Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-zlgnt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T08:25:02.080Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of a barrier on the behaviour and growth of early-weaned piglets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

N. K. Waran  and
D. M. Broom
N. K. Waran
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0ES
D. M. Broom
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0ES
Get access

Abstract

When designing environments for animals, the quality of space as well as the amount of space should be considered. In this study the influence of an opaque barrier on the aggressive behaviour and growth of Large White Χ Landrace piglets that were weaned at 24 days was examined. The behaviour and weight gain of 120 piglets were recorded during a 4-week period following weaning. These piglets were housed in either a conventional flat-deck pen or a straw pen, with or without an opaque barrier. There was no significant difference between the two types of accommodation in the frequency of aggressive interactions that occurred during the weaning period but where a barrier was present the frequency of aggressive interactions was 40% lower during the 1st week after weaning and growth rate was proportionately 0·15 greater. Piglets that were the recipients of most aggressive behaviour used the barrier most frequently during the weaning period and barrier users gained the most weight during the week immediately following weaning.

It was concluded that a barrier improved the weaning environment because it offered piglets an escape route during the period when most aggressive interactions occurred. A barrier may be an effective way of improving the welfare of animals housed in confined conditions.

Keywords

behaviourgrowthpigletsweaning

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 56 , Issue 1 , February 1993 , pp. 115 - 119
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Algers, B. 1984a. Animal health in flatdeck rearing of weaned piglets. Zentralblatt fur Veterinarmedizin Reihe A 31: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Algers, B. 1984b. Early weaning and cage rearing of piglets; influence on behaviour. Zentralblatt fur Veterinarmedizin Reihe A 31: 14–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baxter, M. 1982. Environmental determinants of excretory and lying areas in domestic pigs. Applied Animal Ethology 9: 195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, J. K. 1981. Effect of environmental design on the growth and behaviour of weaned pigs. Livestock Production Science 8: 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blecha, F. and Kelley, K. W. 1981. Effects of cold and weaning stressors on the antibody mediated immune response of pigs. Journal of Animal Science 53: 439.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blecha, F., Pollman, D. S. and Nichols, D. A. 1985. Immunological reactions of pigs regrouped at or near weaning. American journal Veterinary Research 46: 1934–1937.Google ScholarPubMed
Fraser, A. F. and Broom, D. M. 1990. Farm animal behaviour and welfare. 3rd ed. Balliere Tindall, London.Google Scholar
Fraser, D. 1978. Observations on the behavioural development of suckling in early-weaned piglets during the first six weeks after birth. Animal Behaviour 26: 22–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafez, E. S. E. 1975. The behaviour of domestic animals. Bailliere Tindal, London.Google Scholar
Jensen, P. 1980. An ethogram of social interaction patterns in group-housed dry sows. Applied Animal Ethology 6: 341–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P. 1982. An analysis of agonistic interaction patterns in group-housed dry sows-aggression regulation through an ‘avoidance order’. Applied Animal Ethology 9: 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiley, M. 1973. Delving into pig behaviour. Pig Farming 21 (7), 42–43, 45.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1987. Codes of recommendations for the welfare of livestock: pigs. Leaflet 702. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, London.Google Scholar
McGlone, J. J. and Curtis, S. E. 1985. Behaviour and performance of weanling pigs in pens equipped with hide areas. Journal of Animal Science 60: 20–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petherick, J. C. 1983. A biological basis for the design space in livestock housing. In Farm animal housing and welfare (ed. Baxter, S. H., Baxter, M. R. and MacCormack, J. A. C.). Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, pp. 103–120.Google Scholar
Putten, G. van and Dammers, J. 1976. A comparative study of the well-being of piglets reared conventionally and in cages. Applied Animal Ethology 2: 339–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schouten, W. G. P. 1986. Rearing conditions and behaviour in pigs. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wageningen.Google Scholar
Sherritt, G. W., Graves, H. B., Gobble, J. L. and Hazlett, V. E. 1974. Effects of mixing pigs during the growing-finishing period. Journal of Animal Science 39: 834–837.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegel, S. and Castellan, N. J. 1988. Non-parametric statistics for the behavioural sciences 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Symoens, J. and Brande, M. van den 1969. Prevention and cure of aggressiveness in pigs using the sedative Azaperone. Veterinary Record 85: 64–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, E. O. 1975. Sociobiology — the new synthesis. Belknap Press, London.Google Scholar