Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T12:05:38.443Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of performance and welfare of single-caged and group-housed rabbit does

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2012

Zs. Szendrő ,
A. Mikó ,
M. Odermatt ,
Zs. Gerencsér ,
I. Radnai ,
B. Dezséry ,
É. Garai ,
I. Nagy ,
K. Szendrő  and
Zs. Matics
Zs. Szendrő*
Affiliation:
Department of Poultry and Small Animal Breeding, Faculty of Animal Science, 7401 Kaposvár, PO Box 16, Hungary
A. Mikó
Affiliation:
Department of Poultry and Small Animal Breeding, Faculty of Animal Science, 7401 Kaposvár, PO Box 16, Hungary
M. Odermatt
Affiliation:
Olivia Ltd, Mizse 94, 6050 Lajosmizse, Hungary
Zs. Gerencsér
Affiliation:
Department of Poultry and Small Animal Breeding, Faculty of Animal Science, 7401 Kaposvár, PO Box 16, Hungary
I. Radnai
Affiliation:
Department of Poultry and Small Animal Breeding, Faculty of Animal Science, 7401 Kaposvár, PO Box 16, Hungary
B. Dezséry
Affiliation:
Department of Poultry and Small Animal Breeding, Faculty of Animal Science, 7401 Kaposvár, PO Box 16, Hungary
É. Garai
Affiliation:
Department of Poultry and Small Animal Breeding, Faculty of Animal Science, 7401 Kaposvár, PO Box 16, Hungary
I. Nagy
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Product Processing and Qualification, Faculty of Animal Science, 7401 Kaposvár, PO Box 16, Hungary
K. Szendrő
Affiliation:
Department of Poultry and Small Animal Breeding, Faculty of Animal Science, 7401 Kaposvár, PO Box 16, Hungary
Zs. Matics
Affiliation:
Department of Physiology and Animal Hygiene, HAS-ORG Research Group of Animal Breeding and Hygiene, Faculty of Animal Science, Kaposvár University, 7401 Kaposvár, PO Box 16, Hungary
*
†E-mail: Szendro.Zsolt@ke.hu
Get access

Abstract

Although rabbit does are generally single housed on rabbit farms worldwide, it has been suggested by some specialists and recommendation of organic rabbit production systems that group housing of does is more comfortable and similar to the living conditions of the European wild rabbits. The aim of this experiment was to compare production of single-caged (S) and group-housed does (G). The S does were housed in commercial rabbit cages (floor area 0.32 m2 and 0.3 m high). In treatment G, four does and one buck were housed in four pens measuring 7.7 m2 (half of the floor was deep litter and the other half was plastic slat), with four nest boxes in each pen (n = 16). In treatment S, approximately half of the does (n = 18) were inseminated 2 days after kindling (S-33), whereas in the remaining does (n = 16) AI was done 11 days after kindling (S-42). A single-batch system (all of the does in the group were inseminated on the same day) was used in both S treatments. Kindling rates were 77.6%, 85.2% and 45.6% in treatments S-33, S-42 and G, respectively (P < 0.05). During the experiment, the percentage of does that kindled 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 times were 17%, 25%, 17%, 25%, 17% and 0% (G); 0%, 0%, 0%, 8%, 69% and 23% (S-33); and 0%, 0%, 17%, 58% and 25% (S-42, in this treatment does had a maximum of four kindlings). There were no significant differences among treatments for litter size. In treatments S-33, S-42 and G, suckling mortality was 14.0%, 15.2% and 38.5%, respectively (P < 0.001); survival of does was 71%, 81% and 50% (P = 0.084); and faecal corticosterone concentrations were 61, 54 and 175 nmol/g (P < 0.001). The high mortality of kits was associated with stress and aggressive behaviour of does, including scratching, biting or killing the kits, which resulted in the high rates of mortality and culling, as well as shorter lifespan of does. Because of high stress, increased mortality and morbidity, and low productivity, group housing of rabbit does resulted in poorer animal welfare and increased production costs, and therefore is not recommended.

Keywords

rabbit doessingle housinggroup housingperformancewelfare
Type
Behaviour, welfare and health
Information
animal , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , March 2013 , pp. 463 - 468
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2012

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

Alabiso, M, Bonanno, A, Alicata, ML, Leto, G, Todaro, M 1996. Productivity of rabbit does subjected to artificial insemination and natural mating. Proceedings of the 6th World Rabbit Congress, Toulouse, France, vol. 2, pp. 29–32.Google Scholar
Andrist, CA, Bigler, L, Buchwalder, T, Roth, BA 2011. The extent of lesions in group housed rabbits and potential risk factors. Proceedings of the 17th International Symposium on Housing and Diseases of Rabbits, Furproviding Animals and Pet Animals, Celle, Germany, May 11–12, pp. 34–42.Google Scholar
Baumann, P, Bigler, L, Buchwalder, T, Huber-Eicher, B 2003. Recherche pour le bien-être de la volaille et des lapins. Magazine de l'OVF 1, 13–16.Google Scholar
Cowan, DP 1987. Group living in the European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus): mutual benefit or resource localization? Journal of Animal Ecology 5, 779–795.Google Scholar
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 2005. The impact of the current housing and husbandry systems on the health and welfare of farmed domestic rabbits. EFSA Journal 267, 1–137.Google Scholar
Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC) 1992. FAWC updates the five freedoms. Veterinary Record 131, 357.Google Scholar
Holst, D von 1998. The concept of stress and its relevance for animal behaviour. Advances in the Study of Behavior 27, 1–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holst, D von, Hutzelmayer, H, Kaetze, P, Khashei, M, Schönheiter, R 1999. Social rank, stress, and life expectancy in wild rabbits. Naturwissenschaften 86, 388–393.Google Scholar
Holst, D von, Hutzelmayer, H, Kaetze, P, Khashei, M, Rödel, HG, Schrutka, H 2002. Social rank fecundity and life time reproductive success in wild European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 51, 245–254.Google Scholar
Hoy, St, Verga, M 2006. Welfare indicators. In Recent advances in rabbit sciences (ed. L Maertens and P Coudert), pp. 71–74. ILVO, Melle, Belgium.Google Scholar
König, B 1997. Cooperative care of young in mammals. Naturwissenschaften 84, 95–104.Google Scholar
Künkele, J 1992. Infanticide in wild rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Journal of Mammalogy 73, 317–320.Google Scholar
Kutsukake, N 2009. Complexity, dynamics and diversity of sociality in group-living mammals. Ecological Research 24, 521–531.Google Scholar
Lebas, F, Coudert, P, Rochambeau, H de, bault, RG 1997. The rabbit – husbandry, health and production. FAO Animal Production and Health Series No. 21. Retrieved September 14, 2012, from www.fao.org/docrep/t1690E/t1690E00.htmGoogle Scholar
Mirabito, L, Galliot, P, Souchet, C, Dumont, F, Thomeret, F 2005a. Logement collectif des lapines reproductrices: conséquences zootechniques11émes Journées de la Recherche Cunicole, Paris, France, November 29–30, pp. 53–56.Google Scholar
Mirabito, L, Dumont, F, Galliot, P, Souchet, C 2005b. Logement collectif des lapines reproductrices: conséquences sur le comportement11émes Journées de la Recherche Cunicole, Paris, France, November 29–30, pp. 57–60.Google Scholar
Mugnai, C, Dal Bosco, A, Castellini, C 2009. Effect of different rearing systems and pre-kindling handling on behaviour and performance of rabbit does. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 118, 91–100.Google Scholar
Mykytowycz, R, Dudzinski, ML 1972. Aggressive and protective behaviour of adult rabbits Oryctolagus cuniculus (L.) towards juveniles. Behaviour 43, 97–120.Google Scholar
Palme, R, Robia, C, Messmann, S, Hofer, J, Möstl, E 1999. Measurement of featal cortisol metabolites in ruminants: non-invasive parameter of adrenocortical function Wiener tieraerztliche. Monatsschrift 86, 237–241.Google Scholar
Poujardieu, B, Theau-Clèment, M 1995. Productivitè de la lapine et ètat physiologique. Annales de Zootechnie 44, 29–39.Google Scholar
Rödel, GHStarkloff, A, Bautista, A, Friderich, A-C, von Holst, D 2008. Infanticide and maternal offspring defence in European wild rabbits under natural breeding condition. Ethology 114, 22–31.Google Scholar
Rommers, JM, Boiti, C, De Jong, I, Brecchia, G 2006. Performance and behaviour of rabbit does in a group-housing system with natural mating or artificial insemination. Reproduction Nutrition Development 46, 677–687.Google Scholar
Ruis, M 2006. Group housing of breeding does. In Recent advances in rabbit sciences (ed. L Maertens and P Coudert), pp. 99–205. ILVO, Melle, Belgium.Google Scholar
Ruis, M, Coenen, E 2004. A group-housing system for rabbit does in commercial production: a new approach. Proceedings of the 8th World Rabbit Congress, Puebla, Mexico, September 7–10, pp. 1501–1506.Google Scholar
Southern, HN 1948. Sexual and aggressive behaviour of the wild rabbit. Behaviour 1, 173–194.Google Scholar
Stauffacher, M 1992. Group housing and enrichment cages for breeding, fattening and laboratory rabbits. Animal Welfare 1, 105–125.Google Scholar
Szendrő, Zs, Radnai, I, ment, M, Jovánczai, Zs, meth, E, Milisits, G, Poigner, J 1999. Some factors influencing the effectiveness of post partum artificial insemination. Proceedings of the 11th Hungarian Conference on Rabbit Production, Kaposvár, Hungary, May 26, pp. 113–118.Google Scholar
Xiccato, G 1996. Nutrition of lactating does. Proceedings of the 6th World Rabbit Congress, Toulouse, France, July 9–12, vol 1, pp. 13–47.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Szendrő Supplementary Material

Photo

Download Szendrő Supplementary Material(File)
File 106.5 KB