Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-06T10:48:23.529Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The welfare of finishing pigs under different housing and feeding systems: liquid versus dry feeding in fully-slatted and straw-based housing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

K Scott ,
DJ Chennells ,
D Armstrong ,
L Taylor ,
BP Gill  and
SA Edwards
K Scott*
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK
DJ Chennells
Affiliation:
Acorn House Veterinary Surgery, Linnet Way, Brickhill, Bedford, MK41 7HN, UK
D Armstrong
Affiliation:
Meat & Livestock Commission, Winterhill House, Milton Keynes, MK6 1AX, UK
L Taylor
Affiliation:
Meat & Livestock Commission, Winterhill House, Milton Keynes, MK6 1AX, UK
BP Gill
Affiliation:
Meat & Livestock Commission, Winterhill House, Milton Keynes, MK6 1AX, UK
SA Edwards
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence and request for reprints: Kamara.Scott@newcastle.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study assessed the health and welfare implications of feeding pigs a dry or liquid diet when housed in either fully-slatted or straw-based accommodation. Between April and October 2002, 1024 (Large White × Landrace) × Large White pigs, housed in pens of 32, were fed ad libitum from 34 kg to slaughter at 104 kg liveweight. Data were collected on a range of welfare parameters. Feeding system affected only respiratory health losses. Lameness and tail-biting tended to be more prevalent health conditions in the fully-slatted system, while in the straw-based system pigs showed significantly more enteric and respiratory disease. There were no significant treatment effects on skin lesions or bursitis of the hock. Liquid fed pigs had poorer hygiene scores than dry fed pigs, especially in straw-based housing. Liquid feeding reduced activity level and investigatory behaviours directed towards other pigs. Pigs with straw spent a large proportion of their time manipulating it. Pigs without straw were less active and spent more time manipulating the pen hardware. In post-slaughter assessments, there were no systems differences in lung lesions or osteochondrosis, but other measures differed between housing or feeding systems; pigs with straw had more severe toe erosions on the foot, while pigs without straw had more severe heel erosions. Gastric lesions were more pronounced with dry feeding and in the fully-slatted system. The results highlight the relative health and welfare advantages and disadvantages of these systems for finishing pigs.

Keywords

animal welfarefully-slattedhousingliquid feedingpigstraw
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , February 2007 , pp. 53 - 62
Copyright
© 2007 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

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

Allen, V and Hinton, M 1993 Factors affecting the survival and growth of Salmonellas in the environment. Livestock Environment IV: 124-128Google Scholar
Arey, DS 1993 The effect of bedding on the behaviour and welfare of pigs. Animal Welfare 2: 235–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baynes, PJ, Hunter, EJ, Guise, HJ and Penny, RHC 1994 The effect of liquid feeding in a deep straw system on sow behaviour and welfare. Proceedings of the 1994 British Society of Animal Production Meeting pp 184. British Society of Animal Production: Edinburgh, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beattie, VE, O'Connell, NE and Moss, BW 2000 Influence of environmental enrichment on the behaviour, performance and meat quality of domestic pigs. Livestock Production Science 65: 71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Day, JEL, Spoolder, HAM, Burfoot, A, Chamberlain, HL and Edwards, SA 2002 The separate and interactive effects of handling and environmental enrichment on the behaviour and welfare of growing pigs. Applied Animal Science 75: 177–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demmers, TGM, Teer, N and Gill, BP 2004 Environmental impact from pigs finished under different housing and feeding systems: 1. Liquid versus dry feeding in fully-slatted and straw-bedded housing. Proceedings of the 2004 British Society of Animal Science Meeting pp 45. British Society of Animal Science: Edinburgh, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, SA 2000 Pig welfare in indoor pig production. Proceedings of the XXI Symposium ANAPORC pp 244-249. 7-10 November 2000, Barcelona, SpainGoogle Scholar
English, PR and Edwards, SA 1999 Animal Welfare. In: Straw, BE, D'Allaire, S, Mengeling, WL and Taylor, DJ (eds) Diseases of Swine, 8th Edition pp 1067–1076. Iowa State University Press: Ames, USAGoogle Scholar
Farm Animal Welfare Council 1992 The Farm Animal Welfare Council Handbook. Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, PB0906. MAFF publications: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Flatlandsmo, K and Slagsvold, P 1971 Effect of Grain Particle Size and Pellets on Development of Gastric Ulcers in Swine. Journal of Animal Science 33: 1263–1265CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forbes, TJ and Walker, N 1968 The utilisation of wet feed by bacon pigs with special reference to pipe-line feedings. Journal of Agricultural Science 71: 145–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D, Phillips, PA, Thompson, BK and Tennessen, T 1991 Effects of straw on the behaviour of growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 30: 307–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geary, TM, Brooks, PH, Morgan, DT, Campbell, A and Russell, PJ 1996 Performance of weaner pigs fed ad libitum with liquid feed at different dry matter concentrations. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 72: 17–243.0.CO;2-3>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentry, JG, McGlone, JJ, Blanton, J Jr and Miller, MF 2002 Alternative housing systems for pigs: Influences on growth, composition, and pork quality. Journal of Animal Science 80: 1781–1790CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goodwin, RFW and Whittlestone, P 1979 Enzootic pneumonia of pigs: immunization attempts inoculating Mycoplasma Suipneumoniae antigen by various routes and with different adjuvants. Veterinary Journal 129: 456–464Google Scholar
Guy, JH, Rowlinson, P, Chadwick, JR and Ellis, M 2002 Health conditions of two genotypes of growing-finishing pig in three different housing systems: implications for welfare. Livestock Production Science 75: 233–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hessing, MJC, Hagelso, AM, Schouten, WGP, Wiepkema, PR and van Beek, JAM 1994 Individual behavioural and physiological strategies in pigs. Physiology and Behaviour 55: 39–46CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hillman, K, Hunt, B, Davies, R and Gill, BP 2004 The microbial status of the pig and its environment under different housing and feeding systems: 1. liquid feeding in fully-slatted and straw-bedded housing. Proceedings of the 2004 British Society of Animal Science Meeting pp 44. British Society of Animal Science: Edinburgh, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jericho, KWF and Harries, N 1975 Dusty feed and acute respiratory disease in pigs. Canadian Veterinary Journal 16: 360–366Google ScholarPubMed
Jørgensen, B 1995 Effect of different energy and protein levels on leg weakness and osteochondrosis in pigs. Livestock Production Science 41: 171–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jørgensen, B 2003 Influence of floor type and stocking density on leg weakness, osteochondrosis and claw disorders in slaughter pigs. Animal Science 77: 439–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, HRC, Bruce, JM, English, PR, Fowler, VR and Edwards, SA 2000 Behaviour of 3-week weaned pigs in Straw-Flow, deep straw and flatdeck housing systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 68: 269–280CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lyons, CAP, Bruce, JM, Fowler, VR and English, PR 1995 A comparison of productivity and welfare of growing pigs in four intensive systems. Livestock Production Science 43: 265–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, G and Mendl, M 1993 Why is there no simple way of measuring animal welfare? Animal Welfare 2: 301–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission 2004 Finishing Pigs: Systems Research Production Trial 1. British Pig Executive: Milton Keynes, UKGoogle Scholar
Mouttotou, N, Hatchell, FM and Green, LE 1999 Foot lesions in finishing pigs and their associations with the type of floor. The Veterinary Record 144: 629–632CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nakano, T, Aherne, FX and Thompson, JR 1981 Effect of housing system on the recovery of boars from leg weakness. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 61: 335–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petersen, JS, Oksbjerg, N, Jørgensen, B and Sørensen, MT 1998 Growth performance, carcass composition and leg weakness in pigs exposed to different levels of physical activity. Animal Science 66: 725–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potkins, ZV, Lawrence, TLJ and Thomlinson, JR 1989a Oesophagogastric parakeratosis in the growing pig: effects of the physical form of barley-based diets and added fibre. Research in Veterinary Science 47: 60–67Google ScholarPubMed
Potkins, ZV, Lawrence, TLJ and Thomlinson, JR 1989b Rate of development of oesophagogastric parakeratosis in the growing pig: Some effects of finely ground barley diets, genotype and the previous husbandry. Research in Veterinary Science 47: 68–74CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ramis, G, Gómez, S, Pallarés, FJ and Muñoz, A 2005 Comparison of the severity of esophagogastric, lung and limb lesions at slaughter in pigs reared under standard and enriched conditions. Animal Welfare 14: 27–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, PJ, Geary, TM, Brooks, PH and Campbell, A 1996 Performance, water use and effluent output of weaner pigs fed ad libitum with either dry pellets or liquid feed and the role of microbial activity in the liquid feed. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 72: 8–163.0.CO;2-K>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sather, AP and Fredeen, HT 1982 The effect of confinement housing upon the incidence of leg weakness in swine. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 62: 1119–1128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, K, Chennells, DJ, Campbell, FM, Hunt, B, Armstrong, D, Taylor, L, Gill, BP and Edwards, SA 2006 The welfare of finishing pigs in two contrasting housing systems: fully-slatted versus straw-bedded accommodation. Livestock Science 103: 104–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slevin, J, Wiseman, J, Parry, M and Walker, RM 2001 Effects of protein nutrition on bone strength and incidence of osteochondrosis. Proceedings of the 2001 British Society of Animal Science Meeting pp 11. British Society of Animal Science: Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
Smith, WJ 1980 Problems of disease control in large intensive units. Proceedings of the Pig Veterinary Society 6: 1–13Google Scholar
Smith, B and Morgan, M 1997 The role played by the floor surface in the development of claw lesions in the pig. Project Report, SAC Veterinary Sciences Division, Scottish Agricultural College, Aberdeen, UKGoogle Scholar
Stewart, AH, Edwards, SA, Brouns, F and English, PR 1993 An assessment of the effect of feeding system on the production and social organisation of group housed gilts. Proceedings of the 1994 British Society of Animal Production Meeting pp 15–16. British Society of Animal Production: Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
Taylor, DJ 1999 Pig diseases, 8th edition. Farming Press Books and Videos: Ipswich, UKGoogle Scholar
Thompson, JE, Matthews, KR, Taylor, L and Gill, BP 2005 Finishing pigs system research: 1) Production and meat quality. The Pig Journal 55: 223–227Google Scholar
Van Putten, G 1969 An investigation of tail biting among fattening pigs. British Veterinary Journal 125: 511–517CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van de Weerd, HA, Docking, CM, Day, JEL and Edwards, SA 2005 The development of harmful social behaviour in pigs with intact tails and different enrichment backgrounds in two housing systems. Animal Science 80: 289–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar