Yang KY, Jang DH, Kwon KS, Ha T, Kim JB, Ha JJ, Lee JY, Kim JK. Behavioral changes of sows with changes in flattening rate.
JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 2022;
64:564-573. [PMID:
35709125 PMCID:
PMC9184704 DOI:
10.5187/jast.2022.e26]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2021] [Revised: 03/16/2022] [Accepted: 04/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
In this study, considering the difficulties for all farms to convert farm styles
to animal welfare-based housing, an experiment was performed to observe the
changes in the behavior and welfare of sows when the slat floor was changed to a
collective breeding ground. Twenty-eight sows used in this study were between
the second and fifth parities to minimize the influence of parity. Using a flats
floor cover, the flattening rates were treated as 0%, 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50%.
Data collection was the behavior of sows visually observed using a camera (e.g.,
standing, lying, fighting and excessive biting behaviors, and abnormal
behaviors) and the animal welfare level measured through field visits. Lying
behavior was found to be higher (p < 0.01) as the flattening
rate increased, and sows lying on the slatted cover also increased as the
flattening rate increased (p < 0.01). Fighting behavior
wasincreased when the flattening rate was increased to 20%, and chewing behavior
was increased (p < 0.05) as the flattening rate increased.
The animal welfare level of sows, ‘good feeding’, it was found
that all treatment groups for body condition score and water were good at 100
(p < 0.05). ‘Good housing’ was the maximum
value (100) in each treatment group. As the percentage of floor increased, the
minimum good housing was increased from 78 in 0% flattening rate to 96 in 50%
flattening rate. The maximum (100) ‘good health’ was achieved in
the 0% and 20% flattening rates, and it was 98, 98, and 99 in the 30%, 50%, and
40% flattening rate, respectively. ‘Appropriate behavior’ score
was significantly lower than that of other paremeters, but when the flattening
ratio was 0% and 20%, the maximum and minimum values were 10. At 40% and 50%,
the maximum values were 39 and 49, respectively, and the minimum values were
analyzed as 19 for both 40% and 50%. These results will be used as basic data
about sow welfare for farmers to successfully transition to group housing and
flat floors.
Collapse