Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T07:25:44.040Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of floor area allowance on performance of growing pigs kept on fully slatted floors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

S. A. Edwards ,
A. W. Armsby  and
H. H. Spechter
S. A. Edwards
Affiliation:
ADAS, Terrington Experimental Husbandry Farm, Terrington St Clement, Kings Lynn PE34 4PW
A. W. Armsby
Affiliation:
ADAS, Terrington Experimental Husbandry Farm, Terrington St Clement, Kings Lynn PE34 4PW
H. H. Spechter
Affiliation:
AFRC Statistics Department, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden AL5 2JQ
Get access

Abstract

The experiment compared four different space allowances for growing pigs housed on fully slatted floors. Space allowance (A m2) was defined in relation to live weight (M kg) of the pigs according to the equation A = kM0·67, using values for the constant (it) of 0·024, 0·027, 0·030 and 0·034. Six replicate pens of 12 pigs were housed on each treatment in a controlled environment building. Food was given ad libitum and from 34 kg until slaughter at 85 kg pigs were individually weighed each week and the pen size was adjusted according to the appropriate equation. Increasing space allowance increased live-weight gain (844, 862, 883, 897 (s.e.d. 14·4) g/day). Differences in killing-out proportion reduced the effect on final carcass weight (63·3, 63·9, 64·1, 64·5 (s.e.d 0·82) kg). Daily food intake was unaffected by treatment but food conversion ratio was significantly poorer at the lowest space allowance (2·70, 2·56, 2·60, 2·59 (s.e.d. 0·043) kg/kg). Economic analyses of the results indicated an adverse effect on profitability of space allowance less than that defined by the equation A(m2) = 0·027 M0·67 (kg). A minimum allowance defined by the equation A (m2) = 0·030 M0·67 is recommended in commercial practice for pigs in fully slatted housing.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 46 , Issue 3 , June 1988 , pp. 453 - 459
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1988

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

REFERENCES

Anonymous. 1981. How much space per pig? Pig International 11: 79–80.Google Scholar
Baker, R. J. and Nelder, J. A. 1978. The GLIM system. Release 3. Numerical Algorithm Group, Oxford.Google Scholar
Baxter, M. 1985. Social space requirements of pigs. In Social Space for Domestic Animals (ed. Zayan, R.), pp. 116–127. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baxter, S. H. and Petherick, J. C. 1983. Space requirements of pigs. Animal Production 36: 531 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Boon, C. R. 1981. The effect of departures from lower critical temperature on the group postural behaviour of pigs. Animal Production 33: 71–79.Google Scholar
Bruce, J. M. and Boon, C. R. 1984. A note on the relationship between induced mechanical stress and thermal stress in recumbent pigs. Animal Production 38: 309–311.Google Scholar
Ewbank, R. and Bryant, M. J. 1972. Aggressive behaviour amongst groups of domesticated pigs kept at various stocking rates. Animal Behaviour 20: 21–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanrahan, T. J. 1981. Observations on the effects of stocking rate on the performance of gilts and boars to bacon weight. In The Welfare of Pigs (ed. Sybesma, W.), pp. 141–147. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kornegay, E. T. and Notter, D. R. 1984. Effects of floor space and number of pigs per pen on performance. Pig News and Information 5: 23–33.Google Scholar
Krider, J. L., Albright, J. L., Plumlee, M. P., Conrad, J. H., Sinclair, C. L., Underwood, L., Jones, R. G. and Harrington, R. B. 1975. Magnesium supplementation, space and docking effects on swine performance and behavior. Journal of Animal Science 40: 1027–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1977. GENSTAT V, Mark 4.01. Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Hertfordshire.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1987. Pig Yearbook. Table 3.15. Meat and Livestock Commission, Bletchley.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1983. Codes of recommendations for the welfare of livestock — pigs. Leaflet 702, Para 45. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Alnwick.Google Scholar
NCR-89 Committee on Confinement Management of Swine. 1986. Effect of space allowance and tylosin feeding on performance of growing-finishing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 62: 871–874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, D. A., Ames, D. R. and Hines, R. H. 1981. Effect of temperature on performance and efficiency of finishing swine. Livestock Environment II, pp. 376–379. American Society of Agricultural Engineering, Michigan.Google Scholar
Peet, B. 1984. Buying fully-flatted finishing houses. Pig Farming 32: (2), 32–35.Google Scholar
Petherick, J. C. 1983. A biological basis for the design of space in livestock housing. In Farm Animal Housing and Welfare (ed. Baxter, S. H., Baxter, M. R. and MacCormack, J. A. D.), pp. 103–120. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.Google Scholar
Petherick, J. C. and Baxter, S. H. 1981. Modelling the static spatial requirements of livestock. In Modelling, Design and Evaluation of Agricultural Buildings (ed. MacCormack, J. A. D.), pp. 75–82. Commission Internationale de Genie Rurale, Section II Seminar. Scottish Farm Buildings Investigation Unit, Aberdeen.Google Scholar
Petherick, C. and Baxter, S. 1982. Space requirements for pigs. Pig Farming 30: (12), 88 and 93.Google Scholar
Randolph, J. H., Cromwell, G. L., Stahly, T. S. and Kratzer, D. D. 1981. Effects of group size and space allowance on performance and behaviour of swine. Journal of Animal Science 53: 922–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A. T. 1984. Pig environment. Booklet 2410. pp. 30. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Alnwick.Google Scholar
Spencer, G. S. G. 1985. Hormonal systems regulating growth. A review. Livestock Production Science 12: 31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warnier, A. and Zayan, R. 1985. Effects of confinement upon behavioural, hormonal responses and production indices in fattening pigs. In Social Space for Domestic Animals (ed. Zayan, R.), pp. 128–150. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar