22
IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Animal Science Recent published research on gestation sow housing A. K. Johnson Associate Professor Animal Behavior and Well-being Department of Animal Science, Iowa State University, Ames, IA E-mail: [email protected]

Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions - Johnson - Discussion Panel, from the 2013 Iowa Pork Congress, January 23-24, Des Moines, IA, USA. More presentations at http://www.swinecast.com/2013-iowa-pork-congress

Citation preview

Page 1: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Recent published research on gestation sow housing

A. K. Johnson

Associate Professor Animal Behavior and Well-being

Department of Animal Science, Iowa State University, Ames, IA

E-mail: [email protected]

Page 2: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Search terms for the talku Journal

n Journal of Animal Science

u Termsn Sow + gestation + housing

u Time n January to December 2012

u Search conclusion; n = 4 peer review papersn Salak-Johnson et al., 2012 – pen space and effects on

behavior and immunityn Li et al., 2012 – managing groups n Kirchner et al., 2012 – individual feeding in groupsn Canaday et al., 2012 – lighting and temperatures for stalled

sows

Page 3: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Page 4: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Study objective

The primary objective of this study was to determine the impacts of floor space allowance for dry sows in pens

(group size constant) and floor feeding on behavior and immune

traits. Differential effects of keeping sows in individual stalls vs. pens on

traits were evaluated

Page 5: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Animals and housing

u Cross-bred (PIC) sows (n = 217)

u Pens vs. stalls

u Parity breakdown n Parity 1 n = 69n Parity 2 = 62n Parity 3 = 44n Parity ≥ 4 = 42

Pens, flooring was partially slatted concrete,

with a section of solid concrete for feeding

Individual stalls had fully slatted floors equipped with concrete feeding

troughs

Page 6: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Treatments u 5 sows were randomly allocated to one

of four treatments:n TRT ONE: 1.4 m2/sow PEN (15.07 ft2)n TRT TWO: 2.3 m2/sow PEN (24 ft2)n TRT THREE: 3.3 m2/sow PEN (35.54 ft2)n TRT FOUR: STALL (2.12 m long x 0.61 m wide) 1.34

m2/sow (14.42 ft2)

The EU standard of space requirement in group-gestation housing is 2.23 m2 (24 ft2) for a mature sow,

and 1.67 m2 (18 ft2) for a gilt

Page 7: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Behavior

Page 8: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Behavior measures

When comparing sows in stalls to all pen groups regardless of space allowance; sows in stalls sat and

drank more and laid less

Page 9: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Take home from this studyu Behavior serves as an interface between the

sow and its environment

u Relationship is affected by internal and external factors

u Chief behavioral restraint of stalls is restriction of movement n Laid less and sat more

u ONF occurred most often when sows were housed at 2.3 m2/sowu Energetically consuming

Page 10: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Take home from this study

Sows were able to initiate an appropriate and adequate biological response to the environment that enable them to adapt

without deleterious effects on health and well-being

No one system compared in this study excelled by improving or compromising

the sows health and well-being in production agriculture

Page 11: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Page 12: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Study objective

Investigated effects of sorting by parity on aggression, associated

stress, and performance of young sows in a group-housed gestation

system

Page 13: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Animals and housing u Gestating sows and gilts (Yorkshire ×

Landrace) were group housed in a straw-bedded hoop barn

u Barn had 4 pens, which accommodated 15 animals/pen

u Equipped with individual feeding stalls and a bowl drinker with 2 drinking spaces

u Space allowance in each pen was 3.7 m2 excluding the area occupied by feeding stalls and the water drinker

Page 14: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Treatments

u Control (sow-pen): observed in a commercial setting (1st parity [n=4] and multiparous sows [n=11])

u Treatment (gilt-pen) (1st parity [n=4] and gilts [n=11])

Page 15: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Reproduction

Page 16: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Injury Scores; 48-h after mixing

Page 17: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Aggression; First 72-h

Total duration s/h Frequency number/h

These numbers are for first parity sows

Page 18: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Aggression: First 72-hu Gilt-pen vs. Sow-pen

n Fought more frequently l 9 vs. 5.7 fight/h; P = 0.01

n Tended to fight for a greater period of time l 67 vs. 29.9 s/h; P = 0.08

n More head-to-body fights l 6.6 vs. 4.5 fight/h; P = 0.03

n More parallel pressingl 0.8 vs. 0.3 fight/h; P = 0.04

n Tended to parallel press longer l 43.9 vs. 14 s/h; P = 0.08

n Won more parallel pressing fights l 46.4 vs. 18.3 %; P = 0.04

Page 19: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Take home from this studyu Most fighting involving first parity sows

occurred within the 6-h of mixing

u First parity sows in gilt-pens at mixing (72-h)n Fought more frequentlyn Tended to fight longern Won more fights parallel pressing

u First parity sows in gilt-pens had fewer injuries

u First parity sows in gilt-pens gained more BW during gestation

Page 20: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Take home from this study

Suggest that farmers should consider dividing their herd into gilt and first parity groups and multiparous (2nd parity+) and house the groups in

separate pens to improve well-being and performance of first parity sows

Page 21: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

Heads up

Checkoff funded work – contact 1-800-PORK or Sherrie Niekamp Director Animal Welfare

Page 22: Johnson - Discussion Panel - Evaluating Sow Housing Decisions

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION