Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-2c8nx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-23T08:53:16.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Food restriction as a cause of stereotypic behaviour in tethered gilts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

M. C. Appleby  and
A. B. Lawrence
M. C. Appleby
Affiliation:
Edinburgh School of Agriculture, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
A. B. Lawrence
Affiliation:
Edinburgh School of Agriculture, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
Get access

Abstract

The behaviour of Large White × Landrace gilts tethered in stalls was studied by scan sampling from 07.00 to 17.00 h on 3 days consecutively every 5 weeks. Results are presented on 30 gilts sampled during their first 5 weeks in the house, period 1, and on 36 gilts during the following 5-week period, period 2. Twenty individuals were common to both samples. Gilts were fed at 08.00 h with a pelleted complete diet, either on low food levels (1·25 to 2·00 kg) or on high food levels (2·2 to 4·0 kg).

In both periods behaviour was strongly related to food allowance in individual gilts. Gilts on low food levels spent a greater proportion of their time in the standing position than those on high food levels (period 1, medians 0·31 and 0·12 respectively; period 2, medians 0·27 and 0·11 respectively), spent more time in repetitive behaviour (period 1, medians 0·22 and 0·04 respectively; period 2, medians 0·16 and 0·07 respectively) and spent a greater proportion of their standing time in repetitive behaviour (period 1, medians 0·46 and 0 respectively; period 2, medians 0·30 and 0 respectively). Similarly, all three measures of behaviour correlated negatively with food allowance overall, but there was some indication that food level had a threshold effect, with more activity and repetitive behaviour occurring on food levels below about 2 kg.

These results suggest that if food allowances are low tether stalls are not a suitable system of housing for pregnant sows.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , August 1987 , pp. 103 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1987

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Agricultural Research Council. 1981. The Nutrient Requirements of Pigs. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. and Wainman, F. W. 1961. The utilization of food by sheep and cattle. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 57: 419–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, D. M. 1983. Stereotypies as animal welfare indicators. In Indicators Relevant to Farm Animal Welfare (ed. Smidt, D.), pp. 81–87. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, D. M. and Potter, M. J. 1984. Factors affecting the occurrence of stereotypies in stall-housed dry sows. Proceedings of the International Congress on Applied Ethology in Farm Animals (ed. Unshelm, J., Putten, G. van and Zeeb, K.), pp. 229–231. FRG. Kiel.Google Scholar
Close, W. H. and Cole, D. J. A. 1986. Some aspects of the nutritional requirements of sows: their relevance n i the development of a feeding strategy. Livestock Production Science 15: 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, G. M. 1985. The development and significance of abnormal stereotyped behaviours in tethered sows. DAS Thesis, University of Wageningen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cronin, G. M., Tartwijk, J. M. F. M. van, Hel, W. van der and Verstegen, M. W. A. 1986. The influence of degree of adaptation to tether-housing by sows in relation to behaviour and energy metabolism. Animal Production 42: 257–268.Google Scholar
Dantzer, R. and Mormede, P. 1983. De-arousal properties of stereotyped behaviour: evidence from pituitary-adrenal correlates in pigs. Applied Animal Ethology 10: 233–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, M. S. 1983. Battery hens name their price: consumer demand theory and the measurement of ethological ‘needs’. Animal Behaviour 31: 1195–1205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deag, J. M. 1985. KEYBEHAVIOUR: a program for the recording of keypress-time behaviour data on an Epson HX-20 computer. Department of Zoology, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Done-Currie, J. R., Hecker, I. F. and Wodzicka-Tomaszewka, M. 1984. Behaviour of sheep transferred from pasture to an animal house. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 12: 121–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, I. J. H. and Wood-Gush, D. G. M. 1972. Thwarting of feeding behaviour in the domestic fowl. Animal Behaviour 20: 444–451.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evans, H. L. 1971. Rats activity: influence of light-dark cycle, food presentation and deprivation. Physiology and Behavior 7: 455–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fraser, D. 1975. The effect of straw on the behaviour of sows in tether stalls. Animal Production 21: 59–68.Google Scholar
Le Magnen, J. 1975. Hunger. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Marsden, D. and Wood-Gush, D. G. M. 1986. A note on the behaviour of individually-penned sheep regarding their use for research purposes. Animal Production 42: 157–159.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1984. Pig environment. Booklet 2410. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, London.Google Scholar
Mroz, Z., Partridge, I. G., Mitchell, G. and Keal, H. D. 1986. The effect of oat hulls, added to the basal ration for pregnant sows, on reproductive performance, apparent digestibility, rate of passage and plasma parameters. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 37: 239–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palya, W. L. and Zacna, J. P. 1980. Stereotyped adjunctive pecking by caged pigeons. Animal Learning and Behavior 8: 293–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushen, J. P. 1984. Stereotyped behaviour, adjunctive drinking and the feeding periods of tethered sows. Animal Behaviour 32: 1059–1067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushen, J. P. 1985. Stereotypies, aggression and the feeding schedules of tethered sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 14: 137–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savory, C. J. 1986. Some observations on restricted-fed broiler breeder hens and their implications for welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 16: 99 (Abstr.).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stolba, A., Baker, N. and Wood-Gush, D. G. M. 1983. The characterization of stereotyped behaviour in stalled sows by informational redundancy. Behaviour 87: 157–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willard, J. G., Willard, J. C., Wolfram, S. A. and Baker, J. P. 1977. Effect of diet on cecal pH and feeding behavior of horses. Journal of Animal Science 45: 87–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wood-Gush, D. G. M. and Beilharz, R. G. 1983. The enrichment of a bare environment for animals in confined conditions. Applied Animal Ethology 10: 209–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar