Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T04:11:07.662Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Review: Drinking water for liquid-fed pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2016

M.-C. Meunier-Salaün ,
J. Chiron ,
F. Etore ,
A. Fabre ,
A. Laval ,
F. Pol ,
A. Prunier ,
Y. Ramonet  and
B. L. Nielsen
M.-C. Meunier-Salaün*
Affiliation:
PEGASE, INRA, 35590 Saint Gilles, France
J. Chiron
Affiliation:
Anses, Unité Evaluation des risques liés à la santé, l’alimentation et au bien-être des animaux, 94704 Maisons-Alfort, France
F. Etore
Affiliation:
Anses, Unité Evaluation des risques liés à la santé, l’alimentation et au bien-être des animaux, 94704 Maisons-Alfort, France
A. Fabre
Affiliation:
École nationale vétérinaire d’Alfort, 94704 Maisons-Alfort, France
A. Laval
Affiliation:
École vétérinaire de Nantes, Oniris, 44300 Nantes, France
F. Pol
Affiliation:
Anses, Unité Épidémiologie et bien-être du porc, 22440 Ploufragan, France
A. Prunier
Affiliation:
PEGASE, INRA, 35590 Saint Gilles, France
Y. Ramonet
Affiliation:
Chambre Régionale d’Agriculture de Bretagne, 35042 Rennes, France
B. L. Nielsen
Affiliation:
NBO, INRA, Université Paris-Saclay, 78350 Jouy-en-Josas, France
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Liquid feeding has the potential to provide pigs with sufficient water to remain hydrated and prevent prolonged thirst. However, lack of permanent access to fresh water prevents animals from drinking when they are thirsty. Moreover, individual differences between pigs in a pen may result in uneven distribution of the water provided by the liquid feed, leading to some pigs being unable to meet their water requirements. In this review, we look at the need for and provision of water for liquid-fed pigs in terms of their production performance, behaviour, health and welfare. We highlight factors which may lead to water ingestion above or below requirements. Increases in the need for water may be caused by numerous factors such as morbidity, ambient temperature or competition within the social group, emphasising the necessity of permanent access to water as also prescribed in EU legislation. The drinkers can be the target of redirected behaviour in response to feed restriction or in the absence of rooting materials, thereby generating water losses. The method of water provision and drinker design is critical to ensure easy access to water regardless of the pig’s physiological state, and to limit the amount of water used, which does not benefit the pig.

Keywords

thirstliquid feedingdrinker designwater accesswater quality
Type
Review Article
Information
animal , Volume 11 , Issue 5 , May 2017 , pp. 836 - 844
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2016 

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

Ahmed, ST, Mun, HS, Yoe, H and Yang, CJ 2015. Monitoring of behavior using a video-recording system for recognition of Salmonella infection in experimentally infected growing pigs. Animal 9, 115–121.Google Scholar
Andersen, HM-L, Dybkjær, L and Herskin, MS 2014. Growing pigs’ drinking behaviour: number of visits, duration, water intake and diurnal variation. Animal 8, 1881–1888.Google Scholar
Andersen, HM-L and Herskin, MS 2012. Why do pigs waste water? Description of drinking behaviours of growing pigs provided with water nipples. Proceedings of the 46th Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology (ISAE), 31 July – August 4, 2012 Vienna, Austria, p. 214.Google Scholar
Anderson, T 2011. Liquid swine feed gaining in popularity. The Midwest Producer, published 16 November 2011. Retrieved on 3 June 2016 from http://www.midwestproducer.com.Google Scholar
Andreoli, TE 2000. Water: normal balance, hyponatremia, and hypernatremia. Renal Failure 22, 711–735.Google Scholar
Bigelow, JA and Houpt, TR 1988. Feeding and drinking patterns in young pigs. Physiology & Behavior 43, 99–109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Black, JL, Bray, HJ and Giles, LR 1999. The thermal and infectious environment. In A quantitative biology of the pig (ed. I Kyriazakis), pp. 71–97. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Bøe, KE and Cronin, GM 2015. Individual variation in eating speed of dry sows. Journal of Animal Science 93, 1881–1886.Google Scholar
Bøe, KE and Kjelvik, O 2011. Water nipples or water bowls for weaned piglets: effect on water intake, performance, and plasma osmolality. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section A-Animal Science 61, 86–91.Google Scholar
Bracke, MBM 2011. Review of wallowing in pigs: description of the behavior and its motivational basis. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 132, 1–13.Google Scholar
Brooks, PH, Beal, JD and Niven, S 2001. Liquid feeding of pigs: potential for reducing environmental impact and for improving productivity and food safety. Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition in Australia 13, 49–63.Google Scholar
Caldier, P 2005. Asia’s growing potential attracts more exhibitors. Pig Progress 21, 22–23.Google Scholar
Close, WH and Cole, DJA 2000. Nutrition of sows and boars. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK.Google Scholar
Courboulay, V 2015. Loger les truies gestantes en groupe: les clés pour choisir son système et sa conduite. Atelier sur les truies en groupe, Centre de Développement du Porc du Québec, 25–26 February 2015, Quebec, Canada.Google Scholar
Council of Europe 1986. Recommendation concerning pigs. Adopted by the Standing Committee of the European Convention for the Protection of Animals kept for Farming Purposes (T-AP) on 21 November 1986. Retrieved on 4 January 2016 from http://www.coe.int/t/e/legal_affairs/legal_co-operation/biological_safety_and_use_of_animals/farming/A_texts_documents.asp.Google Scholar
DGAL 2012. Note de service DGAL/SDSPA/N2012-8218 de Direction générale de l’Alimentation (DGAL), of 14 November 2012, annex NS N2005-8208 of 24 August 2005 modified, 5pp. Retrieved on 24 October 2016 from http://agriculture.gouv.fr/ministere/note-de-service-dgalsdspan2012-8218-du-14112012.Google Scholar
Docking, CM, van de Weerd, HA, Day, JEL and Edwards, SA 2008. The influence of age on the use of potential enrichment objects and synchronisation of behaviour of pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 110, 244–257.Google Scholar
Dybkjær, L, Jacobsen, AP, Tøgersen, FA and Poulsen, HD 2006. Eating and drinking activity of newly weaned piglets: effects of individual characteristics, social mixing, and addition of extra zinc to the feed. Journal of Animal Science 84, 702–711.Google Scholar
EFSA 2010. Scientific opinion on dietary reference values for water. European food safety authority (EFSA) panel on dietetic products, nutrition, and allergies (NDA). EFSA Journal 8, 1459.Google Scholar
EU 2001. Commission Directive 2001/93/EC of 9 November 2001 amending Directive 91/630/EEC laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs. Official Journal of the European Communities L 316, 36–38.Google Scholar
EU 2009. Council Directive 2008/120/EC of 18 December 2008 laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs (Codified version). Official Journal of the European Communities L 47, 5–13.Google Scholar
Fraser, D and Phillips, PA 1989. Lethargy and low water intake by sows during early lactation: a cause of low piglet weight gains and survival? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 24, 13–22.Google Scholar
Gill, BP, Brooks, PH and Carpenter, JL 1987. Voluntary water intake by growing pigs offered a liquid feed of differing water to meal ratios. In Pig housing and the environment: occasional publication No 11 (ed. AT Smith and TLJ Lawrence), pp. 131–133. British Society of Animal Production, Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
Gonyou, HW 1996. Water use and drinker management: a review. Prairie Swine Centre Inc., Saskatoon, Canada. Retrieved on 10 February 2016 from www.prairieswine.com.Google Scholar
Guingand, N and Rugani, A 2013. Incidence de la réduction de la quantité de paille et de la fréquence des apports sur les émissions d’ammoniac, de GES et d’odeurs chez les porcs en engraissement. Journées Recherche Porcine 45, 141–142.Google Scholar
Harvey, RE 1994. Water consumption in pigs. Pig Journal 32, 95–98.Google Scholar
Houben, MA, van Nes, A and Tobias, TJ 2015. Water palatability, a matter of taste. Porcine Health Management 1, 1–10.Google Scholar
Huynh, TTT, Aarnink, AJA, Verstegen, MWA, Gerrits, WJJ, Heetkamp, MJW, Kemp, B and Cahn, TT 2005. Effects of increasing temperatures on physiological changes in pigs at different relative humidities. Journal of Animal Science 83, 1385–1396.Google Scholar
Ingram, DL 1967. Stimulation of cutaneous glands in the pig. Journal of Comparative Pathology 77, 93–98.Google Scholar
Junge, M, Herd, D, Jezierny, D, Gallmann, E and Jungbluth, T 2012. Indicators for monitoring behavior and health of group housed pregnant sows. Landtechnik 67, 326–331.Google Scholar
Klopfenstein, C, Bigras-Poulin, M and Martineau, GP 1996. La truie potomane, une réalité physiologique. Journées Recherche Porcine 28, 319–324.Google Scholar
Lallès, JP, Konstantinov, S and Rothkötter, HJ 2004. Bases physiologiques, microbiologiques et immunitaires des troubles digestifs du sevrage chez le porcelet: données récentes dans le contexte de la suppression des antibiotiques additifs alimentaires. Journées Recherche Porcine 36, 139–150.Google Scholar
Larsson, K 1997. Evaluation of watering systems with bite valves for pigs. JTI-Report Agriculture & Industry No. 239, Swedish Institute of Agricultural Engineering, Uppsala, Sweden, 28 pp.Google Scholar
Li, YZ, Chénard, L, Lemay, SP and Gonyou, HW 2005. Water intake and wastage at nipple drinkers by growing-finishing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 83, 1413–1422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Madec, F 1985. La consommation d’eau chez la truie gestante en élevage intensif. Relation avec certaines caractéristiques urinaires. Journées Recherche Porcine 17, 223–236.Google Scholar
Madec, F 1990. Epidémiologie des problèmes urinaires chez la truie en élevage intensif. Bulletin des Groupements Techniques Vétérinaires 2, 39–45.Google Scholar
Madec, F 2009. Reproductive disorders in pigs: a review on the crucial role of the environment. In Sustainable animal production (ed. A Aland and F Madec), pp. 215–238. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Madsen, TN and Kristensen, AR 2005. A model for monitoring the condition of young pigs by their drinking behaviour. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 48, 138–154.Google Scholar
Magowan, E, O’Connell, NE and McCann, EE 2007. The effect of drinker design on the performance, behaviour and water usage of growing pigs. Agri-Food and Bioscience Institute, Hillsborough. Report Prepared for UFU and PPDC Committees, August 2007, 16pp. Retrieved on 3 June 2016 from www.afbini.gov.uk.Google Scholar
Martineau, GP and Morvan, H 2010. Les maladies d’élevage du porc, 2nd edition. France Agricole, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Massabie, P, Roy, H, Boulestreau-Boulay, AL and Dubois, A 2014. La consommation d’eau en élevage de porcs. Des leviers pour réduire la consommation d’eau en élevage de porcs. Report from the French Pork and Pig Institute (IFIP), 16 pp. Retrieved on 15 June 2016 from www.ifip.asso.fr.Google Scholar
Maynard, LA, Loosli, HF, Hintz, HF and Warner, RG 1979. Animal nutrition, 7th edition. McGraw Hill Inc., New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
McHugh, PR and Moran, TR 1986. The stomach and satiety. In Interaction of the chemical senses with nutrition (ed. MR Kare and JG Brand), pp. 167–180. Academic Press, Orlando, FL, USA.Google Scholar
Meunier-Salaün, MC, Edwards, S and Robert, S 2001. Effect of fibre on the behaviour and health of the restricted fed sow. Animal Feed Science and Technology 90, 53–69.Google Scholar
Missotten, JAM, Michiels, J, Ovyn, A, De Smet, S and Dierick, NA 2010. Fermented liquid feed for pigs. Archives of Animal Nutrition 64, 437–466.Google Scholar
Mount, LE, Holmes, CW, Close, WH, Morrison, SR and Start, IB 1971. A note on the consumption of water by the growing pig at several environmental temperatures and levels of feeding. Animal Science 13, 561–563.Google Scholar
Mroz, Z, Jongbloed, AW, Lenis, NP and Vreman, K 1995. Water in pig nutrition: physiology, allowances and environmental implications. Nutrition Research Reviews 8, 137–164.Google Scholar
Nannoni, E, Martelli, G, Cecchini, M, Vignola, G, Giammarco, M, Zaghini, G and Sardi, L 2013. Water requirements of liquid-fed heavy pigs: effect of water restriction on growth traits, animal welfare and meat and ham quality. Livestock Science 151, 21–28.Google Scholar
Nielsen, BL 1999. On the interpretation of feeding behaviour measures and the use of feeding rate as an indicator of social constraint. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 63, 79–91.Google Scholar
Odle, J and Harrell, RJ 1998. Nutritional approaches for improving neonatal piglet performance: is there a place for liquid diets in commercial production? – Review. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 11, 774–780.Google Scholar
Paboeuf, F, Gautier, M, Meunier-Salaün, MC and Dourmad, JY 2009. Elevage de porcs sur litière de paille: influences de la conduite alimentaire et du comportement des animaux sur la gestion de la litière. Journées Recherche Porcine 41, 277–278.Google Scholar
Patience, JF 2012a. The importance of water in pork production. Animal Frontiers 2, 28–35.Google Scholar
Patience, JF 2012b. Water in swine nutrition. In Sustainable swine nutrition (ed. LI Chiba), pp. 3–22. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
Pijpers, A, Schoevers, EJ, van Gogh, H, van Leengoed, LA, Visser, IJ, van Miert, AS and Verheijden, JH 1991. The influence of disease on feed and water consumption and on pharmacokinetics of orally administered oxytetracycline in pigs. Journal of Animal Science 69, 2947–2954.Google Scholar
Philippe, FX, Laitat, M and Warvreille Jand Nicks, B 2014. Effets de la quantité de paille sur les émissions d’ammoniac et de gaz à effet de serre lors de l’élevage de porcs charcutiers sur litière accumulée. Journées Recherche Porcine 46, 213–214.Google Scholar
Phillips, PA and Fraser, D 1991. Discovery of selected water dispensers by newborn pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 71, 233–236.Google Scholar
Renaudeau, D, Frances, G, Dubois, S, Gilbert, H and Noblet, J 2013. Effect of thermal heat stress on energy utilization in two lines of pigs divergently selected for residual feed intake. Animal Science 91, 1162–1175.Google Scholar
Rivest, J, Labrecque, J, Roy, M, Ricard, MA and Fortin, F 2015. Le système de mesure de la consommation d’eau individuelle pour les porcs à l’engraissement de la station d'évaluation des porcs de Deschambault. Journées Recherche Porcine 47, 249–250.Google Scholar
Roguet, C, Massabie, P, Gourmelen, C and Douguet, G 2007. Le parc des élevages de porcs en France: état des lieux, évaluation du besoin d’investissement. Report from the French Pork and Pig Institute (IFIP), 122 pp. Retrieved on 15 June 2016 from www.ifip.asso.fr.Google Scholar
Rousselière, Y, Hemonic, A and Marcon, M 2016. Suivi individuel du comportement d’abreuvement du porcelet sevré. Journées Recherche Porcine 48, 355–356.Google Scholar
Roy, H, Calvar, C, landrain, B and Guivarc’h, C 2007a. Enquêtes en élevages sur la distribution de soupe en auges courtes avec sondes. Report from Chambres d’agriculture de Bretagne, 14 pp. Retrieved on 15 June 2016 from www.bretagne.synagri.com.Google Scholar
Roy, H, Calvar, C, landrain, B and Royer, E 2007b. Le point sur l’utilisation et les possibilités du matériel de distribution de l’aliment en soupe en élevage de porcs: matériels techniques et informatiques, problèmes rencontrés, améliorations possibles. Report from Chambres d’agriculture de Bretagne, 73 pp. Retrieved on 15 June 2016 from www.bretagne.synagri.com.Google Scholar
Royer, E, Ernandorena, V and Escribano, F 2007. Effects of the water-feed ratio and of a rheological sepiolite on some physical parameters of liquid feed and performances of pigs. Proceedings from the 58th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production (EAAP), 26–29 August 2007, Dublin, Ireland, pp. 26–29.Google Scholar
Rushen, J 1984. Stereotyped behaviour, adjunctive drinking and the feeding periods of tethered sows. Animal Behaviour 32, 1059–1067.Google Scholar
Russell, PJ, Geary, TM, Brooks, PH and Campbell, A 1996. Performance, water use and effluent output of weaner pigs fed ad libitum with either dry pellets or liquid feed and the role of microbial activity in the liquid feed. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 72, 8–16.Google Scholar
Scott, K, Chennells, DJ, Armstrong, D, Taylor, L, Gill, BP and Edwards, SA 2007. The welfare of finishing pigs under different housing and feeding systems: liquid versus dry feeding in fully-slatted and straw-based housing. Animal Welfare 16, 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiavon, S and Emmans, GC 2000. A model to predict water intake of a pig growing in a known environment on a known diet. British Journal of Nutrition 84, 873–883.Google Scholar
Shaw, MI, Beaulieu, AD and Patience, JF 2006. Effect of diet composition on water consumption in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 84, 3123–3132.Google Scholar
Terlouw, EMC, Lawrence, AB and Illius, AW 1991a. Relationships between agonistic behavior and propensity to develop excessive drinking and chain manipulation in pigs. Physiology & Behavior 50, 493–498.Google Scholar
Terlouw, EMC, Lawrence, AB and Illius, AW 1991b. Influence of feeding level and physical restriction on development of stereotypes in sows. Animal Behaviour 42, 981–991.Google Scholar
Thacker, PA 2000. Water in sow nutrition. In Swine nutrition (ed. NJ Lewis and LL Southern), pp. 381–401. CRC Press, London, UK.Google Scholar
Thornton, EJ, Wilson, RJ, Connaughton, I and Moore, K 1998. Effect of subclinical urogenital infection on reproductive performance in sow. Proceedings of the 15th International Pig Veterinary Society Congress, 5–9 July 1998, Birmingham, England, p. 236.Google Scholar
Tillon, JP and Madec, F 1985. Quelques indicateurs pathologiques à prendre en considération dans l’évaluation du bâtiment en élevage porcin. Journées Recherche Porcine 17, 251–254.Google Scholar
Torrey, S, Tamminga, ELMT and Widowski, TM 2008. Effect of drinker type on water intake in newly weaned piglets. Journal of Animal Science 86, 1439–1445.Google Scholar
Turner, SP, Sinclair, AG and Edwards, SA 2000. The interaction of liveweight and the degree of competition on drinking behaviour in growing pigs at different group sizes. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 67, 321–334.Google Scholar
Vermeer, HM, Kuijken, N and Spoolder, HAM 2009. Motivation for additional water use of growing-finishing pigs. Livestock Science 124, 112–118.Google Scholar
WHO 2011. Guidelines for drinking-water quality, 4th edition. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Yang, TS, Howard, B and Macfarlane, WV 1981. Effects of food on drinking behaviour of growing pigs. Applied Animal Ethology 7, 259–270.Google Scholar