Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T04:26:05.553Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of changing straw provision on the feeding behaviour and activity of growing pigs given food through single-space feeders

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

C. A. Morgan ,
L. A. Deans ,
A. B. Lawrence  and
B. L. Nielsen
C. A. Morgan
Affiliation:
Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
L. A. Deans
Affiliation:
Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
A. B. Lawrence
Affiliation:
Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
B. L. Nielsen
Affiliation:
Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
Get access

Abstract

In a previous experiment the provision of straw to group-housed pigs increased the number of daily feeder visits. This effect of straw is comparable with conditions of reduced social competition for access to the feeder. The aim of this experiment was to investigate if changing straw provision within a pen resulted in similar and reversible effects in this behaviour. One hundred and twenty male pigs (41·1 (s.e. 0·43) kg) were used in three blocks each of four pens of 10 pigs. In each block of 42 days duration one pen had no straw throughout (treatment 1); one pen had no straw for 21 days (period 1) followed by straw for 21 days (period 2) (2); one pen had straw followed by no straw (3) and one pen had straw throughout (4). The pens were situated in a naturally ventilated building with light from 06.00 to 20.00 h. Each pen had a kennel, a lying area and a single-space computerized feeder for recording feeding behaviour. The pigs’ activity was recorded on video in the 2nd and 5th weeks of each block. The number of feeder visits was slightly higher for pigs with straw (1: 9·69 v. 4: 10·46) but this was not significant (P > 0·05). The effect was more marked for treatment 2 where the visits increased (P < 0·01) from period 1 (8·52) to period 2 (10·64) and for treatment 3 where they decreased (11·20 v. 10·10). Pigs without straw (treatment 1) spent more time in the kennel than those with straw (treatment 4) (P < 0·05). For treatment 2 the proportion of time spent in the kennel fell from 0·607 in period 1 to 0·288 in period 2 (P < 0·01). There was a general trend for more activity and more lying outside the kennel when straw was provided. The effect of straw provision was not as marked as that seen previously; nevertheless changing straw provision (treatments 2 and 3) did result in an increase in feeder visits with straw, probably related to the increase in general activity and lying outside in the area adjacent to the feeder.

Keywords

behaviourpigsstraw
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 68 , Issue 1 , February 1999 , pp. 19 - 26
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1999

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.)

References

Bigelow, J. A. and Houpt, T. R. 1988. Feeding and drinking patterns in young pigs. Physiology and Behavior 43: 99–109.Google Scholar
Haer, L. C. M. de and Vries, A. G. de. 1993. Feed intake patterns of and feed digestibility in growing pigs housed individually or in groups. Livestock Production Science 33: 277–292.Google Scholar
Horgan, G. W. and Sword, A. M. 1995. Statistical methods for repeated measures data. Scottish Agricultural Statistics Service, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Johnson, K. G. and Cabanac, M. 1982. Homeostatic competition in rats fed at varying distances from a thermoneutral refuge. Physiology and Behavior 29: 715–720.Google Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1990. Genstat 5 reference manual. Rothamsted Experimental Station. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Mendl, M. and Deag, J. M. 1995. How useful are the concepts of alternative strategy and coping strategy in applied studies of social behaviour? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 44: 119–137.Google Scholar
Meyer, B., Hagelso, A. M., Hansen, L. L. and Jeppersen, L. L. 1984. Effect of environment and rank order on agonistic behaviour in pigs. Proceedings of the international congress on applied ethology in farm animals (ed. Unshelm, J. Putten, G. Van and Zeeb, K.), pp. 162–165. Kiel, Germany.Google Scholar
Minitab, Inc. 1992. Minitab, release 9. Liant Software Corporation, State College, PA.Google Scholar
Morgan, C. A., Deans, L. A., Lawrence, A. B. and Nielsen, B. L. 1998a. The effects of straw bedding on the feeding and social behaviour of growing pigs fed by means of single-space feeders. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 58: 23–33.Google Scholar
Morgan, C. A. Nielsen, B. L., Lawrence, A. B. and Mendle, M. T. Describing the social environment and its effects on food intake and growth In A quantitative biology of the pig (ed. Kyriazakis, I.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxford. In press.Google Scholar
Nielsen, B. L., Lawrence, A. B. and Whittemore, C. T. 1996a. Effect of individual housing on the feeding behaviour of previously group housed growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 45: 63–78.Google Scholar
Nielsen, B. L., Lawrence, A. B. and Whittemore, C. T. 1996b. Feeding behaviour of growing pigs using single or multi-space feeders. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 47: 235–246.Google Scholar
Scottish Agricultural College. 1997. The farm management handbook 1997/98. Scottish Agricultural College, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Von Felde, A., Roehe, R., Looft, H. and Kalm, E. 1996. Genetic association between feed intake behaviour at different stages of growth of group-housed boars. Livestock Production Science 47: 11–22.Google Scholar
Wemelsfelder, F., Haskell, M., Mendl, M., Calvert, S. and Lawrence, A. 1996. The effect of housing with or without substrate on responsiveness to novelty in growing pigs. Proceedings of the 30th international congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology, Guelph, Ontario (ed. Duncan, I. J. H., Widowski, T. M. and Haley, D. B.), p. 69.Google Scholar