Piglets' weaning behavioural response is influenced by quality of human-animal interactions during suckling

Early human contact and housing for pigs - part 2: resilience to routine husbandry practices

The ability of pigs to cope with routine farming practices can affect their welfare. This paper is part of a series on early experiences and stress, and reports on the effects of early human contact and housing on the responses of pigs to routine husbandry practices. Using a 2 × 2 factorial design, 48 litters of pigs were raised in either a conventional farrowing crate (FC) or a loose farrowing pen (LP; PigSAFE pen) which was larger, more physically complex and allowed the sow to move freely. Piglets were provided with either routine contact from stockpeople (C), or routine contact plus regular opportunities for positive human contact (+HC) involving 5 min of scratching, patting and stroking imposed to the litter 5 days/week from 0 to 4 weeks of age. At 4 weeks of age, piglets were weaned and re-housed with controlled mixing of litters within treatment. At 4 days of age, after only 3 bouts of the handling treatment, +HC pigs showed less escape behaviour than C pigs after capture by a stockperson for vaccinations and tail docking, and shorter durations of vocalisations throughout the procedures. The  +HC pigs also showed less escape behaviour when captured by a stockperson at 3 weeks of age. The FC pigs showed less escape behaviour than LP pigs after capture by a stockperson at 4 days of age but not at 3 weeks of age. Serum cortisol concentrations were lower in FC pigs than LP pigs 2 h after weaning but not at 49 h after weaning, whereas serum cortisol concentrations were lower in  +HC pigs than C pigs at 49 h after weaning but not at 2 h after weaning. In the period from 0 to 1 h after weaning, C pigs from LP performed the most escape attempts, although escape attempts were rare overall. When being moved out of the home pen by a stockperson at 21 weeks of age, FC pigs showed less baulking than LP pigs, but there were no detected effects of human contact treatment. In conclusion, both housing system and human contact during lactation affected the stress responses of pigs to routine husbandry practices. The +HC and FC pigs appeared to cope better than C and LP pigs, based on lower responses indicative of stress including escape behaviour, vocalisations and cortisol concentrations. These findings are consistent with corresponding reductions in fear that were reported in Part 1 of this series of papers.

Review: Early life piglet experiences and impacts on immediate and longer-term adaptability

Pigs in production systems are routinely exposed to challenging situations including abrupt weaning, painful husbandry procedures, intense contact with stockpeople, and exposure to novel social and physical environments. The resilience of pigs to these stressors has implications for animal welfare and productivity and can be affected by early life experiences. In rodents and primates, early experiences with stressors that the animal can adequately cope with confers future stress adaptability, leading to less abnormal behaviour, lower behavioural and physiological responses to stressors, and faster recovery after stress exposure. Early experiences that can affect the ability of pigs to overcome challenge include interactions with the dam, conspecifics, humans, and the overall complexity of the environment. Farrowing crates limit the sow's ability to show maternal behaviour towards piglets, and negatively affect piglet social behaviour during lactation, with less play and more manipulation of pen mates in crates than in large pens. Rearing in pens has been proposed to improve the ability of pigs to cope with routine stressors, but the evidence for this is conflicting. The early housing environment can affect general fearfulness and fear of humans, and surprisingly, most studies have shown fear responses to be greater in pigs reared pens than in crates. Given the potential for fear to affect animal welfare and productivity, more detailed research on early housing effects is needed. While there is limited evidence that early housing influences fear in the longer term, human contact early in life appears to have a more profound and sustained effect, with regular positive human interaction early in life having an enduring effect on reducing pigs' fear of humans. The practicality of positive human-pig interaction in a commercial environment needs to be examined further, but only a small amount of positive human contact early in life can improve the resilience of pigs to routine husbandry stressors. Early social experience with non-littermates reduces stress at weaning and mixing, while early weaning before 3-4 weeks of age increases abnormal behaviours. Environmental enrichment, such as foraging substrates and increased floor space, reduces abnormal behaviour in piglets, but housing in an enriched environment early in life and subsequently in a non-enriched environment can increase abnormal behaviour if these environments are dramatically different. Although the later environment can modify the influence of the early environment, overall, early life experiences can be important in shaping how pigs cope with stress in both an immediate and longer-term capacity.

Improving young pig welfare on-farm: The Five Domains Model

Considering welfare through the "neonatal and nursery pig perspective" is an exciting approach, and one that resonates with consumers. Overlaying this with the Five Domains Model, as we suggest in this review, points to practical on-farm improvements that provide each pig the opportunity to experience positive mental states. The Five Domains Model is broken into physical and functional states, that includes Domain 1 Nutrition, Domain 2 Physical Environment, Domain 3 Health and, Domain 4 Behavioral Interaction, and Domain 5 Mental State. The Five Domains Model can build on the breadth and depth of swine welfare science to highlight opportunities to improve welfare on-farm. In Domain 1 management of increasingly large litters is considered, with examples of sow vs. artificial rearing, colostrum quality and quantity, and creep feed management strategies. Efforts can result in positive mental states such as feeling full and content and the ability to experience pleasure of drinking and food tastes/smells. Domain 2 considers space complexity and access to key resources, along with thermal and physical amenities, to promote feelings of physical comfort. Domain 3 considers pig health in three broad, yet inter-linking categories, (a) congenital and hereditary health, (b) environmental pathogen load and, (c) colostrum quality and quantity, and its effect on the microbiome. Improvements can result in a pig that displays vitality and feels healthy. Domain 4 provides the pig opportunities to express its rich behavioral repertoire, specifically positive social interactions, play, and exploration. These efforts can result in pigs feeling calm, safe, comfortable, having companionship, engaged, interested and rewarded. In conclusion, using the Five Domains Model can highlight numerous opportunities to improve current and future housing and management through the "neonatal and nursery pig perspective" with a focus on inducing positive mental states that can result in improved quality of life and welfare state.

Review: The Five Domains model and promoting positive welfare in pigs

Public concern for the welfare of farm animals has increased over recent years. Meeting public demands for higher animal welfare products requires robust animal welfare assessment tools that enable the user to identify areas of potential welfare compromise and enhancement. The Five Domains model is a structured, systematic, and comprehensive framework for assessing welfare risks and enhancement in sentient animals. Since its inception in 1994, the model has undergone regular updates to incorporate advances in animal welfare understanding and scientific knowledge. The model consists of five areas, or domains, that focus attention on specific factors or conditions that may impact on an animal's welfare. These include four physical/functional domains: nutrition, physical environment, health, and behavioural interactions, and a fifth mental or affective state domain. The first three domains draw attention to welfare-significant internal physical/functional states within the animal, whereas the fourth deals with welfare-relevant features of the animal's external physical and social environment. Initially named "Behaviour" Domain 4 was renamed "Behavioural Interactions" in the 2020 iteration of the model and was expanded to include three categories: interactions with the environment, interactions with other animals and interactions with humans. These explicitly focus attention on environmental and social circumstances that may influence the animal's ability to exercise agency, an important determinant of welfare. Once factors in Domains 1-4 have been considered, the likely consequences, in terms of the animal's subjective experiences, are assigned to Domain 5 (affective state). The integrated outcome of all negative and positive mental experiences accumulated in Domain 5 represents the animal's current welfare state. Because the model specifically draws attention to conditions that may positively influence welfare, it provides a useful framework for identifying opportunities to promote positive welfare in intensively farmed animals. When negative affective experiences are minimised, providing animals with the opportunity to engage in species-specific rewarding behaviours may shift them into an overall positive welfare state. In domestic pigs, providing opportunities for foraging, play, and nest building, along with improving the quality of pig-human interactions, has the potential to promote positive welfare.

Positive Human Contact and Housing Systems Impact the Responses of Piglets to Various Stressors

Simple Summary

Early life experiences such as contact with humans, maternal care and the physical environment can play a substantial role in shaping behavioural and physiological responses to stress. This experiment studied the effects of lactation housing systems and human interaction on stress in young pigs. We hypothesised that piglets handled in a positive manner and reared in loose farrowing and lactation pens with increased opportunity for interaction with their dam, greater space and more complexity in their physical environment have improved stress resilience than piglets reared in traditional farrowing crates with routine contact from stockpeople. In both housing systems, providing regular opportunities for positive human interaction reduced piglets’ fear of humans and routine husbandry procedures imposed by humans, and reduced the number of injuries obtained after weaning. However, contrary to the expected findings, piglets from loose farrowing and lactation pens were more reactive to capture by a stockperson, more fearful of novel and human stimuli, had more injuries during the lactation period and were more likely to perform behaviours which may be indicative of reduced coping after weaning. Whether these effects are specific to the loose farrowing and lactation system studied in this experiment or are reflective of other loose systems requires further research.

Abstract

This experiment studied the effects of lactation housing systems and human interaction on piglets’ responses to routine stressors. Forty litters of piglets were reared in either a standard farrowing crate (FC) or a loose farrowing and lactation pen (LP; PigSAFE pen) and received either routine contact with humans (C) or regular opportunities for positive human contact (+HC; 3 min of patting, stroking and scratching 5 times/week). Behavioural and physiological responses to routine husbandry procedures, weaning, novelty and humans were studied in addition to effects on piglet growth, injuries and survival. Compared to C piglets, +HC piglets vocalised for shorter durations (p = 0.018) during husbandry procedures and showed a lower intensity of escape behaviour during iron injection (p = 0.042) and oral vaccination (p = 0.026) at 3 d of age, capture at 2 wk of age (p < 0.001), and intramuscular vaccination (p = 0.005) at 3 wk of age. +HC piglets at 2 wk of age were faster than C piglets to approach (p = 0.048) and interact (p = 0.042) with a stationary unfamiliar human. Compared to LP piglets, FC piglets showed a lower intensity of escape behaviour during capture and iron administration by a stockperson at 3 d of age (p = 0.043). FC piglets at 2 wk of age were faster than LP piglets to approach (p = 0.005) and interact (p = 0.027) with a novel object and approach (p = 0.009) and interact (p = 0.008) with an unfamiliar human. FC piglets had fewer injuries than LP piglets at 2 wk of age (p = 0.004). +HC pigs had fewer injuries than C pigs after weaning (p = 0.003). After weaning there were more pigs from LP than FC observed to be upright (both stationary, p = 0.002 and walking, p = 0.024), vocalizing (p = 0.004), nosing another pig (p = 0.035) and nosing the pen floor (p = 0.038). There were no significant effects on neutrophil:lymphocyte ratios or plasma cortisol concentrations 1.5 h after weaning. However, 25 h after weaning +HC pigs had higher haptoglobin concentrations than C pigs (p = 0.002), and C/LP pigs had higher cortisol concentrations than +HC/LP and C/FC pigs (p = 0.012). There were no significant effects on piglet growth, the number of piglets born alive or the number stillborn, however there were more piglets weaned from FC than LP (p = 0.035). The results from this experiment raise questions that require further research on the ability of pigs reared in loose pens to cope with stressors such as exposure to humans, novelty, husbandry procedures and weaning. This experiment also provides evidence that regular positive human interaction reduces pigs’ fear of humans and husbandry procedures imposed by stockpeople. More research is required to determine if any of these effects are sustained long-term.

The perception of humans by piglets: recognition of familiar handlers and generalisation to unfamiliar humans

Humans are part of the environment of domestic animals and interact with them daily, providing a good basis for the study of interspecific relationships. Abilities to discriminate and recognise individuals form the basis of these relationships, and they are crucial skills for domestic animals, since individual humans can differ in their behaviour towards them. At the same time, with experience, animals may develop a general memory of humans and generalise their behaviour towards strangers. This study aimed to determine the extent to which weaned piglets can discriminate familiar humans and generalise their past experience when faced with unfamiliar humans. Forty-eight groups of three piglets were submitted to two consecutive 5-day conditioning periods of the same or opposite valence (positive and/or negative) given by one (A) or two (A then B) handlers. The reactivity of piglets to a motionless human and to an approaching human was measured before and after conditioning periods with unfamiliar and familiar handlers. Thereafter, piglets which received treatments with the two handlers A and B were subjected to a choice test between both handlers. The reactivity to an approaching human appeared to better reflect the past experience with familiar handlers since piglets clearly recognised them and adapted their behaviour accordingly. In contrast, reaction of piglets to a motionless human reflected their natural propensity to seek interaction, even after a negative experience. Although piglets were able to extend their memory of humans to an unfamiliar human through generalisation, many factors seemed to interact in this process, especially the complexity of the previous experience (inconsistent vs consistent) and the context in which piglets met the unfamiliar human (motionless vs approaching). We conclude that discrimination and generalisation processes of reactivity to humans do not simply rely on past interactions, but also depend on the context according to the degree of similitude with their past experience.

Positive human contact on the first day of life alters the piglet's behavioural response to humans and husbandry practices

This experiment examined the effects of positive human contact at suckling on the first day of life on the behavioural and physiological responses of piglets to both humans and routine husbandry procedures. Forty litters from multiparous sows were randomly allocated to one of two treatments: Control (CC, minimal human interaction with day-old piglets) or Positive Contact (PC, human talking and caressing piglets during 6 suckling bouts on their first day of life, day 1). In each litter, 2 males and 2 females were randomly selected and their behavioural responses to tail docking (day 2), and to an experimenter (day 35) were studied. Escape behaviour at tail docking was assessed according to intensity (on a scale from 0 to 4 representing no movement to high intensity movement) and duration (on a scale from 0 to 3 representing no movement to continuous movement). At day 15 of age, a human approach and avoidance test was performed on focal piglets and at day 15, escape behaviour to capture before and after testing was recorded again. Blood samples for cortisol analysis were obtained from the focal piglets 30 min after tail docking and 1 h after weaning. Escape behaviour to tail docking of the PC piglets was of shorter duration than that of the CC piglets (P = 0.05). There was a tendency for the escape behaviour both before and after testing at day 15 to be of a lower intensity (P = 0.11 and P = 0.06, respectively) and a shorter duration (P = 0.06 and P = 0.08, respectively) in the PC piglets. There was a tendency for PC piglets to have higher cortisol concentrations after tail docking than the CC piglets (P = 0.07). Male piglets had higher cortisol concentrations after tail docking and after weaning than female piglets (P = 0.02 and P = 0.03). The results indicate that Positive Contact treatment reduced the duration of escape behaviour of piglets to tail docking. The role of classical conditioning, habituation and developmental changes in the observed effects of the Positive Contact treatment is unclear. Nonetheless, this experiment demonstrated that brief positive human contacts early in life can alter the behavioural responses of piglets to subsequent stressful events.