Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T15:17:19.211Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Peri-natal environmental effects on maternal behaviour, pituitary and adrenal activation, and the progress of parturition in the primiparous sow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

S Jarvis ,
BT Reed ,
AB Lawrence ,
SK Calvert  and
J Stevenson
S Jarvis*
Affiliation:
Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Sustainable Livestock Systems, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
BT Reed
Affiliation:
Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
AB Lawrence
Affiliation:
Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Sustainable Livestock Systems, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
SK Calvert
Affiliation:
Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Sustainable Livestock Systems, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
J Stevenson
Affiliation:
Animal Behaviour and Welfare, Sustainable Livestock Systems, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Maternal behaviour in free-ranging sows is normally performed in an isolated nest that the sow has built during the pre-parturient period. Consequently there is much concern over the use of restrictive farrowing crates, in which manipulable substrates are often not provided, for parturient sows under commercial conditions. This study examined the impact of the provision of space and substrate on the performance of maternal behaviour by gilts (primiparous sows) on physiological indicators of stress and on the progress of parturition. Gilts had an indwelling jugular catheter implanted 12 days before their expected farrowing date. At 5 days before expected farrowing, 34 gilts were placed in one of four farrowing treatments: crate without straw (C, n = 8), crate with straw (CS, n = 9), pen without straw (P, n = 9) or pen with straw (PS, n = 8). Behavioural observations of gilts and piglets were made during an 8 h period after the expulsion of the first piglet. Blood samples were taken via a catheter extension to minimise disturbance throughout the parturition period. Gilts in all treatments were most active in the first 2 h: performing more standing/walking, substrate-directed and piglet-directed behaviour. This active phase was followed by inactivity and passivity, as has been seen in free-ranging sows. However, this temporal profile of behaviour was more pronounced in the penned gilts (P and PS), which were more active during the first 2 h than the crated gilts (C and CS). Gilts in crates spent longer sitting throughout the 8 h period and tended to show more savaging of their piglets. Savaging gilts were found to be more active and responsive to piglets. The provision of straw did not alter gilt behaviour but did alter piglet behaviour, with piglets that were born into environments with no straw (C and P) spending more time next to the gilt's udder. The provision of straw increased the length of parturition (CS and PS), but this did not have detrimental effects on piglet survival. Plasma cortisol was unaffected by space or substrate, however, plasma ACTH was found to be highest in C gilts during the second hour of parturition. Plasma oxytocin was unaffected by space or substrate, however, there was a positive relationship between plasma oxytocin and unresponsiveness to piglets. In conclusion, it appears that farrowing crates thwart interactions between the gilt and her piglets, and that the provision of space during parturition, irrespective of straw availability, facilitates the performance of maternal behaviour that more closely resembles that performed by free-ranging sows.

Keywords

animal welfareenvironmentfarrowing cratematernal behaviourparturitionpig
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , May 2004 , pp. 171 - 181
Copyright
© 2004 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Ahlstrom S, Jarvis S and Lawrence A B 2002 Savaging gilts are more restless and more responsive to piglets during the expulsive phase of parturition. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 76: 83–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Algers, B, Rojanasthiens, S and Uvnas-Moberg, K 1990 The relationship between teat stimulation, oxytocin release and grunting rate in the sow during nursing. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 26: 267–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arey, D S 1997 Behavioural observations of peri-parturient sows and the development of alternative farrowing accommodation: a review. Animal Welfare 6: 217–229Google Scholar
Baxter, S H 1974 Intensive housing and its effects on farm animals. South African Journal of Animal Science 4: 259–264Google Scholar
Beynon, N 1990 Pigs — A Guide to Management. The Crowood Press: Wiltshire, UKGoogle Scholar
Biensen, N J, von Borell, E H and Ford, S P 1996 Effects of space allocation and temperature on periparturient maternal behaviours, steroid concentrations, and piglet growth rates. Journal of Animal Science 74: 2641–2648CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blackshaw, J K, Blackshaw, A W, Thomas, F J and Newman, F W 1994 Comparison of behaviour patterns of sows and litters in a farrowing crate and a farrowing pen. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 39: 281–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, J and Hagelsø, A M 1990 Getting-up and lying down behaviours of loose-housed sows and social contacts between sows and piglets during day I and day 8 after parturition. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 25: 61–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brent, G 1986 Housing the Pig. Farming Press Ltd: Ipswich, UKGoogle Scholar
Brooks, A N 1992 Prostaglandin E2 stimulates adrenocorti-cotrophin and cortisol secretion via a hypothalamic site of action in fetal sheep. Journal of Developmental Physiology 18: 173–177Google Scholar
Cronin, G M, Schirmer, T H, McCallum, T H, Smith, J A and Butler, K L 1993 The effects of providing sawdust to preparturient sows in farrowing crates on sow behaviour, the duration of parturition, and the occurence of intra-partum stillborn piglets. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 36: 301–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, G M, Simpson, J and Hemsworth, P H 1996 The effects of the gestation and farrowing environments on sow and piglet behaviour and piglet survival and growth in early lactation. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 46: 175–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damm, B I, Vestergaard, K S, Schroder-Petersen, D L and Ladewig, J 2000 The effect of branches on prepartum nest building in gilts with access to straw. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 69: 113–124CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duncan, W F, Lincoln, D W and Naylor, A M 1990 Plasma cortisol is increased during inhibition of LH secretion by central LHRH in the ewe. Neuroendocrinology 51: 705–712Google Scholar
English, P, Smith, W and MacLean, A 1977 The Sow — Improving Her Efficiency. Farming Press Ltd: Ipswich, UKGoogle Scholar
Fahrbach, S E, Morrell, J I and Pfaff, D W 1985 Possible role for endogenous oxytocin in estrogen-facilitated maternal behaviour in rats. Neuroendocrinology 40: 526–532CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fraser, A F and Broom, D M 1990 Farm Animal Behaviour and Welfare, 3rd Edition. Bailliere Tindall: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D 1984 The role of behaviour in swine production: a review of research. Applied Animal Ethology 11: 317–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D, Phillips, P A and Thompson, B K 1997 Farrowing behaviour and stillbirth in two environments: an evaluation of the restraint-stillbirth hypothesis. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 55: 51–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, I 1997 Controlled Reproduction in Pigs. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Harris, M J, Bergeron, R and Gonyou, H W 2001 Parturient behaviour and offspring-directed aggression in farmed wild boar of three genetic lines. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 74: 153–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, R 1964 Animal Machines. Vincent Stuart: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S, Calvert, S K, Stevenson, J, van Leeuwen, N and Lawrence, A B 2002 Pituitary-adrenal activation in pre-parturient pigs (Sus scrofa) is associated with behavioural restriction due to lack of space rather than nesting substrate. Animal Welfare 11: 371–384Google Scholar
Jarvis, S, Lawrence, A B, McLean, K, Chirnside, J, Deans, L A and Calvert, S K 1998 The effects of environment on plasma cortisol and beta-endorphin in the parturient pig and the involvement of endogenous opioids. Animal Reproduction Science 52: 139–151CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jarvis, S, Lawrence, A B, McLean, K A, Deans, L A, Chirnside, J and Calvert, S K 1997 The effect of farrowing environment on behavioural activity, ACTH, beta-endorphin and cortisol in pre-farrowing gilts. Animal Science 65: 465–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S, McLean, K A, Calvert, S K, Deans, L A, Chirnside, J and Lawrence, A B 1999 The responsiveness of sows to their piglets in relation to the length of parturition and the involvement of endogenous opioids. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 63: 195–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P 1986 Observations on the maternal behaviour of freeranging domestic pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 16: 131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, J E T 1966 Observations on parturition in the sow. Part 11: The parturient and post-parturient phases. British Veterinary Journal 122: 471–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, A B, Petherick, J C, McLean, K, Deans, L, Chirnside, J, Vaughan, A, Clutton, E and Terlouw, E M 1994 The effect of environment on behaviour, plasma cortisol and prolactin in parturient sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 39: 313–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, A B, Petherick, J C, McLean, K, Gilbert, C, Chapman, C and Russell, J A 1992 Naloxone prevents interruption of parturition and increases plasma oxytocin following environmental disturbance in parturient sows. Physiology and Behavior 52: 917–923CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MLC 2000 Pig Yearbook 1999. Meat and Livestock Commission: Milton Keynes, UKGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, C A, Ascher, J A, Monroe, Y L and Prange, A J 1982 Oxytocin induces maternal behaviour in virgin female rats. Science 216: 648–650CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petersen, V, Recen, B and Vestergaard, K 1990 Behaviour of sows and piglets during farrowing under free-range conditions. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 26: 169–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrides, J S, Mueller, G P, Kalogeras, K T, Chrousos, G P, Gold, P W and Deuster, P A 1994 Exercise-induced activation of the ERA axis — marked differences in the sensitivity to glucocorticoid suppression. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 79: 377–383Google Scholar
Randall G C B 1972 Observations on parturition in the sow I: Factors associated with the delivery of the piglets and their subsequent behaviour. Veterinary Record 90: 178–182Google Scholar
Taverne, M AM 1992 Physiology of parturition. Animal Reproduction Science 28: 433–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thodberg, K, Jensen, K H, Herskin, M S and Jorgensen, E 1999 Influence of environmental stimuli on nest building and farrowing behaviour in domestic sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 63: 131–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thornton, S N, Leng, G, Bicknell, R J, Chapman, C and Purdew, T 1986 Vasopressin, but not oxytocin is released in response to water deprivation in conscious goats. Journal of Endocrinology 110: 335–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weary, D M, Pajor, E A, Fraser, D and Honkanen, A M 1996 Sow body movements that crush piglets: a comparison between two types of farrowing accommodation. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 49: 149–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whatson, T S and Bertram, J M 1983 Some observations on mother-infant interactions in the pig (Sus scrofa). Applied Animal Ethology 9: 253–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, C 1980 Pig Production — The Scientific and Practical Principles. Longman Group Ltd: London, UKGoogle Scholar