Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T03:41:21.971Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetics of animal temperament: aggressive behaviour at mixing is genetically associated with the response to handling in pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2009

R. B. D’Eath ,
R. Roehe ,
S. P. Turner ,
S. H. Ison ,
M. Farish ,
M. C. Jack  and
A. B. Lawrence
R. B. D’Eath*
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
R. Roehe
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
S. P. Turner
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
S. H. Ison
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
M. Farish
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
M. C. Jack
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
A. B. Lawrence
Affiliation:
Sustainable Livestock Systems, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
*
†E-mail: rick.death@sac.ac.uk
Get access

Abstract

Aggression when pigs are mixed into new social groups has negative impacts on welfare and production. Aggressive behaviour is moderately heritable and could be reduced by genetic selection. The possible wider impacts of selection for reduced aggressiveness on handling traits and activity in the home pen were investigated using 1663 male and female pedigree pigs (898 purebred Yorkshire and 765 Yorkshire × Landrace). Aggressive behaviour was observed over 24 h after pigs were mixed at 10 weeks of age into groups balanced for unfamiliarity and weight. Aggression was highly heritable (duration of involvement in reciprocal fighting h2 = 0.47 ± 0.03, and duration of delivering one-sided aggression h2 = 0.34 ± 0.03). Three weeks after mixing, home pen inactivity (indicated by the frequency of lying) was observed over 24 h. Inactivity was weakly heritable (h2 = 0.05 ± 0.01) but showed no significant genetic association with aggression. Pigs’ behaviour during handling by humans was assessed on entry to, whilst inside and on exit from a weigh crate at both mixing and end of test at 22 weeks. Pigs were generally easy to handle, moving easily into and out of the crate. Scores indicating ‘very difficult to move’ were rare. Handling scores at weighing were weakly heritable (h2 = 0.03 to 0.17), and moderately correlated across the two weighings (rg = 0.28 to 0.76). Aggressive behaviour at mixing was genetically associated with handling at the end of test weighing: pigs that fought and delivered one-sided aggression had handling scores indicating more active behaviour at weighing (e.g. moving quickly into the crate v. fighting rg = 0.41 ± 0.05 and v. bullying rg = 0.60 ± 0.04). Also, there was a genetic association between receiving one-side aggression at mixing and producing high-pitched vocalisations in the weigh crate (rg = 0.78 ± 0.08). Correlated behavioural responses occurring across different challenging situations (e.g. social mixing and human handling) have been described by the concept of animal temperament (also known as coping styles, personality or behavioural syndromes), but this has rarely been demonstrated at the genetic level in farm animals. These findings may have practical implications for the development of breeding programmes aimed at altering animal temperament. Breeding to reduce aggression could result in some reduction in activity at weighing. This would have consequences for animal production, because pigs which are inactive at weighing take longer to move into and out of the weigh crate, and perhaps also for animal welfare.

Keywords

social behaviourbreedingcoping stylesgenetic parametersbehavioural syndromes
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 3 , Issue 11 , November 2009 , pp. 1544 - 1554
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

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

Beilharz, RG, Cox, DF 1967. Genetic analysis of open field behavior in swine. Journal of Animal Science 26, 988–990.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boissy, A, Fisher, AD, Bouix, J, Hinch, GN, Le Neindre, P 2005. Genetics of fear in ruminant livestock. Livestock Production Science 93, 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolhuis, JE, Schouten, WGP, Schrama, JW, Wiegant, VA 2005. Individual coping characteristics, aggressiveness and fighting strategies in pigs. Animal Behaviour 69, 1085–1091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronikowski, AM, Carter, PA, Swallow, JG, Girard, IA, Rhodes, JS, Garland, T 2001. Open-field behavior of house mice selectively bred for high voluntary wheel-running. Behavior Genetics 31, 309–316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burrow, HM 1997. Measurements of temperament and their relationships with performance traits in beef cattle. Animal Breeding Abstracts 65, 477–495.Google Scholar
D’Eath, RB 2002. Individual aggressiveness measured in a resident-intruder test predicts the persistence of aggressive behaviour and weight gain of young pigs after mixing. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 77, 267–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Eath, RB 2004. Consistency of aggressive temperament in domestic pigs: the effects of social experience and social disruption. Aggressive Behavior 30, 435–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Eath, RB 2005. Socialising piglets before weaning improves social hierarchy formation when pigs are mixed post-weaning. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 93, 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Eath, RB, Burn, CC 2002. Individual differences in behaviour: a test of ‘coping style’ does not predict resident-intruder aggressiveness in pigs. Behaviour 139, 1175–1194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Eath, RB, Lawrence, AB 2004. Early life predictors of the development of aggressive behaviour in the domestic pig. Animal Behaviour 67, 501–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, DS, Mackay, TFC 1996. Introduction to quantitative genetics, 4th edition. Longman, New York.Google Scholar
Gammie, SC, Garland, T, Stevenson, SA 2006. Artificial selection for increased maternal defense behavior in mice. Behavior Genetics 36, 713–722.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gottlieb, DJ, O’Connor, GT, Wilk, JB 2007. Genome-wide association of sleep and circadian phenotypes. BMC Medical Genetics 8 (suppl. 1), S9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hemsworth, PH, Barnett, JL, Treacy, D, Madgwick, P 1990. The heritability of the trait fear of humans and the association between this trait and subsequent reproductive- performance of gilts. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 25, 85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janczak, AM, Pedersen, LJ, Bakken, M 2003. Aggression, fearfulness and coping styles in female pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 81, 13–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S, D’Eath, RB, Fujita, K 2005. Consistency of piglet crushing by sows. Animal Welfare 14, 43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kadel, MJ, Johnston, DJ, Burrow, HM, Graser, HU, Ferguson, DM 2006. Genetics of flight time and other measures of temperament and their value as selection criteria for improving meat quality traits in tropically adapted breeds of beef cattle. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 57, 1029–1035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanis, E, van den Belt, H, Groen, AF, Schakel, J, De Greef, KH 2004. Breeding for improved welfare in pigs: a conceptual framework and its use in practice. Animal Science 78, 315–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koolhaas, JM, de Boer, SF, Buwalda, B, van Reenen, K 2007. Individual variation in coping with stress: a multidimensional approach of ultimate and proximate mechanisms. Brain Behavior and Evolution 70, 218–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kovac, M, Groeneveld, E, Garcia-Cortez, A 2003. VCE-5 User's Guide and Reference Manual Version 5.1.2. Institute of Animal Science and Animal Husbandry, Federal Agricultural Research Centre (Bundesforschungsanstalt für Landwirtscharft, FAL), Mariensee/Neustadt, Germany.Google Scholar
Løvendahl, P, Damgaard, LH, Nielsen, BL, Thodberg, K, Su, GS, Rydhmer, L 2005. Aggressive behaviour of sows at mixing and maternal behaviour are heritable and genetically correlated traits. Livestock Production Science 93, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchant, JN, Whittaker, X, Broom, DM 2001. Vocalisations of the adult female domestic pig during a standard human approach test and their relationships with behavioural and heart rate measures. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 72, 23–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miczek, KA, Maxson, SC, Fish, EW, Faccidomo, S 2001. Aggressive behavioral phenotypes in mice. Behavioural Brain Research 125, 167–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phocas, F, Boivin, X, Sapa, J, Trillat, G, Boissy, A, Le Neindre, P 2006. Genetic correlations between temperament and breeding traits in Limousin heifers. Animal Science 82, 805–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Réale, D, Reader, SM, Sol, D, McDougall, PT, Dingemanse, NJ 2007. Integrating animal temperament within ecology and evolution. Biological Reviews 82, 291–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roehe, R, Shrestha, NP, Mekkawy, W, Baxter, EM, Knap, PW, Smurthwaite, KM, Jarvis, S, Lawrence, AB, Edwards, SA 2009. Genetic analyses of piglet survival and individual birth weight on first generation data of a selection experiment for piglet survival under outdoor conditions. Livestock Science 121, 173–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruis, MAW, te Brake, JHA, Van de Burgwal, JA, de Jong, IC, Blokhuis, HJ, Koolhaas, JM 2000. Personalities in female domesticated pigs: behavioural and physiological indications. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 66, 31–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sih, A, Bell, A, Johnson, JC 2004. Behavioral syndromes: an ecological and evolutionary overview. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19, 372–378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Swallow, JG, Carter, PA, Garland, T 1998. Artificial selection for increased wheel-running behavior in house mice. Behavior Genetics 28, 227–237.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thodberg, K, Jensen, KH, Herskin, MS 1999. A general reaction pattern across situations in prepubertal gilts. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 63, 103–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, SP, Lawrence, AB 2007. Relationship between maternal defensive aggression, fear of handling and other maternal care traits in beef cows. Livestock Science 106, 182–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, SP, Roehe, R, Mekkawy, W, Farnworth, MJ, Knap, PW, Lawrence, AB 2008. Bayesian analysis of genetic associations of skin lesions and behavioural traits to identify genetic components of individual aggressiveness in pigs. Behavior Genetics 38, 67–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turner, SP, Roehe, R, D’Eath, RB, Ison, SH, Farish, M, Jack, MC, Lundeheim, N, Rydhmer, L, Lawrence, AB 2009. Genetic validation of skin injuries in pigs as an indicator of post-mixing aggressiveness and the relationship with aggression under stable social conditions. Journal of Animal Science (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, SP, White, IMS, Brotherstone, S, Farnworth, MJ, Knap, PW, Penny, P, Mendl, M, Lawrence, AB 2006. Heritability of post-mixing aggressiveness in grower-stage pigs and the relationship between aggressiveness and production traits. Animal Science 82, 615–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Oers, K, de Jong, G, Van Noordwijk, AJ, Kempenaers, B, Drent, PJ 2005. Contribution of genetics to the study of animal personalities: a review of case studies. Behaviour 142, 1185–1206.Google Scholar
Warriss, PD, Brown, SN, Gade, PB, Santos, C, Costa, LN, Lambooij, E, Geers, R 1998. An analysis of data relating to pig carcass quality and indices of stress collected in the European Union. Meat Science 49, 137–144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolf, BT, McBride, SD, Lewis, RM, Davies, MH, Haresign, W 2008. Estimates of the genetic parameters and repeatability of behavioural traits of sheep in an arena test. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 112, 68–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, AC, Rijsdijk, F, Saudino, KJ, Asherson, P, Kuntsi, J 2008. High heritability for a composite index of children’s activity level measures. Behavior Genetics 38, 266–276.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed