Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:14:41.315Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Loose farrowing systems: challenges and solutions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

B Wechsler  and
R Weber
B Wechsler*
Affiliation:
Swiss Federal Veterinary Office, Centre for Proper Housing of Ruminants and Pigs, Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART, 8356 Ettenhausen, Switzerland School of Psychology, University of Exeter, Washington Singer Laboratories, Exeter EX4 4QG, UK
R Weber
Affiliation:
Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station ART, Centre for Proper Housing of Ruminants and Pigs, 8356 Ettenhausen, Switzerland
*
* 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.

The use of farrowing crates is increasingly questioned from an animal welfare point of view. Even so, since a number of attempts to develop loose farrowing systems have been unsuccessful, leading to high levels of piglet mortality due in the main to crushing, many farmers remain sceptical as to whether or not alternative systems can be viable. On the other hand, several European countries have introduced legislation requiring loose farrowing systems, thus promoting research into this type of housing and allowing for performance studies based on large samples of commercial farms. As a consequence of these recent developments, we think it timely to reconsider the evidence available on loose farrowing systems. In our review, we first address the normal peri-parturient behaviour of domestic pigs, as well as studies comparing behaviour and stress physiology in sows kept in both crates and loose systems during farrowing. We then review approaches taken to develop alternative farrowing systems in different countries, and focus lastly on pen, piglet and sow characteristics that contribute to piglet survival in loose farrowing systems. Taking scientific evidence as well as practical experience into account, we conclude that piglet mortality in loose farrowing systems need not exceed that of crate systems. To obtain good performance results, sows due to farrow should be kept individually in sufficiently large pens, structured for preference into a nest area and an activity area. Furthermore, both management and breeding aspects, resulting in high piglet viability and good maternal behaviour, are essential to achieve high production in loose farrowing systems.

Keywords

animal welfarebehaviourfarrowing sowlegislationpen designpiglet mortality
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 16 , Issue 3 , August 2007 , pp. 295 - 307
Copyright
© 2007 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Abbott, TA, Hunter, EJ and Guise, HJ 1996 Survey of management and welfare in outdoor pig production systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 49: 96–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alonso-Spilsbury, M, Mota-Rojas, D, Villanueva-Garcia, D, Martinez-Burnes, J, Orozco, H, Ramirez-Necoechea, R, Lopez Mayagoitia, A and Trujillo, ME 2005 Perinatal asphyxia pathophysiology in pig and human: A review. Animal Reproduction Science 90: 1–30CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andersen, IL, Berg, S and Bøe, KE 2005 Crushing of piglets by the mother sow Sus scrofa - purely accidental or a poor mother? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 93: 229–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arey, DS, Petchey, AM and Fowler, VR 1991 The preparturient behaviour of sows in enriched pens and the effect of preformed nests. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 31: 61–68Google Scholar
Arey, DS 1992 Straw and food as reinforcers for prepartal sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 33: 217–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arey, DS, Petchey, AM and Fowler, VR 1992 The effect of straw on farrowing site choice and nest building behaviour in sows. Animal Production 54: 129–133Google Scholar
Arey, DS and Sancha, ES 1996 Behaviour and productivity of sows and piglets in a family system and in farrowing crates. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 50: 135–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arey, DS 1997 Behavioural observations of peri-parturient sows and the development of alternative farrowing accommodation: A review. Animal Welfare 6: 217–229Google Scholar
Barnett, JL, Hemsworth, PH, Cronin, GM, Jongman, EC and Hutson, GD 2001 A review of the welfare issues of sows and piglets in relation to housing. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 52: 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, RH 1978 The feral hog at Dye Creek Ranch, California. Hilgardia 46: 283–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baxter, MR 1982 The nesting behaviour of sows and its disturbance by confinement at farrowing. In: Bessei, W (ed) Disturbed Behaviour in Farm Animals pp 101–114. Ulmer: Stuttgart, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Baxter, MR 1991 The ‘Freedom’ farrowing system. Farm Building Progress 104: 9–15Google Scholar
Berger, F, Dagorn, J, Le Denmat, M, Quillien, JP, Vaudelet, JC and Signoret, JP 1997 Perinatal losses in outdoor pig breeding: A survey of factors influencing piglet mortality. Annales de Zootechnie 46: 321–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertschinger, HU, Bürgi, E, Eng, V and Wegmann, P 1990 Senkung der Inzidenz von puerperaler Mastitis bei der Sau durch Schutz des Gesäuges vor Verschmutzung. Schweizer Archiv für Tierheilkunde 132: 557–566. [Title translation: Reduction of the incidence of puerperal mastitis in the sow by protection of the mammary gland against faecal contamination]Google Scholar
Blackshaw, JK and Hagelsø, AM 1990 Getting-up and lyingdown behaviour of loose-housed sows and social contacts between sows and piglets during day 1 and day 8 after parturition. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 25: 61–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, JK, Blackshaw, AW, Thomas, FJ and Newman, FW 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
Bøe, K 1993 Maternal behaviour of lactating sows in a loose-housing system. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 35: 327–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bøe, K 1994 Variation in maternal behaviour and production of sows in integrated loose housing systems in Norway. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 41: 53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonde, M, Rousing, T, Badsberg, JH and Sørensen, JT 2004 Associations between lying-down behaviour problems and body condition, limb disorders and skin lesions of lactating sows housed in farrowing crates in commercial sow herds. Livestock Production Science 87: 179–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, LA, Leonard, FC, Lynch, PB and Brophy, P 2000 Influence of housing system during gestation on the behaviour and welfare of gilts in farrowing crates. Animal Science 71: 561–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, LA, Leonard, FC, Lynch, PB and Brophy, P 2002 Effect of gestation housing on behaviour and skin lesions of sows in farrowing crates. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 76: 119–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradshaw, RH and Broom, DM 1999 A comparison of the behaviour and performance of sows and piglets in crates and oval pens. Animal Science 69: 327–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchenauer, D 1981 Untersuchungen zum Verhalten von ferkelführenden Sauen im Kastenstand und in der Laufbucht. KTBL-Schrift 264 pp 142–150. KTBL: Darmstadt, Germany. [Title translation: Investigations into the behaviour of lactating sows kept in a crate or loose-farrowing pen]Google Scholar
Buré, RG and Houwers, HWJ 1993 Verhalten und Leistung von Sauen in einer frei zugänglichen Abferkelabteilung. KTBL-Schrift 356 pp 167–176. KTBL: Darmstadt, Germany. [Title translation: Behaviour and performance of lactating sows kept in an integrated group housing system]Google Scholar
Buss, K-D 1972 Ein Vergleich des Nestbauverhaltens beim Wildschwein und Hausschwein. PhD Thesis, University of Hannover, Germany. [Title translation: A comparison of nest building behaviour in domestic pigs and wild boars]Google Scholar
Collins, ER Jr, Kornegay, ET and Bonnette, ED 1987 The effects of two confinement systems on the performance of nursing sows and their litters. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 17: 51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, GM, Barnett, JL, Hodge, FM, Smith, JA and McCallum, TH 1991 The welfare of pigs in two farrowing/lactation environments: Cortisol responses of sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 32: 117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, GM and Cropley, JA 1991 The effect of piglet stimuli on the posture changing behaviour of recently farrowed sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 30: 167–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, GM and Smith, JA 1992a Suckling behaviour of sows in farrowing crates and straw-bedded pens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 33: 175–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, GM and Smith, JA 1992b Effects of accommodation type and straw bedding around parturition and during lactation on the behaviour of primiparous sows and survival and growth of piglets to weaning. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 33: 191–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, GM, Smith, JA, Hodge, FM and Hemsworth, PH 1994 The behaviour of primiparous sows around farrowing in response to restraint and straw bedding. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 39: 269–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, GM, Dunsmore, B and Leeson, E 1998 The effects of farrowing nest size and width on sow and piglet behaviour and piglet survival. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 60: 331–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, GM, Lefébure, B and McClintock, S 2000 A comparison of piglet production and survival in the Werribee Farrowing Pen and conventional farrowing crates at a commercial farm. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 40: 17–23Google Scholar
Damm, BI and Pedersen, LJ 2000 Eliminative behaviour in preparturient gilts previously kept in pens or stalls. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 50: 316–320Google Scholar
Damm, BI, Lisborg, L, Vestergaard, KS and Vanicek, J 2003a Nest-building, behavioural disturbances and heart rate in farrowing sows kept in crates and Schmid pens. Livestock Production Science 80: 175–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damm, BI, Pedersen, LJ, Marchant-Forde, JN and Gilbert, CL 2003b Does feed-back from a nest affect periparturient behaviour, heart rate and circulatory cortisol and oxytocin in gilts? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 83: 55–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damm, BI, Forkman, B and Pedersen, LJ 2005a Lying down and rolling behaviour in sows in relation to piglet crushing. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 90: 3–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damm, BI, Pedersen, LJ, Heiskanen, T and Nielsen, NP 2005b Long-stemmed straw as an additional nesting material in modified Schmid pens in a commercial breeding unit: Effects on sow behaviour, and on piglet mortality and growth. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 92: 45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damm, BI, Moustsen, V, Jørgensen, E, Pedersen, LJ, Heiskanen, T and Forkman, B 2006 Sow preferences for walls to lean against when lying down. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 99: 53–63Google Scholar
De Jonge, FH, Bokkers, EAM, Schouten, WGP and Helmond, FA 1996 Rearing piglets in a poor environment: Developmental aspects of social stress in pigs. Physiology & Behavior 60: 389–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyck, GW and Swierstra, EE 1987 Causes of piglet death from birth to weaning. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 67: 543–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, SA and Fraser, D 1997 Housing systems for farrowing and lactation. The Pig Journal 39: 77–89Google Scholar
Edwards, SA 2002 Perinatal mortality in the pig: Environmental or physiological solutions? Livestock Production Science 78: 3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, SA 2005 Product quality attributes associated with outdoor pig production. Livestock Production Science 94: 5–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
English, PR and Morrison, V 1984 Causes and prevention of piglet mortality. Pig News and Information 5: 369–376Google Scholar
Fraser, D and Thompson, BK 1986 Variation in piglet weights: Relationship to suckling behaviour, parity number and farrowing crate design. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 66: 31–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D, Phillips, PA and Thompson, BK 1988 Initial test of a farrowing crate with inward-sloping sides. Livestock Production Science 20: 249–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D 1990 Behavioural perspectives on piglet survival. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility Supplement 40: 355–370Google ScholarPubMed
Fraser, AF and Broom, DM 1990 Farm Animal Behaviour and Welfare. Ballière Tindall: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Friedli, K, Weber, R and Troxler, J 1994 Abferkelbuchten mit Kastenständen zum Öffnen. FAT-Berichte 452. FAT: Tänikon, Switzerland. [Title translation: Farrowing pens with crates that can be opened a few days after parturition]Google Scholar
Götz, M and Troxler, J 1993 Farrowing and nursing in the group. In: Collins, E and Boon, C (eds) Proceedings of 4th Livestock Environment Symposium pp 159–165. American Society of Agricultural Engineers: St. Joseph, Michigan, USAGoogle Scholar
Götz, M and Troxler, J 1995a Gruppenhaltung von Sauen während des Abferkelns und der Säugezeit. KTBL-Schrift 370 pp 229–236. KTBL: Darmstadt, Germany. [Title translation: Group housing of sows during farrowing and lactation]Google Scholar
Götz, M and Troxler, J 1995b Sauen in Gruppen während der Geburt und Säugezeit. FAT-Schriftenreihe 40. FAT: Tänikon, Switzerland. [Title translation: Group housing of sows from farrowing to weaning]Google Scholar
Grandinson, K, Lund, MS, Rydhmer, L and Strandberg, E 2002 Genetic parameters for the piglet mortality traits crushing, stillbirth and total mortality, and their relation to birth weight. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 52: 167–173Google Scholar
Grandinson, K, Rydhmer, L, Strandberg, E and Thodberg, K 2003 Genetic analysis of on-farm tests of maternal behaviour in sows. Livestock Production Science 83: 141–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grandinson, K 2005 Genetic background of maternal behaviour and its relation to offspring survival. Livestock Production Science 93: 43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graves, HB 1984 Behavior and ecology of wild and feral swine Sus scrofa. Journal of Animal Science 58: 482–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gundlach, H 1968 Brutfürsorge, Brutpflege, Verhaltensontogenese und Tagesperiodik beim Europäischen Wildschwein Sus scrofa L. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 25: 955–995. [Title translation: Maternal care, ontogeny of behaviour and daily periodicity in European wild boars, Sus scrofa L]Google Scholar
Hansen, KF and Curtis, SF 1980 Prepartal activity of sows in stall or pen. Journal of Animal Science 51: 456–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, KF and Vestergaard, K 1984 Tethered versus loose sows: Ethological observations and measures of productivity II. Production results. Annales de Recherches Véterinaires 15: 185–191Google ScholarPubMed
Harris, MJ and Gonyou, HW 1998 Increasing available space in a farrowing crate does not facilitate postural changes or maternal responses in gilts. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 59: 285–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartsock, TG and Barczewski, RA 1997 Prepartum behavior in swine: Effects of pen size. Journal of Animal Science 75: 2899–2904CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haskell, MJ and Hutson, GD 1994 Pre-farrowing behaviour of sows and gilts with access to space for locomotion. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 34: 1099–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haskell, MJ and Hutson, GD 1996 The pre-farrowing behaviour of sows with access to straw and space for locomotion. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 49: 375–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haskell, MJ, Hutson, GD, Dickenson, LG and Palmer, S 1997 The pre-farrowing behaviour of sows with operant access to space for locomotion. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 51: 51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendriks, HJM, Pedersen, BK, Vermeer, HM and Wittmann, M 1998 Pig housing systems in Europe: Current distributions and trends. Pig News and Information 19: 97–104Google Scholar
Herpin, P, Damon, M and le Dividich, J 2002 Development of thermoregulation and neonatal survival in pigs. Livestock Production Science 78: 25–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herskin, MS, Jensen, KH and Thodberg, K 1998 Influence of environmental stimuli on maternal behaviour related to bonding, reactivity and crushing of piglets in domestic sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 58: 241–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoy, S, Lutter, C, Puppe, B and Wahner, M 1995 Zum Einfluss endogener und exogener Faktoren auf den Verlauf der Rektaltemperatur von Ferkeln post natum. Der Praktische Tierarzt 76: 238–249. [Title translation: Influence of endogenic and exogenic factors on the dynamics of rectal temperature in newborn piglets]Google Scholar
Hunt, K and Petchey, AM 1989 Degree of enclosure preferred by sows around farrowing. Animal Production 48: 643Google Scholar
Hutson, GD and Haskell, MJ 1990 The behaviour of farrowing sows with free and operant access to an earth floor. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 26: 363–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutson, GD, Wilkinson, JL and Luxford, BG 1991 The response of lactating sows to tactile, visual and auditory stimuli associated with a model piglet. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 32: 129–137Google Scholar
Hutson, GD 1992 A comparison of operant responding by farrowing sows for food and nest-building material. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 34: 221–230Google Scholar
Hutson, GD, Argent, MF, Dickenson, LG and Luxford, BG 1992 Influence of parity and time since parturition on responsiveness of sows to a piglet distress call. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 34: 303–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutson, GD, Price, EO and Dickenson, LG 1993 The effect of playback volume and duration on the response of sows to piglet distress calls. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 37: 31–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S, Lawrence, AB, McLean, KA, Deans, LA, Chirnside, J and Calvert, SK 1997 The effect of environment on behavioural activity, ACTH, ß endorphin and cortisol in pre-farrowing gilts. Animal Science 65: 465–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S, Van der Vegt, BJ, Lawrence, AB, McLean, KA, Deans, LA, Chirnside, J and Calvert, SK 2001 The effect of parity and environmental restriction on behavioural and physiological responses of pre-parturient pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 71: 203–216CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jarvis, S, Calvert, SK, Stevenson, J, van Leeuwen, N and Lawrence, AB 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: 371–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S, D'Eath, RB and Fujita, K 2005 Consistency of piglet crushing by sows. Animal Welfare 14: 43–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S, D'Eath, RB, Robson, SK and Lawrence, AB 2006 The effect of confinement during lactation on the hypothalamicpituitary-adrenal axis and behaviour of primiparous sows. Physiology & Behavior 87: 345–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P 1986 Observations on the maternal behaviour of freeranging domestic pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 16: 131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P, Florén, K and Hobroh, B 1987 Peri-parturient behaviour in free-ranging domestic pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 17: 69–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P and Redbo, I 1987 Behaviour during nest leaving in free-ranging domestic pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 18: 355–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P 1989 Nest site choice and nest building of free-ranging domestic pigs due to farrow. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 22: 13–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P and Recén, B 1989 When to wean - Observations from free-ranging domestic pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 23: 49–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P 1993 Nest building in domestic sows: The role of external stimuli. Animal Behaviour 45: 351–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P, Vestergaard, K and Algers, B 1993 Nest-building in free-ranging domestic sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 38: 245–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamphues, B, Hessel, E, Lücke, W, Snell, H and Van den Weghe, H 2003 Einstreulose Haltungssysteme im Abferkelbereich II. Agrartechnische Forschung 9: 64–71. [Title translation: Farrowing systems without litter II]Google Scholar
Klocek, C, Koczanowski, J, Migda, W and Nowicki, J 2000 Prepartum behaviour and course of farrowing of sows housed with and without freedom of movement. Advances in Agricultural Sciences 7: 25–28Google Scholar
Knol, EF, Leenhouwers, JI and van der Lende, T 2002 Genetic aspects of piglet survival. Livestock Production Science 78: 47–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunz, HJ and Ernst, E 1987 Abgangsursachen bei Ferkeln. Züchtungskunde 59: 135–145. [Title translation: Causes of piglet losses]Google Scholar
Kurz, J and Marchinton, RL 1972 Radiotelemetry studies of feral hogs in South Carolina. Journal of Wildlife Managment 36: 1240–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lammers, GJ and De Lange, A 1986 Pre- and post-farrowing behaviour in primiparous domesticated pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 15: 31–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, AB, Petherick, JC, McLean, KA, Deans, LA, Chirnside, J, Vaughan, A, Clutton, E and Terlouw, EMC 1994 The effect of environment on behaviour, plasma cortisol and prolactin in parturient sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 39: 313–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leenhouwers, JI, Knol, EF and van der Lende, T 2002 Differences in late prenatal development as an explanation for genetic differences in piglet survival. Livestock Production Science 78: 57–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lou, Z and Hurnik, FJ 1994 An ellipsoid farrowing crate: Its ergonomical design and effects on pig productivity. Journal of Animal Science 72: 2610–2616CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Løvendahl, P, Holm Damgaard, L, Lindstrøm Nielsen, B, Thodberg, K, Su, G and Rydhmer, L 2005 Aggressive behaviour of sows at mixing and maternal behaviour are heritable and genetically correlated traits. Livestock Production Science 93: 73–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malmkvist, J, Pedersen, LJ, Damgaard, BM, Thodberg, K, Jørgensen, E and Labouriau, R 2006 Does floor heating around parturition affect the vitality of piglets born to loose housed sows? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 99: 88–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchant, JN, Rudd, AR, Mendl, MT, Broom, DM, Meredith, MJ, Corning, S and Simmins, PH 2000 Timing and causes of piglet mortality in alternative and conventional farrowing systems. The Veterinary Record 147: 209–214Google ScholarPubMed
Marchant, JN, Broom, DM and Corning, S 2001 The influence of sow behaviour on piglet mortality due to crushing in an open farrowing system. Animal Science 72: 19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martys, M 1982 Gehegebeobachtungen zur Geburts- und Reproduktionsbiologie des Europäischen Wildschweines Sus scrofa L. Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde 47: 100–113. [Title translation: Observations on parturition and reproductive biology in captive European wild boars, Sus scrofa L]Google Scholar
Mauget, R 1981 Behavioural and reproductive strategies in wild forms of Sus scrofa European wild boar and feral pigs. In: Sybesma, W (ed) The Welfare of Pigs pp 3–13. Martinus Nijhoff: The Hague, NetherlandsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, JJ, Martin, FD and Brisbin, IL Jr 2002 Characteristics of wild pig farrowing nests and beds in the upper Coastal Plain of South Carolina. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 78: 1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGlone, JJ and Blecha, F 1987 An examination of behavioural, immunological and productive traits in four management systems for sows and piglets. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 18: 269–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGlone, JJ and Morrow-Tesch, J 1990 Productivity and behaviour of sows in level vs. sloped farrowing pens and crates. Journal of Animal Science 68: 82–87Google Scholar
Mesa, H, Safranski, TJ, Cammack, KM, Weaber, RL and Lamberson, WR 2006 Genetic and phenotypic relationships of farrowing and weaning survival to birth and placental weights in pigs Journal of Animal Science 84: 32–40CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pajor, EA, Kramer, DL and Fraser, D 2000 Regulation of contact with offspring by domestic sows: Temporal patterns and individual variation. Ethology 106: 37–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, V, Recén, B and Vestergaard, K 1990 Behaviour of sows and piglets during farrowing under free-range conditions. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 26: 169–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, LJ, Jørgensen, E, Heiskanen, T and Damm, BI 2006 Early piglet mortality in loose-housed sows related to sow and piglet behaviour and to the progress of parturition. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 96: 215–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, PA and Fraser, D 1993 Developments in farrowing housing for sows and litters. Pig News and Information 14: 51–55Google Scholar
Phillips, PA, Fraser, D and Pawluczuk, B 2000 Floor temperature preference of sows at farrowing. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 67: 59–65CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Reilly, KM, Harris, MJ, Mendl, M, Held, S, Moinard, C, Statham, P, Marchant-Forde, J and Green, LE 2006 Factors associated with preweaning mortality on commercial pig farms in England and Wales. The Veterinary Record 159: 193–196CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quiniou, N, Dagorn, J and Gaudré, D 2002 Variation of piglets’ birth weight and consequences on subsequent performance. Livestock Production Science 78: 63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rantzer, D and Svendsen, J 2001 Slatted versus solid floors in the dung area of farrowing pens: Effects on hygiene and pig performance, birth to weaning. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 51: 167–174Google Scholar
Robertson, JB, Laird, R, Hall, JKS, Forsyth, RJ, Thomson, JM and Walker-Love, J 1966 A comparison of two indoor farrowing systems for sows. Animal Production 8: 171–177Google Scholar
Schmid, H 1990 Unbehindertes Verhalten von Muttersauen und ihrer Ferkel am Geburtsnest und artgemässe Verhaltenssicherungen gegen Erdrücken. KTBL-Schrift 342 pp 40–66. KTBL: Darmstadt, Germany. [Title translation: Ethological design of a farrowing pen]Google Scholar
Schmid, H 1992 Arttypische Strukturierung der Abferkelbucht. KTBL-Schrift 351 pp 27–36. KTBL: Darmstadt, Germany. [Title translation: Unrestricted behaviour of the sow and the piglets at the nest site and behavioural mechanisms to avoid crushing]Google Scholar
Schmid, H and Weber, R 1992 Abferkelbuchten: ein neues Konzept. FAT-Berichte 417. FAT: Tänikon, Switzerland. [Title translation: A new concept for farrowing pens]Google Scholar
Schmid, H 1993 Ethological design of a practicable farrowing pen. In: Nichelmann, M, Wierenga, HK and Braun, S (eds) Proceedings of the International Congress on Applied Ethology pp 238–242. KTBL: Darmstadt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Schmid, H and Hirt, H 1993 Species specific behaviour of sows and piglets that prevent crushing. In: Nichelmann, M, Wierenga, HK and Braun, S (eds) Proceedings of the International Congress on Applied Ethology pp 465–467. KTBL: Darmstadt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
Scientific Veterinary Committee 1997 The Welfare of Intensively Kept Pigs. Report to the Directorate General XXIV of the European Commission. Adopted 30th September 1997. Doc XXIV/ScVc/0005/97. Scientific Veterinary Committee, Animal Welfare Section: Brussels, BelgiumGoogle Scholar
Sneddon, IA, Beattie, VE, Dunne, L and Neil, W 2000 The effect of environmental enrichment on learning in pigs. Animal Welfare 9: 373–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spinka, M, Illmann, G, de Jonge, F, Andersson, M, Schuurman, T and Jensen, P 2000 Dimensions of maternal behaviour characteristics in domestic and wild x domestic crossbred sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 70: 99–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stangel, G and Jensen, P 1991 Behaviour of semi-naturally kept sows and piglets except suckling during 10 days postpartum. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 31: 211–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stolba, A 1984 Verhaltensmuster von Hausschweinen in einem Freigehege: Bemerkungen zum Film. KTBL-Schrift 299 pp 106–115. KTBL: Darmstadt, Germany. [Title translation: Behaviour of domestic pigs in a semi-natural environment: Remarks to the movie]Google Scholar
Stolba, A and Wood-Gush, DGM 1984 The identification of behavioural key features and their incorporation into a housing design for pigs. Annales de Recherches Véterinaires 15: 287–298Google ScholarPubMed
Stolba, A 1986 Ansatz zu einer artgerechten Schweinehaltung: Der “möblierte Familienstall”. In: Sambraus, HH and Boehncke, E (eds) Ökologische Tierhaltung pp 148–166. Müller: Karlsruhe, Germany. [Title translation: Species-specific housing of pigs: The Family Pen System]Google Scholar
Stolba, A and Wood-Gush, DGM 1989 The behaviour of pigs in a semi-natural environment. Animal Production 48: 419–425Google Scholar
Svendsen, J, Bengtsson, AC and Svendsen, LS 1986 Occurrence and causes of traumatic injuries in neonatal pigs. Pig News and Information 7: 159–170Google Scholar
Tajet, GM, Haukvik, IA, Andersen, IL and Kongsrud, S 2003 Effect of managemental factors on piglet mortality with focus on herds with loose-housed sows. In: van der Honing Y (ed) Book of Abstracts of the 54th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production p 366. Wageningen Pers: Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
Thodberg, K, Jensen, KH and Herskin, MS 2002 Nest building and farrowing in sows: Relation to the reaction pattern during stress, farrowing environment and experience. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 77: 21–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, BK and Fraser, D 1986 Variation in piglet weights: Development of within-litter variation over a 5-week lactation and effect of farrowing crate design. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 66: 361–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troxler, J and Weber, R 1989 Die Anwendung ethologischer Erkenntnisse bei der Prüfung von Stalleinrichtungen für Schweine. KTBL-Schrift 336 pp 142–149. KTBL: Darmstadt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
van de Burgwal-Konertz, B 1996 Das Saug- und Säugeverhalten bei der Gruppenhaltung abferkelnder und ferkelführender Sauen und ihren Würfen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Fremdsaugens. PhD Thesis, Universität Hohenheim, Germany. [Title translation: Nursing behaviour of group-housed farrowing and lactating sows with particular reference to cross-suckling]Google Scholar
Vangen, O, Holm, B, Valros, A, Lund, MS and Rydhmer, L 2005 Genetic variation in sows’ maternal behaviour, recorded under field conditions. Livestock Production Science 93: 63–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Putten, G and van de Burgwal, JA 1989 Tiergerechte Gruppenhaltung im Abferkelstall. KTBL-Schrift 336 pp 93–108. KTBL: Darmstadt, Germany. [Title translation: Group housing of sows during farrowing and lactation]Google Scholar
Vestergaard, K and Hansen, LL 1984 Tethered versus loose sows: Ethological observations and productivity I. Ethological observations during pregnancy and farrowing. Annales de Recherches Véterinaires 15: 245–256Google ScholarPubMed
Weary, DM, Pajor, EA, Fraser, D and Honkanen, A-M 1996a Sow body movements that crush piglets: A comparison between two types of farrowing accommodation. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 49: 149–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weary, DM, Pajor, EA, Thompson, BK and Fraser, D 1996b Risky behaviour by piglets: A trade off between feeding and risk of mortality by maternal crushing? Animal Behaviour 51: 619–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weary, DM, Phillips, PA, Pajor, EA, Fraser, D and Thompson, BK 1998 Crushing of piglets by sows: Effects of litter features, pen features and sow behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 61: 103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, R 1984 Entwicklung einer Abferkelbucht nach ethologischen und verfahrenstechnischen Gesichtspunkten. KTBL-Schrift 299 pp 153–165. KTBL: Darmstadt, Germany. [Title translation: Development of a farrowing pen considering behavioural and technical aspects]Google Scholar
Weber, R 1987 Abferkelbuchten mit Kastenstand. FAT-Berichte 318. FAT: Tänikon, Switzerland. [Title translation: Farrowing systems with crates]Google Scholar
Weber, R and Troxler, J 1988 Die Bedeutung der Zeitdauer der Geburt in verschiedenen Abferkelbuchten zur Beurteilung auf Tiergerechtheit. KTBL-Schrift 323 pp 172–184. KTBL: Darmstadt, Germany. [Title translation: The significance of the duration of parturition in different farrowing systems for the assessment of animal welfare]Google Scholar
Weber, R 2000 Alternative housing systems for farrowing and lactating sows. In: Blokhuis, HJ, Ekkel, ED and Wechsler, B (eds) Improving Health and Welfare in Animal Production. EAAP publication No. 102 pp 109–115. Wageningen Pers: Wageningen, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
Weber, R, Keil, NM, Fehr, M and Horat, R 2006 Ferkelverluste in Abferkelbuchen: Ein Vergleich zwischen Abferkelbuchten mit und ohne Kastenstand. FAT-Berichte 656. FAT: Tänikon, Switzerland. [Title translation: Piglet mortality: a comparison of farrowing systems with and without crates]Google Scholar
Weber, R, Keil, NM, Fehr, M and Horat, R 2007 Piglet mortality on farms using farrowing systems with or without crates. Animal Welfare 16: 277–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wechsler, B, Fröhlich, E, Oester, H, Oswald, T, Troxler, J, Weber, R and Schmid, H 1997 The contribution of applied ethology in judging animal welfare in farm animal housing systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 53: 33–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wechsler, B and Hegglin, D 1997 Individual differences in the behaviour of sows at the nest-site and the crushing of piglets. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 51: 39–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wechsler, B 2005 An authorisation procedure for mass-produced farm animal housing systems with regard to animal welfare. Livestock Production Science 94: 71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widowski, SE and Curtis, ES 1990 The influence of straw, cloth tassel, or both on the prepartum behaviour of sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 27: 53–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar