Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:59:01.449Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The use of a second-order schedule to assess the effect of food bulk on the feeding motivation of growing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. E. L. Day ,
I. Kyriazakis  and
A. B. Lawrence
J. E. L. Day
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, Ashworth Building (Zoology), West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT
I. Kyriazakis
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
A. B. Lawrence
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
Get access

Abstract

It has been suggested that feeding motivation, and hence the incidence of certain abnormal behaviours, may be reduced by the gastro-intestinal distension which results from the ad libitum provision offoods with a high water-holding-capacity (WHO. Therefore, the aim of this experiment was to test the hypothesis that feeding motivation is inversely proportional to the WHC of meals which supply the same level of nutrients. Eight male pigs (initial body weight 54·0 (s.d. 5·76) kg) were offered a series of four foods which possessed increasing WHC due to a linearly increasing inclusion of dried citrus-pulp (2·18, 3·52, 5·60 and 6·92 g water per g dry food for LB, MLB, MHB and HB), but all with similar ratios of digestible energy (DE) to crude protein and minerals. The experimental treatments were allocated in two 4X4 Latin squares with blocks of 6 days separated by a 4-day change-over period. On each day the pigs were given food twice (09.00 h and 16.00 h) to provide the same level of scaled DE across the meals of each treatment. The resulting level offeeding motivation was measured in two successive tests at 30-min intervals before, and eight successive tests at 30-min intervals after, the ingestion of the first meal using a second-order operant conditioning schedule; a methodology which requires pigs to press a paddle to obtain a feeding-related stimuli (CS). It was found that the number ofCS earned pre-feeding was not affected by treatment (17·2, 17·2, 17·6 and 17·5 (s.e.d. 1·58) CS per test for LB, MLB, MHB and HB; P > 0·05), whereas, the number of CS earned post feeding was significantly affected by treatment (16·6, 15·5, 14·6 and 13·8 (s.e.d. 1·15) CS per test for LB, MLB, MHB and HB; P < 0·001). Within each treatment, the number ofCS earned did not alter significantly across any of the time-periods post feeding. As the number of CS earned has been shown to be a reliable indicator of feeding motivation, the results from this experiment support the hypothesis that feeding motivation is inversely proportional to the WHC of iso-energetic meals.

Keywords

feeding motivationfood bulkpigswater-holding capacity
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 63 , Issue 3 , December 1996 , pp. 447 - 455
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

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

Barnett, J. L., Cronin, G. M., McCallum, T. H. and Newman, E. A. 1994. Effects of food and time of day on aggression when grouping unfamiliar adult pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 39: 339–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouns, F., Edwards, S. A. and English, P. R. 1994. Effect of dietary fibre and feeding system on activity and oral behaviour of group housed gilts. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 39: 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, J. E. L., Kyriazakis, I. and Lawrence, A. B. 1995. The effect of food deprivation and the expression of foraging and exploratory behaviour in the growing pig. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 42: 193–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, J. E. L., Kyriazakis, I. and Lawrence, A. B. 1996. The use of a second-order schedule to measure feeding motivation in the pig. Applied Animal Behaviour Science press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deag, J. M. 1990. Keybehaviour—a program for behavioural data on an Atari Portfolio computer. John M. Deag, 10 Fletcher Grove, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 OJT, UK.Google Scholar
Deag, J. M. 1993. Keytime—a program system for and analysing behavioural data. Copyright John M. Deag, Fletcher Grove, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 OJT, UK.Google Scholar
Deutsch, J. A., Gonzalez, M. F. and Young, W. G. 1980. Two factors control meal size. Brain Research Bulletin 55: 55–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, S. A., Atkinson, K. A. and Lawrence, A. B. 1993. The effect of food level and type on behaviour of outdoor sows. In Proceedings of the international congress on ethology, Berlin, 26–30 July 1993 (ed. Nichelmann, M., Wierenga, H. and Braun, S.), pp. 501–503. KTBL, Darmstadt.Google Scholar
Fraser, D. 1987a. Attraction to blood as a factor in tail-biting by pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 17: 61–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D. 1987b. Mineral deficient diets and the pig's attraction to blood: implications for tail-biting. Canadian Journal ofAnimal Science. 67: 909–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houpt, K. A. 1982. Gastrointestinal factors in hunger and satiety. Neuroscience and Biobehavioural Reviews. 6: 145–164CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jensen, M. B., Kyriazakis, I. and Lawrence, A. B. 1993. The activity and straw directed behaviour of pigs offered foods of different crude protein content. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 37: 211–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kidder, D. E. and Manners, M. J. 1978. Digestion in the pig, pp. 12–32. Scientifica, Bristol.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I. 1994. The voluntary food intake and diet selection of pigs. In Principles of pig science (ed. Wiseman, J. and Varley, M.). Nottingham University Press, Nottingham.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I. and Emmans, G. C. 1995. The voluntary food intake of pigs given feeds based on wheat bran, dried citrus pulp and grass meal, in relation to measurements of feed bulk. British Journal of Nutrition. 73: 191–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1987. Genstat V, mark 1.3 Rothamstead Experimental Station, Harpenden, Hertfordshire.Google Scholar
Lawrence, A. B., Appleby, M. C., Illius, A. W. and MacLeod, H. A. 1989. Measuring hunger using operant conditioning: the effect of food bulk. Animal Production 48: 213–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, A. B., Appleby, M. C. and MacLeod, H. A. 1988. Measuring hunger in the pig using operant conditioning: the effect of food restriction. Animal Production. 47: 131–137.Google Scholar
Lawrence, A. B. and Illius, A. W. 1989. Methodology for measuring hunger and food needs using operant conditioning in the pig. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 24: 273–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, A. B., Terlouw, E. M. C. and Kyriazakis, I. 1993. The behavioural effects of undernutrition in confined farm animals. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 52: 219–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, J. E. and Edwards, S. A. 1994. Feeding behaviour of outdoor sows: the effects of diet quantity and type. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 41: 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parrot, R. F. and Baldwin, B. A. 1982. Centrally-administered bombesin produces effects unlike short-term satiety in operant feeding in pigs. Physiology and Behaviour. 28: 521–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putten, G. van. 1989. The pig: a model for discussing animal behaviour an d welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 22: 115–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robert, S., Matte, J. J., Farmer, C., Girard, C. L. and Martineau, G. P. 1993. High fibre diets for sows: effects on stereotypies and adjunctive drinking. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 37: 297–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushen, J. 1984. Stereotyped behaviour, adjunctive drinking and the feeding periods of tethered sows. Animal Behaviour. 32: 1059–1067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, B. F., Joiner, B. L. and Ryan, T. A. 1992. Minitab handbook (2nd edition). PWS-Kent Publishing Company, Boston.Google Scholar
Savory, C. J., Hocking, P. M., Mann, J. S. and Maxwell, M. H. 1996. Is broiler breeder welfare improved by using qualitative rather than quantitative food restriction to limit growth rate? British Poultry Science In press.Google Scholar
Smith, G. P. and Gibbs, J. 1979. Postprandial satiety. In Progress in psychology and physiological psychology, volume 8 (ed. Sprague, J. M. and Epstein, A. N.), pp. 179–242. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1989. Statistical methods. Iowa State University Press, Iowa.Google Scholar
Terlouw, E. M. C., Lawrence, A. B. and Illius, A. W. 1991. Influences of feeding level and physical restriction o n development of stereotypies in sows. Animal Behaviour. 42: 981–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. 1987. Elements of pig science. Longman Scientific and Technical, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Young, R. J., MacLeod, H. A. and Lawrence, A. B. 1994. Effect of manipulandum design on operant responding in pigs. Animal Behaviour. 47: 1488–1490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar