Getting around social status: Motivation and enrichment use of dominant and subordinate sows in a group setting

Phenomics in Livestock Research: Bottlenecks and Promises of Digital Phenotyping and Other Quantification Techniques on a Global Scale

Bottlenecks in moving genomics to real-life applications also include phenomics. This is true not only for genomics medicine and public health genomics but also in ecology and livestock phenomics. This expert narrative review explores the intricate relationship between genetic makeup and observable phenotypic traits across various biological levels in the context of livestock research. We unpack and emphasize the significance of precise phenotypic data in selective breeding outcomes and examine the multifaceted applications of phenomics, ranging from improvement to assessing welfare, reproductive traits, and environmental adaptation in livestock. As phenotypic traits exhibit strong correlations, their measurement alongside specific biological outcomes provides insights into performance, overall health, and clinical endpoints like morbidity and disease. In addition, automated assessment of livestock holds potential for monitoring the dynamic phenotypic traits across various species, facilitating a deeper comprehension of how they adapt to their environment and attendant stressors. A key challenge in genetic improvement in livestock is predicting individuals with optimal fitness without direct measurement. Temporal predictions from unmanned aerial systems can surpass genomic predictions, offering in-depth data on livestock. In the near future, digital phenotyping and digital biomarkers may further unravel the genetic intricacies of stress tolerance, adaptation and welfare aspects of animals enabling the selection of climate-resilient and productive livestock. This expert review thus delves into challenges associated with phenotyping and discusses technological advancements shaping the future of biological research concerning livestock.

Effects of Herd Establishment Time and Structure on Group-on-Individual Aggression Intensity in Farm Pigs

Aggression in farm animals affects welfare. Although one-on-one aggression was studied, group-on-individual aggression remains unresolved. This study aimed to examine how herd establishment times and structures influence aggression intensity (AI) of herds towards unfamiliar pigs. Six groups of pigs were established, with a new pig added every three days. AI was measured by skin lesion severity on the new pigs. A parabolic model based on the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm and conjoint analysis identified factors influencing AI. Results show AI was not significantly affected by herd size but was significantly influenced by the number of pens (p < 0.01). AI showed a significant association with elevated time (T) since the establishment of the herd in six pig herds (Kendall's tau-τ = 0.976, p < 0.001). The effect of T on the AI became stronger as T increased, which was consistently validated in six pig herds. Furthermore, the interaction effect indicates a significant difference in AI between herds formed with two pens and those with more than two pens when T ≤ 12 (p < 0.05). However, as T increased beyond 12, the number of pens used to form the herd did not significantly affect AI. These findings highlight the complex interactions between herd establishment time and structural composition in shaping aggression intensity towards unfamiliar pigs.

Indicators of improved gestation housing of sows. Part I: Effects on behaviour, skin lesions, locomotion, and tear staining

Commercial gestation housing systems for sows generally fail to cater fully for their needs in terms of comfort or the ability to perform highly motivated behaviours, which can lead to chronic stress and an impairment to welfare. We compared a typical gestation system (CONTROL) with an IMPROVED one as regards oral stereotypies, aggressive behaviour, skin lesions, locomotion, and tear staining. Sows were mixed into 12 stable groups (six groups per treatment, 20 sows per group), 29 days post-service in pens with free-access, full-length individual feeding/lying stalls. CONTROL pens had fully slatted concrete floors, with two blocks of wood and two chains suspended in the group area. IMPROVED pens were the same but with rubber mats and a length of manila rope in each feeding stall, and straw provided in three racks in the group area. Direct observations of oral stereotypical (30 instantaneous scans per sow per day) and aggressive (all-occurrence sampling, 3 h per sow per day) behaviours were conducted 72 h post-mixing, in mid and late gestation. Skin lesions were counted 24 h and three weeks post-mixing, and in late gestation. Sows' locomotion (locomotory ability) was scored using a visual analogue scale in mid and late gestation. Right and left eye tear staining was scored in late gestation. Indications of better welfare in IMPROVED sows included performance of fewer oral stereotypies in mid and late gestation, and lower tear stain scores. These sows performed more aggression in late gestation, which was associated with access to enrichment, but skin lesion counts were not affected. Thus, the changes made in the IMPROVED treatment benefitted aspects of sow welfare.

An effective environmental enrichment framework for the continual improvement of production animal welfare

Substrates and objects are provided to farm animals on the assumption that they improve animal welfare by enriching the environment, but these often fail to consider the extent to which an environmental enrichment (EE) improves animal welfare, if at all. Furthermore, there are numerous definitions of EE, each with a unique expectation. If expectations of animal welfare improvement are set too high, industry uptake may be thwarted, but if thresholds are set too low it will not result in meaningful improvements to animal welfare. We propose an EE framework based on revised definitions of EE that reflect improvements to various components of animal welfare: (i) pseudo-enrichment; (ii) EE for meeting basic needs; (iii) EE for pleasure; and (iv) EE for positive welfare balance. This framework requires short- and long-term assessments to determine the impact of the EE, although many are lacking in the production animal literature. Redefining EE with a focus on specific animal welfare outcomes will assist producers in identifying the optimal EE for their enterprise. Subsequently, we encourage dialogue between farmers, researchers and industry stakeholders when designing environmental enrichment programmes. This framework is a science-based tool that can be used to inform the development of clear EE assessment protocols and requirements for animal welfare legislation, assurance programmes and industry. This evidence-based framework ensures that the focus is on the outcome of EE programmes rather than the intent. Importantly, this framework has the flexibility to adapt even as baseline environments evolve, ensuring the continual improvement to production animal welfare.

Are infrared thermography, feeding behavior, and heart rate variability measures capable of characterizing group-housed sow social hierarchies?

Group gestation housing is quickly becoming standard practice in commercial swine production. However, poor performance and welfare in group housed sows may result from the formation and maintenance of the social hierarchy within the pen. In the future, the ability to quickly characterize the social hierarchy via precision technologies could be beneficial to producers for identifying animals at risk of poor welfare outcomes. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the use of infrared thermography (IRT), automated electronic sow feeding systems, and heart rate monitors as potential technologies for detecting the social hierarchy within five groups of sows. Behavioral data collection occurred for 12 h after introducing five sow groups (1-5; n = 14, 12, 15, 15, and 17, respectively) to group gestation housing to determine the social hierarchy and allocate individual sows to 1 of 4 rank quartiles (RQ 1-4). Sows within RQ1 were ranked highest while RQ4 sows were ranked lowest within the hierarchy. Infrared thermal images were taken behind the neck at the base of the ear of each sow on days 3, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, 90, and 105 of the experiment. Two electronic sow feeders tracked feeding behavior throughout the gestation period. Heart rate monitors were worn by 10 randomly selected sows per repetition for 1 h prior to and 4 h after reintroduction to group gestation housing to collect heart rate variability (HRV). No differences were found between RQ for any IRT characteristic. Sows within RQ3 and RQ4 had the greatest number of visits to the electronic sow feeders overall (P < 0.04) but spent shorter time per visit in feeders (P < 0.05) than RQ1 and RQ2 sows. There was an interaction of RQ with hour for feed offered (P = 0.0003), with differences between RQ occurring in hour 0, 1, 2, and 8. Higher-ranked sows (RQ1 and RQ2) occupied the feeder for longer during the first hour than lower ranking sows (RQ3 and RQ4; P < 0.04), while RQ3 sows occupied the feeder longer than RQ1 sows during hour 6, 7, and 8 (P < 0.02). Heart beat interval (RR) collected prior to group housing introduction differed between RQ (P < 0.02 for all), with RQ3 sows exhibiting the lowest RR, followed by RQ4, RQ1, and RQ2. Rank quartile also affected standard deviation of RR (P = 0.0043), with RQ4 sows having the lowest, followed by RQ1, RQ3, and RQ2 sows. Overall, these results indicate that feeding behavior and HRV measures may be capable of characterizing social hierarchy in a group housing system.

Effects of Enrichment Type, Presentation and Social Status on Enrichment Use and Behavior of Sows—Part 2: Free Access Stall Feeding

Simple Summary

The Canadian pork industry is transitioning to group housing gestation. The Code of Practice for pigs recommends the provision of enrichment. Although straw is considered prime enrichment, it is perceived as a biosecurity risk and manure management issue; therefore, identifying other enrichment materials is needed to promote adequate welfare. Previously, our group examined the effects of four types of point-source enrichments in an Electronic Sow Feeding (ESF) system. This study is a continuation of our previous research applied in Free Access Stalls (FAS). Four treatments were studied: (1) Constant: constant provision of wood on chain; (2) Rotate: rotation of three enrichments (rope, straw, and wood on chain); (3) Stimulus: rotation of three enrichments with an associative stimulus (bell or whistle); and (4) Control: no enrichment. Contact with enrichment and time spent in different postures were measured using scan sampling. Skin lesions were scored, and salivary cortisol was measured in a subset of dominant and subordinate sows. Sows spent more time contacting straw compared to other types of enrichment. There was no difference in enrichment use between dominant and subordinate sows, no increase in cortisol concentrations in subordinates nor significant differences in aggression. In conclusion, sows preferred straw enrichment and FAS provided some protection against aggression and stress.

Abstract

Continuing with previous research by our group in an ESF system, four types of enrichment treatments were assessed in gestating sows housed in Free Access Stalls: (1) Constant: constant provision of wood on chain; (2) Rotate: rotation of rope, straw and wood; (3) Stimulus: rotation of enrichments with an acoustic cue; and (4) Control: no enrichment. Treatments had a 12 day-duration. Four groups (28 ± 2 sows) were studied from weeks 6 to 14 of gestation. Groups received all treatments in random order. Three dominant and 3 subordinates per pen were selected using a feed competition test. Digital photos were collected at 10 min intervals for 8 h on days 1, 8, 10 and 12 to record interactions with enrichment. Skin lesions were assessed on days 1 and 12, and salivary cortisol was assessed in weeks 6, 10 and 14 of gestation. More enrichment use was observed in Rotate and Stimulus treatments compared to Constant, and more sows contacted enrichment when straw was provided in the Rotate and Stimulus treatments. There was no difference in the amount of enrichment use by dominants and subordinates, no cortisol concentration elevation in subordinate sows nor any difference in lesion scores. In conclusion, social status had little impact and feeding system is important to reduce stress and aggression.

The Neurobiology of Behavior and Its Applicability for Animal Welfare: A Review

Simple Summary

Animal welfare is the result of physical and psychological well-being and is expected to occur if animals are free: (1) from hunger, thirst and malnutrition, (2) from discomfort, (3) from pain, (4) to express normal behavior, and (5) from fear and distress. Nevertheless, well-being is not a constant state but rather the result of certain brain dynamics underlying innate motivated behaviors and learned responses. Thus, by understanding the foundations of the neurobiology of behavior we fathom how emotions and well-being occur in the brain. Herein, we discuss the potential applicability of this approach for animal welfare. First, we provide a general view of the basic responses coordinated by the central nervous system from the processing of internal and external stimuli. Then, we discuss how those stimuli mediate activity in seven neurobiological systems that evoke innate emotional and behavioral responses that directly influence well-being and biological fitness. Finally, we discuss the basic mechanisms of learning and how it affects motivated responses and welfare.

Abstract

Understanding the foundations of the neurobiology of behavior and well-being can help us better achieve animal welfare. Behavior is the expression of several physiological, endocrine, motor and emotional responses that are coordinated by the central nervous system from the processing of internal and external stimuli. In mammals, seven basic emotional systems have been described that when activated by the right stimuli evoke positive or negative innate responses that evolved to facilitate biological fitness. This review describes the process of how those neurobiological systems can directly influence animal welfare. We also describe examples of the interaction between primary (innate) and secondary (learned) processes that influence behavior.

Social Status Differentially Affects Behavioral and Immunological Outcomes of Group-Kept Sows Fed Different Dietary Fiber Using Different Length Feeding Barriers

Social conflict is inevitable among group-housed sows and may contribute to poorer welfare among those sows experiencing more social stress. The degree of individual welfare is associated with social position within the group. Therefore, this study examined the effects of social status on behavior, immune, endocrine, and productivity of group-housed pregnant sows fed a diet supplemented with 30% wheat middlings and 15% soybean hulls (MID-SH) or 30% distillers dried grains with solubles and 30% corn germ meal (DDGS-GM) and in pens with individual feeding places made from short (58.4 cm) or long (203.2 cm) barriers. A 2 × 2 factorial design resulted in 4 experimental treatment groups (n = 9 sows/diet-length-block combination): (1) MID-SHshort; (2) MID-SHlong; (3) DDGS-GMshort; (4) DDGS-GMlong. Groups of sows equally representing all diet-length combinations across 4 blocks (n = 36 sows/block) were subjected to a feeding competition test to identify highest (dominant) and lowest (subordinate) ranked sows within each group resulting in 64 sows (n = 16 sows/treatment; n = 32 sows/social status). Data revealed 2- and 3-way interactive effects on aggressive behavior (P &lt; 0.005), postural (P &lt; 0.01), oral (P &lt; 0.0001), and eating (P &lt; 0.005) behaviors, sow mean body weights and gains (P &lt; 0.05) and litter weaning weights (P &lt; 0.05), especially among subordinates in pens with long barriers. Subordinates in pens with long barriers received 21% less aggression and were 73% less likely to be displaced than subordinates in pens with short ones (P &lt; 0.0001). Dietary treatment also influenced some of these measures among the subordinates in pens with long barriers. For example, subordinates in DDGS-GMlong received 64 and 67% less aggression than subordinates in DDGS-GMshort and MID-SHshort (P &lt; 0.005). Eat bouts were greatest among subordinates in MID-SHlong, and sitting and sham-chewing were less. However, those in DDGS-GMlong spent less time standing and laying, and their litters were 15.28 kg heavier (P = 0.01), but overall subordinates fed DDGS-GM diet were lightest and gained less total body weight than those fed MID-SH (P &lt; 0.05). Other measures such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio were elevated among dominants in MID-SHlong (P &lt; 0.05); whereas, cortisol (P = 0.06) was lowest and glucose (P = 0.09) highest for subordinates in DDGS-GMlong. These data imply that subordinates benefited from being housed in pens with long barriers, but the type of dietary fiber consumed differentially influenced behavioral budget and several sow- or litter-related traits among subordinates in pens with long barriers. In contrast, the subordinates in pens with short barriers had poorer welfare regardless of diet. Collectively, these data imply that social status is a crucial factor contributing to variation in individual well-being among group-housed sows and that sows of different social positions within a group may evoke different biological responses in an attempt to cope.

Short-Term Impact of Point-Source Enrichment on the Behavior of Gestating Sows Housed in Groups

Environmental enrichment is an important strategy to improve the welfare of farm animals. However, relatively little is known about enrichment for gestating sows, especially those raised on farms with slatted floors and for which provision of straw may be difficult. The objective of this study was therefore to investigate the short-term (4 d) impact of a point-source enrichment object on the behavior of gestating sows housed in group pens. Four pens of gestating sows on a university research farm were randomly allocated to receive either enrichment or no enrichment (control) in a 2 by 2 crossover design. Time budgets were established by video recording focal sows' behaviors (n = 10 focals per pen) every 15 min between 0800 and 1500 every day. Enrichment use was further characterized by continuous behavior sampling for a 1 h interval between 0830 and 0930 each day. The impact of parity, lameness and presence of stereotypical behavior such as sham chewing on enrichment use was evaluated. Over the course of the study, focal sows spent approximately 73% of observations inactive [either lying down (70%), standing (2%), or sitting (1%)]. Within the remaining observations, sows were most commonly observed sham-chewing (16%), followed by 3% exploring, 2% feeding, 2% walking and 1% interacting with the enrichment when it was available. Low-parity sows, moderately-lame sows, and sows observed sham chewing at baseline displayed more consistent enrichment use over the course of the study (p = 0.02, p &lt; 0.01, p = 0.04, respectively). While no adverse behavioral effects (increased agonism or sham chewing) due to provision or removal of the enrichment object were observed and while 85% of sows were observed to interact with enrichment at least once, interest declined sharply after the first day. We conclude that further research is needed to identify effective and sustainable enrichment strategies for gestating sows.

Effects of Enrichment Type, Presentation and Social Status on Enrichment Use and Behaviour of Sows with Electronic Sow Feeding

The goal of this study was to identify practical enrichments for sows in partially or fully slatted pen systems. Four treatments were applied: (1) Constant: constant provision of wood on chain; (2) Rotate: rotation of rope, straw and wood enrichments; (3) Stimulus: rotation of enrichments (as in Rotate) with an associative stimulus (bell or whistle); and (4) Control: no enrichment, with each treatment lasting 12 days. Six groups of 20 ± 2 sows were studied from weeks 6 to 14 of gestation in pens with one electronic sow feeder. Each group received all treatments in random order. Six focal animals (3 dominant and 3 subordinate) were selected per pen using a feed competition test. Digital photos were collected at 10 min intervals for 8 h (between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m.) on 4 days/treatment (d 1, 8, 10 and 12) to record interactions with enrichment. Skin lesions were assessed on days 1 and 12, and saliva cortisol samples collected in weeks 6, 10 and 14 of gestation on focal pigs. Sows spent more time in contact with enrichments in Rotate and Stimulus treatments than Constant. Enrichment treatments did not influence lesion scores. Subordinate sows spent more time standing and near enrichments than dominants. Subordinate sows also received more skin lesions and had higher salivary cortisol concentrations than dominants. These results indicate that access to enrichment is valued by sows but can result in greater aggression directed towards subordinates.

Provision Point-Source Materials Stimulates Play in Sows but Does Not Affect Aggression at Regrouping

When sows are mixed into groups, hierarchies form and resulting aggression and stress can affect production and welfare. This study determined the effect of providing point-source materials on aggressive and play behaviors in gestating sows. Large white cross Landrace sows were mixed after insemination; six pens of 12 sows were housed in 'standard' pens, and six pens of 12 sows were housed in 'enhanced' pens. The 'enhanced' pens each contained two rubber mats, eight strands of 24 mm-thick sisal rope and two yellow plastic disks, suspended from the roof. The sows remained in these pens until pregnancy confirmation. Salivary cortisol concentration, injury counts, and sow behaviors were recorded the day before mixing (day 1), mixing (day 0) and post-mixing day 1, day 4, day 7 and day 20. At farrowing, reproductive outcomes were obtained. Play was observed (including locomotor and object play) in the 'enhanced' pen, and percentage of time spent playing was greater on d4 (1.48 ± 0.3 Square root transformed data (2.84% non-transformed adjusted mean)), d7 (1.43 ± 0.3 (2.97%)) and d20 (1.64 ± 0.3 (3.84%)), compared to d0 (0.56 ± 0.3 (0.70%)) and d1 (0.87 ± 0.3 (1.67%) (p < 0.05)). No play was observed in standard housing. Aggression, salivary free cortisol concentrations and injuries were unaffected (p > 0.05). The provision of materials had no impact on aggression, although their presence maintained sow interest and play behavior, suggesting a positive effect.

Individual and pen-based oral fluid sampling: A welfare-friendly sampling method for group-housed gestating sows

The aims of this study were to assess the feasibility of individual and pen-based oral fluid sampling (OFS) in 35 pig herds with group-housed sows, compare these methods to blood sampling, and assess the factors influencing the success of sampling. Individual samples were collected from at least 30 sows per herd. Pen-based OFS was performed using devices placed in at least three pens for 45min. Information related to the farm, the sows, and their living conditions were collected. Factors significantly associated with the duration of sampling and the chewing behaviour of sows were identified by logistic regression. Individual OFS took 2min 42s on average; the type of floor, swab size, and operator were associated with a sampling time >2min. Pen-based OFS was obtained from 112 devices (62.2%). The type of floor, parity, pen-level activity, and type of feeding were associated with chewing behaviour. Pen activity was associated with the latency to interact with the device. The type of floor, gestation stage, parity, group size, and latency to interact with the device were associated with a chewing time >10min. After 15, 30 and 45min of pen-based OFS, 48%, 60% and 65% of the sows were lying down, respectively. The time spent after the beginning of sampling, genetic type, and time elapsed since the last meal were associated with 50% of the sows lying down at one time point. The mean time to blood sample the sows was 1min 16s and 2min 52s if the number of operators required was considered in the sampling time estimation. The genetic type, parity, and type of floor were significantly associated with a sampling time higher than 1min 30s. This study shows that individual OFS is easy to perform in group-housed sows by a single operator, even though straw-bedded animals take longer to sample than animals housed on slatted floors, and suggests some guidelines to optimise pen-based OFS success.

Group and individual sow behavior is altered in early gestation by space allowance in the days immediately following grouping

Aggression between domestic sows is greatest when sows are first introduced to each other and hierarchies form. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of a spacious "mixing pen" on sow aggression and stress. Sows were mixed into groups of 6 and allowed 2 (LOW; 8 groups and 48 sows), 4 (MED; 7 groups and 42 sows), or 6 m/sow (HIGH; 7 groups and 42 sows) for 4 d after mixing, at which point all pens were equalized to 2 m/sow. Salivary cortisol concentration and injury counts were measured on d -1, 0, 1, 3, and 4 relative to mixing, and behavior was also recorded on each of these days following mixing. Reproductive performance was assessed at farrowing. A linear mixed model was applied to the data. Data are presented as least squares means and standard error of the mean. Where transformations occurred, nontransformed adjusted means are presented in parentheses following the presentation of transformed data. In the primary analyses where measures were considered at the pen level, there were no effect of space allowance on fight number per sow, duration of fights, percentage of total time spent fighting, displacements, bites, knocks, and lunges ( > 0.05). These measures were higher on d 0 (i.e., fight number 1.0 ± 0.1 [13.8]) compared with d 1 (0.4 ± 0.1 [4.2]), 3 (0.7 ± 0.1 [5.3]), and 4 (0.7 ± 0.1 [5.5]; < 0.05), with no increase in aggression on d 4 when pen sizes were standardized ( > 0.05). There was increased percentage of time spent active (1.5 ± 0.02 [33.7] for LOW, 1.5 ± 0.02 [36.5] for MED, and 1.6 ± 0.02 [43.4] for HIGH) and time spent exploring (1.8 ± 0.1 [3.5] for LOW, 2.0 ± 0.1 [4.0] for MED, and 2.3 ± 0.1 [5.7] for HIGH) and number of nonaggressive sow-sow contacts (0.3 ± 0.09 [2.2] for LOW, 0.4 ± 0.07 [3.2] for MED, and 0.5 ± 0.07 [4.5] for HIGH) in HIGH compared with LOW ( < 0.05). Farrowing rate and total piglets born were not affected by treatment ( > 0.05). A secondary analysis was conducted that examined individual sow behavior within each pen, and this identified increased injury number in the lowest ranked sows (involved in no fights on d 0 and no displacements on d0 to d4) in LOW (9.3 ± 1.2 [107.9] for LOW, 6.2 ± 0.8 [53.0] for MED, and 5.1 ± 0.8 [28.1] for HIGH) and also decreased fight number and duration in HIGH compared with LOW on d 0 and 1 ( < 0.05). Our primary data analysis demonstrates positive exploratory and social behaviors with increased space and suggests that a reduction in space following hierarchy formation is not a significant stressor. Additionally, there is some evidence at an individual sow level that increased space at mixing benefits sow welfare parameters, especially for low-ranked sows.

Effect of continuous access to feeding stalls during mixing on behavior, welfare, and performance of group-housed gestating sows in different social ranks

This study was conducted to evaluate a strategy of using feeding stalls to protect low-ranking sows in group-housing systems. Sows (n = 150, parity 1–9) were mixed at weaning in pens of 15 sows. Control pens allowed sows to access feeding stalls for 1 h of feeding daily during the initial 2 d after mixing. Treatment pens allowed sows to access feeding stalls continuously. Social rank was determined based on outcomes of aggressive interactions among sows after mixing. Low-ranking sows used the feeding stalls more frequently (P < 0.01) than high-ranking sows during the initial 6 h after mixing. Continuous stall access reduced frequency of aggressive interactions (P = 0.05) and, consequently, reduced skin lesions (P = 0.05) of sows in the pen. Neither continuous access to stalls nor social rank affected performance of sows. These results suggest that low-ranking sows used feeding stalls as hiding spaces to escape from aggressive interactions during mixing, which reduced skin lesions caused by aggression and improved the welfare of sows in the group-housing system studied.

Public Attitudes to Housing Systems for Pregnant Pigs

Understanding concerns about the welfare of farm animals is important for the development of socially sustainable production practices. This study used an online survey to test how views on group versus stall housing for pregnant sows varied when Canadian and US participants were provided information about these systems, including access to scientific papers, YouTube videos, Google images, and a frequently-asked-questions page (S1 Appendix). Initial responses and changes in responses after accessing the information were analyzed from Likert scores of 242 participants and from their written comments. Participants were less willing to accept the use of gestation stalls after viewing information on sow housing. For example, initially 30.4% of respondents indicated that they supported the use of gestation stalls; this declined to 17.8% after participants were provided additional information. Qualitative analysis of comments showed that supporters of gestation stalls expressed concern about the spread of disease and aggression between animals in less confined systems, whereas supporters of group housing placed more emphasis on the sow’s ability to interact socially and perform natural behaviors. These results point to public opposition to the use of gestation stalls, and indicate that the more that the public learns about gestation stalls the less willing they will be to accept their use.

If you knew what was good for you! The value of environmental enrichments with known welfare benefits is not demonstrated by sows using operant techniques

This study assessed the motivation of gestating sows housed in standard, barren gestation stalls (used for breeding/implantation and/or gestation) for access to environmental enrichment. Enrichment consisted of a cotton rope or rubber mat in comparison to positive (additional food when fed at commercial levels) and negative (empty trough) controls. Although environmental enrichment may improve animal welfare, sows' valuation of enrichments is largely unknown. This study used an operant panel and obtained behavioral measures to quantify motivation. As indicated by a higher price paid and lower latencies to press the panel and enter the treatment stall (all comparisons, p < .05), sows demonstrated higher motivation for food compared with all treatments. Sows housed in gestation stalls did not demonstrate high motivation via operant responding for a cotton rope or a rubber mat; nor did they demonstrate any differences in behavioral measures (all comparisons, p > .10). Although sows' motivation for a mat did not differ from that for an empty trough, previous work has demonstrated the welfare benefits associated with comfort flooring.