The influence of retaining sows in pens with improved elements on their adaptability and productive qualities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32636/01308521.2020-(68)-2-13Keywords:
sow, piglets, technology of retaining, pen equipment, adaptability, productivityAbstract
Methods of intensive pigs rearing in the conditions of different farms with the use of industrial technology of retaining, differ significantly from traditional methods of their rearing. At the same time, early weaning of piglets from the sows is an extreme irritant, resulting in a stressful state, accompanied by growth retardation, increased morbidity and mortality of piglets, impaired sow reproductive capacity.
To solve these problems, it is extremely important (both theoretically and practically) to study the adaptability and productivity of lactating sows and the preservation of piglets during their retaining in pens with advanced elements and pens of mass production.
Due to the fact that pregnant sows are retained in the pen 3‒5 days before farrowing, and 21‒35 days or more after it, there is a need to improve their conditions, namely to ensure the possibility of free movement in the area of pen placement. Therefore, in order to increase the space for the sow exercise, as well as to activate the game behaviour between the sow and the offspring, a device for a removable side wall of the pen is proposed. The device consists of the following main parts: the upper and lower fastenings of the side wall to the base of the pen, as well as two S-shaped structures made of stainless steel with a diameter of 6 mm.
For optimal access of piglets to the sow’s nipples, it is proposed to lift the floor at 1‒3 cm in the place, where the sow is located. Lifting the space under the sow provides piglets with better access to the lower row of nipples, so that they can be freely located around the sow. And since the place is lifted directly under the sow, piglets can freely move around the "mother" both in front and back of it. The lifting structure is made of hard-alloy plastic or hard rubber 2 cm thick, 60 cm wide and 80‒120 cm long. It is fastened to the pen base using self-tapping screws, if the base is plastic or expansion bolts, if the base is made from grating concrete.
On the basis of selected individual elements of pens for retaining lactating sows and piglets, the improvement of which optimally provides the biological peculiarities of their maintenance, an experimental sample of the pens was made.
The results of the research show that the adaptability of sows, retained in pens with improved individual elements, is higher than of animals retained in mass-produced pens. In particular, it was found that in the sows of the experimental group index of breeding value (BVI) was higher by 11.9 points compared to the control group. These animals also have a slight advantage in terms of adaptation index (AI) and level of adaptation (AL) by 0.6 and 0.7 points respectively.
It was also found that retaining sows with offspring in pens with advanced elements improves their productive qualities, namely provides an increase in live weight of the offspring by 3.9 kg and increase the preservation of piglets by 2.4%.
References
1. Адаптація свиней в умовах альтернативних технологій / Д. Д. Чертков та ін. Науковий вісник «Асканія-Нова». 2018. Вип. 11. С. 223‒228.
2. Бажов Г. М. Племенное свиноводство : учеб. пособие. Санкт-Петербург, 2006. 386 с.
3. Волощук В. М. Теоретичне обґрунтування і створення конкуренто-спроможних технологій виробництва свинини. Полтава, 2012. 350 с.
4. Вплив стрессхильності свиней на їх продуктивність / В. О. Іванов та ін. Свинарство. 2013. Вип. 63. С. 12‒18.
5. Довідник з виробництва свинини / В. І. Герасімов та ін. Харків, 2001. 336 с.
6. Зиновьева H. A., Эрнст Л. K. Проблемы биотехнологии и селекции сельскохозяйственных животных. Дубровицы, 2006. 326 с.
7. Лихач В. Я. Обґрунтування, розробка та впровадження інтенсивно-технологічних рішень у свинарстві. Миколаїв : МНАУ, 2016. 227 с.
8. Мазанько М. О., Пундик В. П., Тесак Г. В. Вдосконалення окремих елементів станкового обладнання для підсисних свиноматок. Свинарство. 2017. Вип. 69. С. 41‒45.
9. Механизация и технология производства продукции животноводства / В. Г. Коба и др. Москва, 2000. 256 с.
10. Пундик В. П., Тесак Г. В. Удосконалення станкового обладнання для утримання підсисних свиноматок з поросятами. Свинарство. 2019. Вип. 73. С. 57‒60.
11. Сравнительная оценка станков различных конструкций для содержания подсосных свиноматок с приплодом / В. А. Безмен и др. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sravnitelnaya-otsenka-stankov-razlichnyh-konstruktsiy-dlya-soderzhaniya-podsosnyh-svinomatok-s-priplodom/viewer (дата обращения: 25.03.2019).
12. Топіха В. С., Лихач В. Я., Лихач А. В. Порода ландрас, її адаптаційні та продуктивні якості в умовах промислової технології. Науково-технічний бюлетень Інституту тваринництва НААН. 2014. № 112. С. 150–159.
13. Тривалість продуктивного довголіття та рівень адаптації свиноматок універсального напрямку продуктивності / В. І. Халак та ін. Свинарство. 2017. Вип. 69. С. 74‒82.
14. Шейко И. П., Смирнов В. С., Шейко Р. И. Свиноводство. Минск, 2013. 376 с.
15. Шичкин Г., Симонов Г. Состояние и перспективы развития отрасли свиноводства. Свиноводство. 2007. № 4. С. 9‒12.
16. A flooring comparison: The impact of rubber mats on the health, behavior, and welfare of group-housed sows at breeding / M. Elmore et al. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2010. V. 123. P. 7‒15.
17. Aggregation of measures to produce an overall assessment of animal welfare. Part 1: a review of existing methods / R. Botreau et al. Animal. 2007. V. 1, Issue 8. P. 1179‒1187.
18. A review of sow and piglet behaviour and performance in group housing systems for lactating sows / S. E. van Nieuwamerongen et al. Animal. 2014. V. 8, № 3. P. 448‒460.
19. A review of the welfare issues for sows and piglets in relation to housing / J. L. Barnett et al. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research. 2001. V. 52, № 1. P. 1–28.
20. Baxter E. M., Lawrence A. B., Edwards S. A. Alternative farrowing accommodation: welfare and economic aspects of existing farrowing and lactation systems for pigs. Animal. 2012. V. 6, № 1. P. 96‒117.
21. Baxter E. M., Lawrence A. B., Edwards S. A. Alternative farrowing systems: design criteria for farrowing systems based on the biological needs of sows and piglets. Animal. 2011. V. 5. P. 580‒600.
22. Bünger B. Effects of housing conditions of farrowing and nursing sows on development of piglets: our own studies and an evaluation of the literature. Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr. 2002. V. 109, № 6. P. 277‒289.
23. Confinement of lactating sows in crates for 4 days after farrowing reduces piglet mortality / V. A. Moustsen et al. Animal. 2013. V. 7, № 4. P. 648‒654.
24. Díaz J., Boyle L. Effect of rubber slat mats on the behaviour and welfare of group housed pregnant sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2014. V. 151. P. 13‒23.
25. Dubois A., Meunier-Salaun M.-C., Le Gall R. Performances et comportement des truies et de leurs portees dans une maternite alternative en batiment: resultats preliminaires. Journees Recherche Porcine. 2008. V. 40. P. 233–238.
26. Effect of rubber mats on sow behavior and litter performance during lactation / G. Ruff et al. Livestock Science. 2017. V. 204. P. 65‒70.
27. Kemp B., Soede N. M. Reproductive issues in welfare-friendly housing systems in pig industry: A review. Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2012. V. 47. P. 51‒57.
28. Kneeskern S. How to reduce piglet mortality with sows in loose-housed systems. 2015. URL: https://phys.org/news/2015-08-piglet-mortality-loose-housed.html?utm_source=TrendMD&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Phys.org_TrendMD_1 (last accessed: 25.03.2019).
29. Neonatal piglet traits of importance for survival in crates and indoor pens / L. J. Pedersen et al. Journal of Animal Science. 2011. V. 89. P. 1207–1218.
30. Observations of sows and piglets housed in farrowing pens with temporary crating or farrowing crates on a commercial farm / K. L. Chidgey et al. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2016. V. 176. P. 12‒18.
31. Pedersen L. J., Malmkvist J., Jorgensen E. The use of a heated floor area by sows and piglets in farrowing pens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2007. V. 103. P. 1‒11.
32. Piglet use of the creep area and piglet mortality – effects of closing the piglets inside the creep area during sow feeding time in pens for individually loose-housed sows / S. Berg et al. Animal Science. 2006. V. 82, № 2. P. 277‒281.
33. Postural behaviour in gilts housed on concrete and rubber slats during four seasons / Ž. Pavičić et al. Macedonian Veterinary Review. 2014. V. 37. P. 157‒164.
34. Rantzer D., Svendsen J. Slatted versus Solid Floors in the Dung Area of Farrowing Pens: Effects on Hygiene and Pig Performance, Birth to Weaning. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A ‒ Animal Science. 2001. V. 51. P. 167‒174.
35. Temporary confinement of loose-housed hyperprolific sows reduces piglet mortality / J. Hales et al. Journal of Animal Science. 2015. V. 93. P. 4079–4088.
36. The behaviour and welfare of sows and piglets in farrowing crates or lactation pens / C. Singh et al. Animal. 2017. V. 11, № 7. P. 1210‒1221.
37. The performance and behaviour of gilts and their piglets is influenced by whether they were born and reared in farrowing crates or farrowing pens / K. L. Chidgey et al. Livestock Science. 2016. V. 193. P. 51‒57.
38. The Welfare of Piglets in the Pig Industry. 2010. URL: http://animalstudiesrepository.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1025&context=hsus_reps_impacts_on_animals (last accessed: 25.03.2019).
39. Wassmuth R., Biestmann C., Janssen H. Behaviour and performance of suckling gilts and their piglets in single housing with different fixation times. Arch. Anim. Breed. 2017. V. 60. P. 101–104.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Г. В. ТЕСАК, В. П. ПУНДИК (Автор)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
