Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T13:36:24.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors affecting piglet mortality during the first 24 h after the onset of parturition in large litters: effects of farrowing housing on behaviour of postpartum sows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2018

J. Yun Open the ORCID record for J. Yun [Opens in a new window] ,
T. Han ,
S. Björkman ,
M. Nystén ,
S. Hasan ,
A. Valros ,
C. Oliviero ,
Y. Kim  and
O. Peltoniemi
J. Yun*
Affiliation:
Department of Production Animal Medicine, Research Centre for Animal Welfare, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 57, 00014 Helsinki, Finland
T. Han
Affiliation:
Department of Production Animal Medicine, Production Animal Hospital, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 66, 00014 Helsinki, Finland
S. Björkman
Affiliation:
Department of Production Animal Medicine, Production Animal Hospital, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 66, 00014 Helsinki, Finland
M. Nystén
Affiliation:
Department of Production Animal Medicine, Production Animal Hospital, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 66, 00014 Helsinki, Finland
S. Hasan
Affiliation:
Department of Production Animal Medicine, Production Animal Hospital, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 66, 00014 Helsinki, Finland
A. Valros
Affiliation:
Department of Production Animal Medicine, Research Centre for Animal Welfare, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 57, 00014 Helsinki, Finland
C. Oliviero
Affiliation:
Department of Production Animal Medicine, Production Animal Hospital, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 66, 00014 Helsinki, Finland
Y. Kim
Affiliation:
Department of Food and Animal Biotech, College of Agriculture and Life Science, Seoul National University, San 56-1 Sillim-dong, 151-742 Seoul, Republic of Korea
O. Peltoniemi
Affiliation:
Department of Production Animal Medicine, Production Animal Hospital, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 66, 00014 Helsinki, Finland
*
†E-mail: jinhyeon.yun@helsinki.fi
Get access

Abstract

The present study aimed to identify the factors that affect immediate (within 24 h after farrowing onset) postnatal piglet mortality in litters with hyperprolific sows, and investigate their associations with behaviour of postpartum sows in two different farrowing housing systems. A total of 30 sows were housed in: (1) CRATE (n=15): the farrowing crate closed (0.80×2.20 m) within a pen (2.50×1.70 m), and (2) OPEN (n=15): the farrowing crate open (0.80×2.20×1.80 m) within a pen (2.50×2.40 m) with a provision of 20 ls of hay in a rack. A total of 518 live born piglets, produced from the 30 sows, were used for data analyses during the first 24 h after the onset of parturition (T24). Behavioural observations of the sows were assessed via video analyses during T24. Total and crushed piglet mortality rates were higher in OPEN compared with CRATE (P<0.01, for both). During T24, the OPEN sows tended to show higher frequency of postural changes (P=0.07) and duration of standing (P=0.10), and showed higher frequencies of bar-biting (P<0.05) and piglet trapping (P<0.01), when compared with the CRATE sows. During T24, the mortality rates caused by crushing were correlated with the piglet trapping event (r=0.93, P<0.0001), postural changes (r=0.37, P<0.01), duration of standing (r=0.32, P<0.01) and frequency of bar-biting behaviour (r=0.51, P<0.01) of the sows (n=30). In conclusion, immediate postnatal piglet mortality, mainly due to crushing, may be associated with potential increases in frequency of postural changes, duration of standing and incidence of piglet trapping in postpartum sows in the open crate system with large litters.

Keywords

hyperprolific pigloose-housedpostnatal mortalitysow behavioursalivary cortisol
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 13 , Issue 5 , May 2019 , pp. 1045 - 1053
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2018 

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

Algers, B and Uvnäs-Moberg, K 2007. Maternal behavior in pigs. Hormones and Behavior 52, 78–85.Google Scholar
Andersen, IL, Tajet, GM, Haukvik, IA, Kongsrud, S and Bøe, KE 2007. Relationship between postnatal piglet mortality, environmental factors and management around farrowing in herds with loose-housed, lactating sows. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science 57, 38–45.10.1080/09064700601159626Google Scholar
Baxter, EM, Adeleye, OO, Jack, MC, Farish, M, Ison, SH and Edwards, SA 2015. Achieving optimum performance in a loose-housed farrowing system for sows: the effects of space and temperature. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 169, 9–16.Google Scholar
Baxter, EM, Andersen, IL and Edwards, SA 2017. Sow welfare in the farrowing crate and alternatives. In Advances in pig welfare, (ed. M Špinka), pp. 27–72. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Baxter, EM, Jarvis, S, D’eath, RB, Ross, DW, Robson, SK, Farish, M, Nevison, IM, Lawrence, AB and Edwards, SA 2008. Investigating the behavioural and physiological indicators of neonatal survival in pigs. Theriogenology 69, 773–783.Google Scholar
Baxter, EM, Lawrence, AB and Edwards, SA 2011. Alternative farrowing systems: design criteria for farrowing systems based on the biological needs of sows and piglets. Animal 5, 580–600.Google Scholar
Chidgey, KL, Morel, PC, Stafford, KJ and Barugh, IW 2015. Sow and piglet productivity and sow reproductive performance in farrowing pens with temporary crating or farrowing crates on a commercial New Zealand pig farm. Livestock Science 173, 87–94.10.1016/j.livsci.2015.01.003Google Scholar
Chidgey, KL, Morel, PC, Stafford, KJ and Barugh, IW 2017. Sow and piglet behavioral associations in farrowing pens with temporary crating and in farrowing crates. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research 20, 91–101.Google Scholar
Damm, BI, Moustsen, V, Jørgensen, E, Pedersen, LJ, Heiskanen, T and Forkman, B 2006. Sow preferences for walls to lean against when lying down. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 99, 53–63.Google Scholar
Edwards, SA 2002. Perinatal mortality in the pig: environmental or physiological solutions? Livestock Production Science 78, 3–12.Google Scholar
Fries, E, Hesse, J, Hellhammer, J and Hellhammer, DH 2005. A new view on hypocortisolism. Psychoneuroendocrinology 30, 1010–1016.Google Scholar
Hales, J, Moustsen, VA, Nielsen, MBF and Hansen, CF 2016. The effect of temporary confinement of hyperprolific sows in sow welfare and piglet protection pens on sow behaviour and salivary cortisol concentrations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 183, 19–27.Google Scholar
Hänninen, L and Pastell, M 2009. CowLog: open-source software for coding behaviors from digital video. Behavior Research Methods 41, 472–476.10.3758/BRM.41.2.472Google Scholar
Harris, MJ and Gonyou, HW 1998. Increasing available space in a farrowing crate does not facilitate postural changes or maternal responses in gilts. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 59, 285–296.10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00142-7Google Scholar
Herpin, P, Le Dividich, J, Hulin, JC, Fillaut, M, De Marco, F and Bertin, R 1996. Effects of the level of asphyxia during delivery on viability at birth and early postnatal vitality of newborn pigs. Journal of Animal Science 74, 2067–2075.Google Scholar
King, RL, Baxter, EM, Matheson, SM and Edwards, SA 2018. Consistency is key: interactions of current and previous farrowing system on litter size and piglet mortality. Animal, https://doi.org/10.1017/S175173111800092.Google Scholar
Larsen, MLV, Thodberg, K and Pedersen, LJ 2017. Radiant heat increases piglets’ use of the heated creep area on the critical days after birth. Livestock Science 201, 74–77.Google Scholar
Mayer, JJ, Martin, FD and Brisbin, IL 2002. Characteristics of wild pig farrowing nests and beds in the upper coastal plain of south Carolina. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 78, 1–17.Google Scholar
Melišová, M, Illmann, G, Chaloupková, H and Bozděchová, B 2014. Sow postural changes, responsiveness to piglet screams, and their impact on piglet mortality in pens and crates. Journal of Animal Science 92, 3064–3072.Google Scholar
Pedersen, LJ, Berg, P, Jørgensen, G and Andersen, IL 2011. Neonatal piglet traits of importance for survival in crates and indoor pens. Journal of Animal Science 89, 1207–1218.Google Scholar
Pedersen, LJ, Jørgensen, E, Heiskanen, T and Damm, BI 2006. Early piglet mortality in loose-housed sows related to sow and piglet behaviour and to the progress of parturition. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 96, 215–232.10.1016/j.applanim.2005.06.016Google Scholar
Rohde Parfet, KA and Gonyou, HW 1988. Effect of creep partitions on teat-seeking behavior of newborn piglets. Journal of Animal Science 66, 2165–2173.10.2527/jas1988.6692165xGoogle Scholar
Rutherford, KMD, Baxter, EM, D’Eath, RB, Turner, SP, Arnott, G, Roehe, R, Ask, B, Sandøe, P, Moustsen, VA, Thorup, F and Edwards, SA 2013. The welfare implications of large litter size in the domestic pig I: biological factors. Animal Welfare 22, 199–218.10.7120/09627286.22.2.199Google Scholar
Stolba, A and Wood-Gush, DGM 1984. The identification of behavioural key features and their incorporation into a housing design for pigs. Annales de Recherches Veterinaires 15, 287–302.Google Scholar
Thodberg, K, Jensen, KH and Herskin, MS 2002a. Nest building and farrowing in sows: relation to the reaction pattern during stress, farrowing environment and experience. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 77, 21–42.10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00026-6Google Scholar
Thodberg, K, Jensen, KH and Herskin, MS 2002b. Nursing behaviour, postpartum activity and reactivity in sows: effects of farrowing environment, previous experience and temperament. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 77, 53–76.10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00023-0Google Scholar
Valros, A, Munsterhjelm, C, Puolanne, E, Ruusunen, M, Heinonen, M, Peltoniemi, OA and Pösö, AR 2013. Physiological indicators of stress and meat and carcass characteristics in tail bitten slaughter pigs. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 55, 75.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, AJ, Van Rens, BTTM, Van der Lende, T and Taverne, MAM 2005. Factors affecting duration of the expulsive stage of parturition and piglet birth intervals in sows with uncomplicated, spontaneous farrowings. Theriogenology 64, 1573–1590.Google Scholar
Vasdal, G, Østensen, I, Melišová, M, Bozděchová, B, Illmann, G and Andersen, IL 2011. Management routines at the time of farrowing – effects on teat success and postnatal piglet mortality from loose housed sows. Livestock Science 136, 225–231.Google Scholar
Weary, DM, Pajor, EA, Fraser, D and Honkanen, AM 1996. Sow body movements that crush piglets: a comparison between two types of farrowing accommodation. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 49, 149–158.Google Scholar
Weary, DM, Phillips, PA, Pajor, EA, Fraser, D and Thompson, BK 1998. Crushing of piglets by sows: effects of litter features, pen features and sow behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 61, 103–111.10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00187-7Google Scholar
Weber, R, Keil, NM, Fehr, M and Horat, R 2009. Factors affecting piglet mortality in loose farrowing systems on commercial farms. Livestock Science 124, 216–222.10.1016/j.livsci.2009.02.002Google Scholar
Yun, J, Björkman, S, Pöytäkangas, M and Peltoniemi, O 2017. The effects of ovarian biopsy and blood sampling methods on salivary cortisol and behaviour in sows. Research in Veterinary Science 114, 80–85.Google Scholar
Yun, J, Swan, KM, Farmer, C, Oliviero, C, Peltoniemi, O and Valros, A 2014. Prepartum nest-building has an impact on postpartum nursing performance and maternal behaviour in early lactating sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 160, 31–37.10.1016/j.applanim.2014.08.011Google Scholar
Yun, J, Swan, KM, Oliviero, C, Peltoniemi, O and Valros, A 2015. Effects of prepartum housing environment on abnormal behaviour, the farrowing process, and interactions with circulating oxytocin in sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 162, 20–25.Google Scholar
Yun, J and Valros, A 2015. Benefits of prepartum nest-building behaviour on parturition and lactation in sows – a review. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 28, 1519–1524.Google Scholar