Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T04:59:02.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feeding behaviour of pigs in groups monitored by a computerized feeding system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. J. Young  and
A. B. Lawrence
R. J. Young
Affiliation:
Institute of Ecology and Resource Management, University of Edinburgh, Kings Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
A. B. Lawrence
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, Scottish Agricultural College, Edinburgh, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0QE
Get access

Abstract

Electronic feeding systems for progeny testing pigs, allow selection to occur under conditions found on commercial farms. This paper reports on the feeding behaviour of six groups of 10 pigs, balanced for sex and initial body weight (mean starting and finishing weight: 32·1 kg v. 68·5 kg), monitored on such a system, for an average of 38 days. These data represent 26 542 feeder visits for which the pen, identity of the pig, feeder entry and exit times, and the amount of food consumed are known. The results show significant time-of-day effects for frequency of feeder visits, feeding rates, mean feeder occupation time, mean food intake per feeder visit, total food intake and total feeder duration (all P < 0·001). A single peak in feeding behaviour was observed between 13·00 and 16·00 h. Significant pen effects were observed on all feeding variables (e.g. feeder occupation times P < 0·05) with the exception of total food intake (P > 0·05). Individual pigs were found to possess different types of meal regulation, as measured by prandial correlations. Pens were found to have significantly non-random sequences of feeder entries (e.g. yen 1, P < 0·001). The range of feeder visits (three to 69) observed, was higher than reported in any previous study. Physical performance on the system, in terms of gain in body weight and total food intake was best predicted by total feeder occupation time, suggesting that individual pigs could adapt to the physical and social constraints imposed by the system, by altering aspects of their feeding behaviour. The results suggest that feeder access competition resulting from social synchrony and facilitation strongly influenced the feeding behaviour of pigs on this computerized food intake recording system.

Keywords

electronic feedingfeeding behaviourpigssocial behaviour
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 58 , Issue 1 , February 1994 , pp. 145 - 152
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1994

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

Auffray, P. and Marcilloux, J.-C. 1980. Analyse de la sequences alimentaire du pore, du sevrage a l'etat adulte. Reproduction Nutrition Development 20: 1625–1632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auffray, P. and Marcilloux, J. C. 1983. [An analysis of feeding pattern in the adult pig.] Reproduction Nutrition Development 23: 517–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balagura, S. and Coscina, D. V. 1968. Periodicity of food intake in the rat as measured by an operant response. Physiology and Behavior 3: 641–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Begon, M., Harper, J. L. and Townsend, C. R. 1986. Ecology: individuals, populations and communities. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.Google Scholar
Bigelow, J. A. and Houpt, R. T. 1988. Feeding and drinking patterns in young pigs. Physiology and Behaviour 43: 99–109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carlstead, K. 1986. Predictability of feeding: its effect on agonistic behaviour and growth in grower pigs. Applied Animal Behavioural Science 16: 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, D. A. 1978. Socially facilitated behavior. Quarterly Review of Biology 53: 373–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeCastro, J. M. 1988. The meal patterns of rats shifts from postprandial regulation to preprandial regulation when only five meals per day are scheduled. Physiology and Behavior 43: 739–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeCastro, J. M. and Balagura, S. 1976. A preprandial intake in weanling rats ingesting a high fat diet. Physiology and Behavior 17: 401–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feddes, J. J. R., Young, B. A. and DeShazer, J. A. 1989. Influence of temperature and light on feeding behaviour of pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 23: 215–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonyou, H. W. and Stricklin, W. R. 1981. Eating behavior of beef cattle groups fed from a single stall or trough. Applied Animal Ethology 7: 123–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haer, L. C. M. de and Merks, J. W. M. 1992. Patterns of daily food intake in growing pigs. Animal Production 54: 95–104.Google Scholar
Haer, L. C. M. de, Merks, J. W. M., Kooper, H. G., Buiting, G. A. J. and van Hattum, J. A. 1992. A note on the IVOG-station: a feeding station to record the individual food intake of group-housed animals. Animal Production 54: 160–162.Google Scholar
Hansen, L. L., Hagelso, A. M. and Madsen, A. 1982. Behavioural results and performance of bacon pigs fed ad libitum from one or several self-feeders. Applied Animal Ethology 8: 307–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hepper, P. G. 1991. Kin recognition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hsia, L. C. 1981. Studies on social facilitation in the feeding behaviour of the pig. Ph.D. thesis. University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Hsia, L. C. and Wood-Gush, D. G. M. 1983. A note on social facilitation and competition in the feeding behaviour of pigs. Animal Production 37: 149–152.Google Scholar
Jensen, P. 1982. An analysis of agnonistic interaction patterns in group-housed dry sows — aggression regulation through an avoidance order. Applied Animal Ethology 9: 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machlis, L. 1977. An analysis of the temporal patterning of pecking in chicks. Behaviour 63: 1–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Magnen, J. 1985. Hunger. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Martin, P. and Bateson, P. 1986. Measuring behaviour: an introductory guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Montgomery, G. W., Flux, D. S. and Carr, J. R. 1978. Feeding patterns in pigs: the effects of amino acid deficiency. Physiology and Behavior 20: 693–698.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nienaber, J. A., McDonald, T. P., Hahn, G. L. and Chen, Y. R. 1991. Group feeding behavior of swine. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 34: 289–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savory, C. J. 1981. Correlations between meals and inter-meal intervals in Japanese Quail and their significance in the control of feeding. Behavioural Processes 6: 23–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schouten, W. G. P. 1986. Rearing conditions and behaviour in pigs. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wageningen.Google Scholar
Sibly, R. M., Nott, H. M. R. and Fletcher, D. J. 1990. Splitting behaviour into bouts. Animal Behaviour 39: 63–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slater, P. J. B. 1974. The temporal pattern of feeding in the Zebra finch. Animal Behaviour 22: 506–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stricklin, W. R. and Gonyou, H. W. 1981. Dominance and eating behaviour of beef cattle fed from a single stall. Applied Animal Ethology 7: 135–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tindsley, W. E. C. and Lean, I. J. 1984. Effects of weight range at allocation on production and behaviour in fattening pig groups. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 12: 79–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, A. J. 1989. Genetics of food intake in the pig. In The voluntary food intake of pigs, (ed. Forbes, J. M., Varley, M. A. and Lawrence, T. L. J.), occasional publication, British Society of Animal Production no. 13, pp. 41–50.Google Scholar
Webb, A. J., Brampton, P. R., Smith, S. and Close, S. P. 1990. Electronics in genetic improvements of pigs. Animal Production 50: 576 (abstr.).Google Scholar