 7 and day 20. At farrowing, reproductive outcomes were obtained. Play was observed (including locomotor and object play) in the ‘enhanced’ pen, and percentage of time spent playing was greater on d4 (1.48 ± 0.3 Square root transformed data (2.84% non-transformed adjusted mean)), d7 (1.43 ± 0.3 (2.97%)) and d20 (1.64 ± 0.3 (3.84%)), compared to d0 (0.56 ± 0.3 (0.70%)) and d1 (0.87 ± 0.3 (1.67%) (p < 0.05)). No play was observed in standard housing. Aggression, salivary free cortisol concentrations and injuries were unaffected (p > 0.05). The provision of materials had no impact on aggression, although their presence maintained sow interest and play behavior, suggesting a positive effect.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Provision Point-Source Materials Stimulates Play in Sows but Does Not Affect Aggression at Regrouping

Greenwood

Wettere

Rayner

et al. 2018

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To correctly identify welfare issues affecting the wellbeing of zoo‐housed animals, we must consider what it is that the animals actually want, and make sure we are being honest and explicit about the way we are asking the animals to “answer” (and how we are scientifically interpreting that answer; Franks, 2019). There are many ways to assess needs and wants of animals; preference testing has for decades been praised and criticized for its varying efficacy and implicit assumptions (Browne et al, 2011; Franks, 2019; Hemsworth et al, 2011; Kirkden & Pajor, 2006; Mehrkam & Dorey, 2014). Preference testing is currently considered as a good way to assess an animal's affective state and motivations for rewarding and pleasurable stimuli (Kirkden & Pajor, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing preferences of two zoo‐housed Aldabran giant tortoises (Aldabrachelys gigantea) for three stimuli using a novel preference test

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research has uncovered many complex cognitive traits and affective processes in many reptile species, such as the ability to make choices that are rewarding or pleasurable. The investigation herein was initiated after many years of anecdotal reports, and preliminary observations, that the two male Aldabran giant tortoises (Aldabrachelys gigantea), Wilbur and Little John, at Melbourne Zoo (Melbourne, Australia) would approach the fence‐line of their enclosure, sometimes multiple times daily, to “solicit” interactions from zoo visitors and/or zoo staff. Following other research with Galapagos giant tortoises (Geochelone nigra), this experiment was a novel preference test with two male Aldabran giant tortoises to assess their individual preferences for three stimuli: (1) human interaction (shell and neck rubs provided using hands); (2) food (highly palatable carrot pieces); and (3) an “enrichment” ball (a red “boomer ball”). The results found that Wilbur highly preferred human interaction and food over the ball; whereas Little John preferred food, and showed some initial interest in the ball, but did not approach the human on any of his 13 human interaction trials. These results reflect previous published findings, that human interaction is a preferred “enrichment,” but is dependent upon a multitude of other contextual factors, and is not preferred at all times by all individuals. Individual variation may be very important to understand to have greater positive effect on the welfare‐related needs of each giant tortoise housed in captivity. Further research is clearly required to enhance the welfare and well‐being of many types of zoo‐housed reptiles.

show abstract

“…Food is an important motivator for pigs, often being more effective than social interaction [ 14 ]. Foraging is a series of appetitive behaviours whereby pigs investigate the environment with the goal of seeking food to ingest, which presumably rewards them for their behaviour.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Enrichment for Sucker and Weaner Pigs: The Effect of Enrichment Block Shape on the Behavioural Interaction by Pigs with the Blocks

Winfield

Macnamara

et al. 2017

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryHow often do intensively-housed pigs interact with enrichment devices, especially smaller pigs during the sucker and weaner phases of production? Understanding whether smaller pigs use such devices, whether habituation occurs, and whether device-shape influences the level of interaction by pigs are all relevant questions surrounding justification for including enrichment devices in pig pens. We provided litters of pigs from 10 to 60 days old with one of three different shaped enrichment blocks (cube, brick, or wedge) and recorded oro-nasal contact with the blocks on two days each week. Fresh blocks were provided weekly. While pig interaction with blocks was infrequent before about 25 days of age, contact with the blocks steadily increased thereafter. Brick-shaped blocks were used more than the other shapes, possibly because the brick-shape presented a wider surface for contact, allowing multiple pigs to simultaneously interact with the block. Pigs interacted more with 1-day-old (i.e., ‘fresh’) than 4-day-old blocks, suggesting that habituation to the blocks may have occurred.AbstractThis experiment tested the effect of enrichment-block shape on oro-nasal contact by young pigs, and possible habituation to the blocks. Nineteen litters (197 piglets) were randomly allocated to one of three block-shape treatments: Cube, Brick, or Wedge. Oro-nasal contact with blocks was infrequent before 25 days of age. Thereafter, contact steadily increased, suggesting enrichment blocks may not need to be provided until week 4 of lactation. Brick-shaped blocks attracted more oro-nasal contact than the cube and wedge shapes (p = 0.002). Oro-nasal contact was more frequent (p < 0.001) during the first 24 h after block introduction than when blocks were four days old. From 25 to 60 days of age, oro-nasal bouts were longer (p = 0.014) during the first 30 min of exposure to a fresh block, than for the remainder of the 24 h, or on day 4 after block replacement. Therefore, habituation to blocks may have occurred by 24 h after block introduction. Brick-shaped blocks may present a wider surface for oro-nasal contact, where multiple pigs could simultaneously interact with the block. We speculate that simultaneous interaction with brick-shaped blocks may be similar to a litter co-operatively massaging the sow’s udder prior to suckling bouts.

show abstract

The choice behaviour of pigs in a Y maze: Effects of deprivation of feed, social contact and bedding

Cited by 9 publications

References 17 publications

Provision Point-Source Materials Stimulates Play in Sows but Does Not Affect Aggression at Regrouping

Provision Point-Source Materials Stimulates Play in Sows but Does Not Affect Aggression at Regrouping

Assessing preferences of two zoo‐housed Aldabran giant tortoises (Aldabrachelys gigantea) for three stimuli using a novel preference test

Environmental Enrichment for Sucker and Weaner Pigs: The Effect of Enrichment Block Shape on the Behavioural Interaction by Pigs with the Blocks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About