Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T02:41:14.876Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The development of harmful social behaviour in pigs with intact tails and different enrichment backgrounds in two housing systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

H. A. Van de Weerd ,
C. M. Docking ,
J. E. L. Day  and
S. A. Edwards
H. A. Van de Weerd*
Affiliation:
University of Newcastle, School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, King George VI Building, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK
C. M. Docking
Affiliation:
ADAS Pig Research Unit, Terrington St Clement, King's Lynn, Norfolk PE34 4PW, UK
J. E. L. Day
Affiliation:
ADAS Pig Research Unit, Terrington St Clement, King's Lynn, Norfolk PE34 4PW, UK
S. A. Edwards
Affiliation:
University of Newcastle, School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, King George VI Building, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The present study compared the performance and development of adverse behaviours of pigs with intact tails, when housed in a straw-bedded system or a part-slatted system enriched with a commercial device. The pigs had previously received different enrichment treatments (rooting box, liquid dispenser, straw bedding or none), either in the farrowing crate or with their lactating dam or post weaning. The pigs were mixed in groups at 10 weeks of age and from then on, every 2 weeks, behavioural observations were performed, focusing mainly on harmful social behaviour and enrichment use. The study showed that pigs with undocked tails can be at high risk of tail biting in part-slatted systems, whereas the straw bedding prevented the development of tail biting. The immediate effects of the environment seemed to exert a greater influence on the development of adverse behaviour than early life enrichment and adding a simple enrichment device could not compensate for the deficiencies in the barren environment of the part-slatted system. In order to prevent vice, functional design of environmental enrichment is required.

Keywords

behaviourenrichmentpigstail biting
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 80 , Issue 3 , June 2005 , pp. 289 - 298
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2005

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.)

Footnotes

†Pig and Poultry Research Group, ADAS Gleadthorpe, Meden Vale, Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, NG20 9PF, UK.

References

Arey, D. S. 1993. The effect of bedding on the behaviour and welfare of pigs. Animal Welfare 2: 235–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arey, D. S. and Franklin, M. F. 1995. Effects of straw and unfamiliarity on fighting between newly mixed growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 45: 23–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beattie, V. E., O'Connell, N. E. and Moss, B. W. 2000. Influence of environmental enrichment on the behaviour, performance and meat quality of domestic pigs. Livestock Production Science 65: 71–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beattie, V. E., Sneddon, I. A. and Walker, N. 1993. Behaviour and productivity of the domestic pig in barren and enriched environments. In Livestock environment IV. Proceedings of the fourth international symposium of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, pp. 43–50.Google Scholar
Beattie, V. E., Sneddon, I. A., Walker, N. and Weatherup, R. N. 2001. Environmental enrichment of intensive pig housing using spent mushroom compost. Animal Science 72: 35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beattie, V. E., Walker, N. and Sneddon, I. A. 1996. Influence of maternal experience on pig behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 46: 159–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, J. K. 1981. Some behavioural deviations in weaned domestic pigs: persistent inguinal nose thrusting, and tail and ear biting. Animal Production 33: 325–332.Google Scholar
Breuer, K., Sutcliffe, M. E. M., Mercer, J. T., Rance, K. A., Beattie, V. E., Sneddon, I. A. and Edwards, S. A. 2003. The effect of breed on the development of adverse social behaviours in pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 84: 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burfoot, A., Kay, R. M. and Corning, S. 1995. A scoring method to assess damage caused by aggression between sows after mixing. Animal Production 60: 564 (abstr. ).Google Scholar
Da, J. E. L., Burfoot, A., Docking, C. M., Whittaker, X., Spoolder, H. A. M. and Edwards, S. A. 2002. The effects of prior experience of straw and the level of straw provision on the behaviour of growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 76: 189–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, J. E. L., Kyriazakis, I. and Lawrence, A. B. 1996. An investigation into the causation of chewing behaviour in growing pigs: the role of exploration and feeding motivation. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 48: 47–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, J. E. L., Spoolder, H. A. M. and Edwards, S. A. 2001. Straw as environmental enrichment: which properties do growing pigs find behaviourally rewarding? In Animal welfare considerations in livestock housing systems. Proceedings of the international symposium of the CIGR, second technical section, pp. 157–167.Google Scholar
Fraser, D. 1983/84. The role of behavior in swine production: a review of research. Applied Animal Ethology 11: 317–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D. 1985. Selection of bedded and unbedded areas by pigs in relation to environmental temperature and behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 14: 117–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D., Phillips, P. A., Thompson, B. K. and Tennessen, T. 1991.Effect of straw on the behaviour of growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 30: 307–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guy, J. H., Rowlinson, P., Chadwick, J. P. and Ellis, M. 2002. Growth performance and carcass characteristics of two genotypes of growing-finishing pig in three different housing systems. Animal Science 74: 493–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemsworth, P. H., Barnett, J. L., Hansen, C. and Gonyou, H. W. 1986. The influence of early contact with humans on subsequent behavioural response of pigs to humans. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 15: 55–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, E. J., Jones, T. A., Guise, H. J., Penny, R. H. C. and Hoste, S. 1999. Tail biting in pigs. 1. The prevalence at six UK abattoirs and the relationship of tail biting with docking, sex and other carcass damage. Pig Journal – Refereed Section 43: 18–32.Google Scholar
Hunter, E. J., Jones, T. A., Guise, H. J., Penny, R. H. C. and Hoste, S. 2001. The relationship between tail biting in pigs, docking procedure and other management practices. The Veterinary Journal 161: 72–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jensen, M. B., Kyriazakis, I. and Lawrence, A. B. 1993. The activity and straw directed behaviour of pigs offered foods with different crude protein content. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 37: 211–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jericho, K. W. F. and Church, T. L. 1972. Cannibalism in pigs. Canadian Veterinary Journal 13(7): 156–159.Google ScholarPubMed
Jong de, I. C., Ekkel, E. D., Burgwal van de, J. A., Lambooij, E., Korte, S. M., Ruis, M. A. W., Koolhaas, J. M. and Blokhuis, H. J. 1998. Effects of strawbedding on physiological responses to stressors and behavior in growing pigs. Physiology and Behavior 64: 303–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, C. A. P., Bruce, J. M., Fowler, V. R. and English, P. R. 1995. A comparison of productivity and welfare of growing pigs in four intensive systems. Livestock Production Science 43: 265–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinnon, A. J., Edwards, S. A., Stephens, D. B. and Walters, D. E. 1989. Behaviour of groups of weaner pigs in three different housing systems. British Veterinary Journal 145: 367–372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mench, J. A. 1998. Environmental enrichment and the importance of exploratory behavior. In Second nature: environmental enrichment for captive animals (ed. Sheperdson, D. J., Mellen, and Hutchins, .), pp. 30–46. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Moinard, C., Mendl, M., Nicol, C. J. and Green, L. E. 2003. A case control study of on-farm risk factors for tail biting in pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 81: 333–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, C. A., Deans, L. A., Lawrence, A. B. and Nielsen, B. L. 1998. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearce, G. P., Paterson, A. M. and Pearce, A. N. 1989. The influence of pleasant and unpleasant handling and the provision of toys on the growth and behaviour of male pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 23: 27–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, V., Simonsen, H. B. and Lawson, L. G. 1995. The effect of environmental stimulation on the development of behaviour in pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 45: 215–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruiterkamp, W. A. 1985. [The behaviour of grower pigs in relation to housing systems.] Ph.D. thesis, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Ruiterkamp, W. A. 1987. The behaviour of grower pigs in relation to housing systems. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 35: 67–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushen, J., Lawrence, A. B. and Terlouw, E. M. 1993. The motivational basis of stereotypies. In Stereotypic animal behaviour. Fundamentals and applications to welfare (ed.Lawrence, A. B. and Rushen, J.), pp. 41–65. CAB International, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Sambraus, H. H. 1985. Mouth-based anomalous syndromes. In World animal science. A5. Ethology of farm animals. A comprehensive study of the behavioural features of common farm animals, pp. 391–422.Google Scholar
Schaefer, A. L., Salomons, M. O., Tong, A. K. W., Sather, A. P. and Lepage, P. 1990. The effect of environment enrichment on aggression in newly weaned pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 27: 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schouten, W. G. P. 1987. Abnormal behaviour in piglets with espect to rearing conditions. In Welfare aspects of pig rearing (ed. Marx, D., Granvogl, A. and Smidt, D.), pp. 101–116. Commission of the European Communities, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
Schouten, W. G. P. 1991. Effects of rearing on subsequent performance in pigs. Pig News and Information 12: 245–247.Google Scholar
Schrøder-Petersen, D. L. and Simonsen, H. B. 2001. Tail biting in pigs. Veterinary Journal 162: 196–210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Statistical Packages for the Social Sciences. 2001. SPSS, version 11.0. SPSS Inc., Chicago.Google Scholar
Van Putt en, G. 1969. An investigation into tail-biting among fattening pigs. British Veterinary Journal 125: 511–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van de Weerd, H. A., Docking, C. M., Day, J. E. L., Avery, P. J. and Edwards, S. A. 2003. A systematic approach towards developing environmental enrichment for pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 84: 101–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallgren, P. and Lindalh, E. 1996. The influence of tail biting on performance of fattening pigs. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 37: 453–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weaver, S. A., Aherne, F. X., Meaney, M. J., Schaefer, A. L. and Dxon, W. T. 2000. Neonatal handling permanently alters hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function, behaviour, and body weight in boars. Journal of Endocrinology 164: 349–359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, R. J., Carruthers, J. and Lawrence, A. B. 1994. The effect of a foraging device (the ‘Edinburgh Foodball’) on the behaviour of pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 39: 237–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zonderland, J. J., Fillerup, M., Van Reenen, C. G., Hopster, H. and Spoolder, H. A. M. 2003 [revention and treatment of tail biting in weaned piglets.] Praktijkrapport Varkens 18, Animal Sciences Group, Wageningen UR.Google Scholar