Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:A:Applied Animal Behaviour Science:Vol67.Issue4.2000:

(1)

www.elsevier.comrlocaterapplanim

The interaction of liveweight and the degree of

competition on drinking behaviour in growing pigs

at different group sizes

S.P. Turner

)

_{, A.G. Sinclair, S.A. Edwards}

Animal Biology DiÕision, Scottish Agricultural College, Ferguson Building, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn,

Aberdeen AB21 9YA, UK

Accepted 30 November 1999

Abstract

The pattern of drinking behaviour in pigs, and the influence of social factors such as competition on this behaviour, have been poorly documented. If competition for access to a limited resource is substantial, access to that resource may be allocated disproportionately to different members of a group. Priority may be based on a dominance hierarchy, or on physical characteristics, such as weight. The pattern of drinking behaviour was examined and the effect of pig liveweight on drinking behaviour under conditions likely to produce different levels of

competition was investigated. Four replicates of a 2=2 factorial design of two group sizes 20 vs.

. Ž . Ž

60 and two drinker:pig ratios 1:10 vs. 1:20 used a total of 640 growing pigs start weight

. Ž

36"5.0 kg . The drinking behaviour, skin lesion score and performance of nine focal pigs three

Ž . Ž . Ž

each of heavy 41.9 S.E.M. 0.57 kg , medium 35.7 S.E.M. 0.51 kg and light weight 30.9

S.E.M. 0.63 kg per pen were recorded. For all focal pigs, the maximum time spent at the drinkers occurred between the 1800 and 1900 h and the minimum time between 0700 and 0800 h. The mean number of drinking bouts per pig per day was 30.9 S.E.M. 1.41, the median bout length was 21 s and the mean daily duration spent at the drinkers was 832 s. The frequency of visits to the drinkers, drinking bout duration and daily drinking time were affected by group size and drinker allocation, but not by weight or the interaction of treatments and weight. The diurnal spread of drinking was similar for each of the four treatment combinations and each weight

)_{Corresponding author. Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, Sir Stephen Watson} Building, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0PH, UK. Tel.:q44-131-5353200; fax:q44-131-5353121.

Ž .

E-mail address: [email protected] S.P. Turner .

Present address: Department of Agriculture, University of Aberdeen, King Street, Aberdeen AB24 5UA, UK.

(2)

( ) S.P. Turner et al.rApplied Animal BehaÕiour Science 67 2000 321–334

322

category. Heavy pigs had the greatest number of lesions, and light weight pigs the least 13.2 vs.

8.8 S.E.D. 1.18, P-0.005 , but this was not affected by the four treatment combinations. Lesion score correlated poorly with the parameters of drinking behaviour. The treatments, in isolation, or in interaction with weight, did not affect performance. No treatment encouraged sufficient competition to compromise the drinking behaviour, social behaviour or performance of the lightest animals in the pen.q_{2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.}

Keywords: Resource access; Competition; Group size; Drinking behaviour; Pig-feeding and nutrition

1. Introduction

The factors which influence the water balance within the pig have been reviewed by

Ž . Ž .

Brooks and Carpenter 1993 , and Barber et al. 1988 have described the consequences of restricting the water delivery rate to growing pigs. Despite this, very little is known about the water requirements of the pig. Less still is understood about the pattern of ingestion of that water, such as the amount of time spent at the drinking points each day, the number of visits within that time, the average drinking bout length and the diurnal pattern of ingestion. The influence of social factors, such as competition for access to a small number of drinking points, on drinking behaviour has not been described.

Competition between individuals arises due to the limitation, either in quantity, spatial distribution or temporal availability, of a resource such as food, water, space, or a mate. Competition for resources accounts for the greater part of animal aggression

Ž_{Fraser and Rushen, 1987 . Meese and Ewbank 1973 identified prioritising access to}. Ž .

limited resources as a principal reason for the emergence of dominance hierarchies,

Ž .

although this suggestion has been disputed by others e.g., McGlone, 1986 . If social rank is correlated with resource access, the pattern of allocation to different ranked individuals is likely to be dependent on the availability of the resource itself. In cases of severe restriction the highest-ranking individual would obtain a substantial amount of the resource, while all lesser ranks would obtain a lower level. In cases of only moderate restriction only the very lowest ranking individual or individuals would be penalised,

Ž .

while all others would acquire a higher amount of resource Craig, 1986 . Furthermore, the nature and density of the resource affects the ease with which it can be defended. A concentrated resource, which is easily defended, promotes frequent and intense

aggres-Ž .

sion Schnebel and Griswold, 1983 . During periods of competition, therefore, the ability of certain individuals to access resources may be compromised, as a result of their lower social rank or their poorer competitive ability. Consequently, under commer-cial conditions, provision of resources to a group of pigs must be adequate to allow every individual sufficient access, regardless of social status or competitive advantage or disadvantage.

Competition for access to resources may be elevated in large group housing condi-tions. The sight of an individual engaged in feeding or drinking behaviour may encourage similar behaviour in another individual; a process know as social facilitation.

Furthermore, individuals have been described by Gonyou unpublished data, cited in

(3)

existence of a greater number of pigs feeding at any moment, and thereby encouraging social facilitation, and the possibility of an excessive number of animals preferring the

Ž .

same feeding point in large groups have been suggested by Spoolder et al. 1999 as potential sources of increased feeding competition in large group systems. Without evidence to the contrary, it is possible that such mechanisms may operate in large groups to elevate the demand for drinker access also.

Although the volume of drinking water offered to growing pigs is generally not restricted, the ability of the pigs to gain access to the drinking points themselves has received little attention. The current Welfare Codes have adopted caution in advising the provision of one nipple drinker per 10 growing pigs fed a dry diet. Producers have frequently extended this ratio to one drinker per 20 animals without encountering problems. In view of this discrepancy and the increased popularity of large group housing systems, a reassessment of the current drinker provision recommendation is required.

The consequences for drinking behaviour, overt aggression and performance of the pen as a whole resulting from the restriction of drinker allocation from one drinker per 10 pigs to one drinker per 20 pigs for animals housed in groups of 20 and 60 have

Ž .

recently been reported by Turner et al. 1999 . These findings indicate that, under the environmental conditions and feeding regime used in the experiment, the water intake, behaviour and performance of the pen as a whole were not compromised by the more restricted drinker allocation, large group size or the interaction of these two factors. However, the consequences for the detailed drinking behaviour of specific individuals within the pen have not yet been reported.

Thus, the purpose of this investigation was, firstly, to describe in detail the drinking behaviour of growing pigs. The second objective was to examine how the drinking behaviour, aggression and performance of pigs of different weight categories, selected as examples of individuals likely to be different in their competitive ability, was influenced by changes to drinker allocation, group size and the interaction of these two factors.

2. Materials and methods 2.1. Animals and housing

Over the period January to July, 640 Large White=Landrace growing pigs start

weight 36"5.0 kg were allocated to one of four treatments for 5 weeks. Four replicates over time were allocated according to a 2=2 factorial design of two nipple

Ž . Ž .

drinker to pig ratios 1:10 vs. 1:20 and two group sizes 20 vs. 60 giving four treatment combinations. Each group comprised of 55% males and 45% females, and floor space allowance per pig remained constant. The groups of 20 were selected from three smaller commercial pens, and the groups of 60 from nine. The animals were housed in a commercial grower house, on a fully slatted concrete floor, and an

Ž .

automatically controlled natural ventilation ACNV system was in operation. Dry pelleted feed was offered ad libitum via one 5-space hopper for the groups of 20, and

(4)

( ) S.P. Turner et al.rApplied Animal BehaÕiour Science 67 2000 321–334

324

three such hoppers for the groups of 60. Hoppers were filled daily at 0900 h. Artificial light was provided for 8 h daily. Daily minimum and maximum ambient temperature was recorded for each pen 1 m above floor height.

2.2. Drinkers

The nipple drinkers were of standard commercial type Arato, ‘‘80 Pig Drinker’’,

Clacton-on-Sea, UK , suitable for the weight of pigs. A flow meter was attached to the pipe above the point at which it diverged to supply the individual nipples within each pen. The flow meters were calibrated regularly and daily water use per pen was recorded. The flow rate of the individual drinkers was measured at the beginning of each replicate, and showed a mean value of 670 S.E.M. 30.8 mlrmin. Drinkers were placed a minimum of 1 m apart and located adjacent to the feeding area, and more distant from the lying area.

2.3. Focal animals

Two males and one female of each of three weight categories chosen to represent the

heaviest, mean and lightest weight animals in the pen heavy; 41.9 S.E.M. 0.57 kg,

medium; 35.7 S.E.M. 0.51 kg and light; 30.9 S.E.M. 0.63 kg , were selected on the basis of start weight alone. Detailed observations were concentrated on these nine focal animals per pen.

2.4. BehaÕiour

2.4.1. Drinking behaÕiour

The time of onset and duration of every drinking bout of the focal pigs were recorded during a complete 24-h period using time lapse videos collected during their fourth week on trial. A drinking bout was defined as starting when the mouth of a pig made contact with a nipple drinker and terminating when this contact ended. Bouts below 5-s duration were not recorded as water may not have been drawn in that time. The interaction of treatment and weight category was compared for its effect on the drinking behaviour and diurnal pattern of drinking time of the focal animals.

2.4.2. Skin lesion score

The body of the focal animals was divided into face, ears, neck, shoulders, flanks, back, rump and combined tail and ano-genital areas. The number of fresh cuts, scratches and abrasions in each area were counted, by a single observer, at 3 days post-mixing, and at the end of the 1st and subsequent weeks, up to week 4. The dimensions of the lesions were not quantified.

2.5. Performance

Ž .

Average daily gain ADG was calculated from liveweight measurements made on each individual pig in the pen on the day of mixing and at the end of weeks 2 and 4.

(5)

2.6. Statistical analysis

Interactions between the four treatment combinations hereafter abbreviated to

treat-.

ment and focal pig weight category on drinking behaviour, lesion score and ADG were investigated using analyses of variance with weight class, treatment and replicate as factors. Interactions between drinker ratio and group size on the drinking behaviour of the pooled focal pigs were examined using two-way analyses of variance. Changes in lesion score value over time were investigated using a one-way analysis of variance. The existence of significant correlations between the individual parameters of drinking behaviour and between mean lesion score and parameters of drinking behaviour were examined using Pearson Product Moment Correlations. A Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test was used to examine differences in drinking bout length during the period of the day with the maximum compared to minimum duration of drinking behaviour.

3. Results

Unless explicitly stated the results presented below describe the drinking behaviour,

Ž .

lesion score and performance of the nine focal pigs per pen only. Turner et al. 1999 presented an analysis of these parameters considering the mean for all members of the pen, but without a detailed account of the findings for differential weight categories of pigs.

3.1. Ambient temperature

The mean daily temperature ranged from 14.38C to 18.28C and did not significantly differ between treatments. Replicates, which were allocated sequentially between

Jan-Ž . Ž .

uary replicate 1 and July replicate 4 , did not significantly influence the drinking patterns described below.

3.2. Drinking behaÕiour of pooled focal pigs

The parameters of drinking behaviour, irrespective of weight category or treatment, were investigated by pooling the data from all focal pigs. The percentage of total daily drinking time occurring during each hour within the 24-h period of video analysis was

Ž .

calculated Fig. 1a . The maximum hourly percentage of total drinking time occurred

Ž .

during the hour of 1800–1900 h 10.1 S.E.M. 0.73% of total , and the minimum

Ž .

occurred between 0700 and 0800 h 0.9 S.E.M. 0.28% . The mean number of drinking

Ž .

bouts per day was 30.9 S.E.M. 1.41 visitsrpigrday Fig. 1b with a range of 7–98. The frequency distribution of drinking bout length was skewed with a median of 21.0 s. The mode of this distribution occurred in the range 10 to 14 s, and represented 18.4% of

Ž .

drinking bouts Fig. 1c . The mean total time spent at the drinkers in a 24-h period was

Ž .

(6)

()

S.P.

Turner

al.

Applied

Animal

Beha

iour

Science

2000

321

–

334

326

Ž . Ž .

Fig. 1. Drinking behaviour of pooled focal pigs: a Mean percentage of total daily drinking time occurring during each hour of a 24-h period. b Frequency

Ž . Ž .

(7)

3.3. Drinking behaÕiour of separated focal pig weight categories and treatments Heavy, medium and light weight focal pigs visited the drinkers a similar number of

Ž .

times 28.1, 31.1 and 30.3 S.E.D. 3.05 visitsrpigrday, respectively , and there was no interaction between weight category and treatment on the frequency of visits. The mean

drinking bout duration was not significantly affected by weight category 28.1, 24.4 and

25.9 S.E.D. 2.70 s for heavy, medium and light weight pigs , nor was there an interaction with treatment. Consequently, the total time spent drinking per day was

Ž .

similar for each weight category 787, 777 and 810 S.E.D. 94.7 srpigrday , and again there was no interaction between weight category and treatment.

With the three weight categories pooled, focal animals in groups of 20 pigs

performed more drinking bouts per day than groups of 60 36.3 vs. 22.5 S.E.D. 2.86

boutsrpigrday, P-0.01, respectively, Table 1 . Focal pigs offered one drinker per 10 animals also performed drinking bouts more frequently than those offered one drinker

Ž .

per 20 individuals 34.7 vs. 24.2 S.E.D. 2.86 boutsrpigrday, P-0.05 . No significant interaction occurred between the two main factors of group size and drinker ratio. A trend was apparent for pigs in groups of 20 to perform longer drinking bouts than those

Ž .

in groups of 60 28.9 vs. 22.9 S.E.D. 2.55 s, P-0.1 . Consequently, those in groups of 20 spent a significantly longer duration at the drinkers each day than animals in groups

Ž .

of 60 1055 vs. 517 S.E.D. 86.9 srpigrday, Ps0.001 . Those animals offered one drinker per 10 pigs also spent more time at the drinkers each day than pigs offered one

Ž .

drinker per 20 933 vs. 638 S.E.D. 86.9 srpigrday, P-0.05 . An interaction between

group size and drinker ratio on daily time at the drinkers was apparent 490, 787, 544 and 1323 S.E.M. 94.2 srpigrday for 60 pigs, three drinkers; 20 pigs, one drinker; 60

pigs, six drinkers and 20 pigs, two drinkers, respectively, P-0.05 .

When the focal animal weight categories and treatments were pooled, drinking bout

length and total daily drinking time were significantly and positively correlated rs0.79,

P-0.01 as were the daily number of visits to the drinker and total daily drinking time

Ž_r_s_{0.87, P}-0.001 . Bout length was not significantly correlated with the daily.

Ž .

number of visits to the drinker rs0.39 . However, considering these relationships within individual pens, but again with weight category pooled, the correlation between bout length and total daily drinking time reached significance in only three pens. The relationship between daily number of drinking visits and total drinking time reached

Table 1

Drinking behaviour of the pooled focal pigs in each drinker ratio and group size combination

Treatment S.E.M. Significance

60 pigs, 20 pigs, 60 pigs, 20 pigs, Drinkers Group Drinkers= 3 drinkers 1 drinker 6 drinkers 2 drinkers size group size

UU U Daily number of drinking 18.6 29.8 26.5 42.8 3.10

Ž .

bouts boutsrpigrday

Ž .

Mean bout length s 24.8 26.4 21.0 31.4 2.76 P-0.1

U U

Total daily drinking 490 787 544 1323 94.2 P-0.1

Ž .

(8)

( ) S.P. Turner et al.rApplied Animal BehaÕiour Science 67 2000 321–334

328

significance in 10 pens and that between bout length and daily number of drinking visits reached significance in four pens, although three of these relationships occurred in the treatment of 20 pigs with two drinkers.

3.4. Diurnal pattern of drinker use

The 24 h period of video analysis of each pen was divided into six blocks of 4 h. When the percentage of the total daily drinking time occurring during each block was plotted, no notable effect of treatment on the diurnal pattern of drinking in any focal pig weight category was apparent. Fig. 2, therefore, shows the diurnal pattern when the four treatments were pooled. The period during which the greatest percentage of the total daily drinking time occurred was between 1700 and 2059 h. The percentage of the total daily drinking time occurring during this period was not significantly different between

treatments 29.4, 27.4, 31.3 and 28.8 S.E.M. 5.29% for 60 pigs, three drinkers; 20 pigs,

one drinker; 60 pigs, six drinkers and 20 pigs, two drinkers, respectively, P)0.05 . The period during which the smallest percentage of total daily drinking time occurred was between 0500 and 0859 h, and the percentage of daily drinking time occurring during

this period was also similar for each treatment 9.7, 3.2, 7.4 and 6.6 S.E.M. 1.65%,

respectively, P)0.05 . When treatments were pooled, focal pigs of different weight category did not significantly differ in the percentage of total drinking time which

occurred during the maximum 29.2, 25.8 and 32.8 S.E.D. 3.99% for heavy, medium

. Ž

and light weight pigs, respectively or minimum drinking periods 8.5, 7.3 and 4.9

S.E.D. 1.86%, respectively . Focal pig weight category did not interact with treatment to significantly influence the percentage of total drinking time occurring during either of these periods. Mean drinking bout length was similar between the two periods and was not significantly affected by weight category.

Fig. 2. Percentage of total daily drinking time occurring during 4-h blocks for each weight category when treatment was pooled.

(9)

3.5. Aggression

Analysis of the lesion scores for each body area separately showed no significant influences of treatment. The total lesion score for the whole body was therefore used in

Ž .

the analyses below. Turner et al. 1999 presented the effects of group size and drinker allocation on the pooled focal pig lesion score. Here the lesion score data for specific weight categories of pig are described. Heavy weight pigs had significantly more lesions

than light weight animals over the whole trial period 13.2, 10.8 and 8.8 S.E.D. 1.18

lesionsrpig for heavy, medium and light weight categories, P-0.005 . By 3 days

Ž .

post-mixing, this pattern was evident P-0.05 . Treatment and weight category did not significantly interact to affect the lesion score during either the whole period, or at 3 days post-mixing alone. When treatments were pooled, the lesion score peaked at 3 days

Ž .

post-mixing, significantly P-0.001 declined to half this value by the end of the first week and reached a plateau by the end of the second week. This pattern varied little

Ž .

between weight categories Fig. 3 .

The mean of the five lesion score recordings over time per pig did not significantly

Ž . Ž .

correlate with the daily number of drinker visits rs0.24 , mean bout length rs0.02

Ž .

and total daily drinking time rs0.18 .

3.6. Performance

Considering the focal pigs, the heavy individuals had a higher ADG than the medium

and light weight animals 0.73, 0.65 and 0.66 S.E.D. 0.030 kgrday, respectively,

P-0.05 . The ADG of the focal pigs was investigated for a possible detrimental effect on the light weight animals. No such interaction between treatment and weight category

occurred, and the ADG of the pooled focal pigs was similar for each treatment Table

2 . When considering all the animals within the pen, pigs beginning the experiment with an upper inter-quartile start weight had a higher ADG than those in the lower quartile,

Ž .

irrespective of treatment 0.69 vs. 0.62 S.E.D. 0.027 kgrday, P-0.01 , although this

(10)

( ) S.P. Turner et al.rApplied Animal BehaÕiour Science 67 2000 321–334

330 Table 2

Ž .

ADG kgrpigrday of focal pigs and, considering all members of the pen, pigs of lower and upper inter-quartile start weight in the four combinations of group size and drinker allocation

Treatment S.E.M. Significance

60 pigs, 20 pigs, 60 pigs, 20 pigs, Drinkers Group Drinkers= 3 drinkers 1 drinker 6 drinkers 2 drinkers size group size

Pooled focal pigs 0.70 0.70 0.65 0.67 0.024

Lower quartile 0.53 0.68 0.68 0.58 0.037

Upper quartile 0.63 0.80 0.70 0.64 0.037

pattern only reached significance after 2 weeks on trial. The lower quartile animals

Ž .

gained most slowly in a group of 60 with three drinkers P-0.05 . This pattern was

Ž .

repeated by the animals with an upper inter-quartile start weight P-0.01 , and the interaction between start weight and treatment was not significant.

4. Discussion

Quantification of the drinking behaviour showed the existence of large individual variation in drinking patterns and total daily drinking time. The extent to which this precisely correlated with similar variability in water intake could not be ascertained in the current experiment, but it indicates much higher variability than would be expected from differences in individual metabolic requirement alone and appeared unrelated to pig liveweight. Differences in the rate of water ingestion between individuals may contribute to this variability and may need examination in the future. Such data support

Ž .

the contention of Brooks and Carpenter 1993 that no single value for water require-ment can be defined with our present state of knowledge.

The diurnal pattern of drinking behaviour showed a clear increase in the late afternoon and a low overnight. Most previous reports of diurnal patterns of drinking

Ž_{Bigelow and Houpt, 1988; Gill and Barber, 1993 or water use Hepherd et al., 1983}. Ž .

have come from pigs fed in restricted daily meals. These indicate that the majority of drinking is associated with the daily meals, during both the pre- and post-prandial periods, with little drinking occurring overnight. Reports on drinking patterns of pigs fed ad libitum are scarce, but in one study of pigs in groups of 42 in straw courts, where

different allowances of open water trough space were compared McDonald et al.,

1996 , a diurnal pattern which was very similar to that in the present study was recorded. Since pigs fed ad libitum do not fully synchronise their feeding behaviour with the other pen mates, a more uniform diurnal water intake pattern for the group would be expected. When fed ad libitum pigs generally show two peaks in feeding activity, one in

Ž .

the morning and one in the afternoon e.g., Schouten, 1986; de Haer and Merkst, 1992 . The single very prominent peak in drinking is therefore difficult to explain by simple association with feeding patterns as repeatably reported in the literature, although these were not recorded in the present experiment.

The drinking behaviour parameters recorded in detail for individual pigs closely

Ž .

(11)

Ž .

group as a whole Turner et al., 1999 . In this study, where water was provided via bite drinkers, the number of daily drinking bouts and their duration were both greater than

Ž .

those recorded in the study by McDonald et al. 1996 , where water was consumed from an open trough and greater ingestion rates would have been possible. However, in

Ž .

neither the study by McDonald et al. 1996 nor the current experiment were significant differences in drinking behaviour of pigs of different liveweight seen for any treatment. The assumption that a high liveweight automatically assures a high social rank in

Ž .

growing pigs is, at best, tenuous. Rasmussen et al. 1962 and Meese and Ewbank

Ž1973 failed to find such a relationship in pigs, while Tennessen and Gonyou 1981. Ž . Ž .

reported a similar finding in cattle. In contrast, McBride et al. 1964 , working with young pigs, described a positive correlation between weight and social rank; a finding

Ž .

supported by Stricklin 1983 in cattle. The magnitude of weight difference within a group may be influential in this context; the difference in weight between the heavy and

Ž .

light weight focal pigs in the present study was substantial 26% .

It is also debatable whether a high social rank confers preferential access to

Ž .

resources. Syme 1974 found lower correlations between dominance and competitive

Ž .

orders than predicted from this assumption. McGlone 1986 observed that the most aggressive pigs spent the greatest time drinking, but that generally, dominance was not

Ž .

an advantage in gaining access to resources. Similarly, Stricklin and Gonyou 1981 , found that dominance was not a good predictor of access to a single space feeding stall in cattle, although even slight amounts of physical contact were included in their study as replacements.

Consequently, it is difficult to unequivocally support a hypothesis that heavy pigs would, by virtue of their higher rank, obtain preferential access to drinking points. However, even assuming that social rank plays a negligible role in allocating resource access in many situations, the comparison of drinker use by different weight categories

of pig is still a valid one as the critical interest was how liveweight and by inference,

competitive ability itself influenced resource access.

An alternative explanation for the apparent absence of a weight effect on drinker access is that the resource was not sufficiently limited to encourage the necessary degree of competition. This may account for the similarity in diurnal use of the drinkers for

heavy, medium and light weight animals. From the results of various workers Morrow and Walker, 1994, and Botermans et al., 1997 in pigs; Gonyou and Stricklin, 1981, and

Stricklin and Gonyou, 1981, in beef cattle , sub-optimal feeder allocation caused animals, particularly subordinate individuals, to make frequent visits to the feeder at night. In the present experiment, there was no interaction between liveweight and treatment on diurnal pattern of drinker use, indicating that competition was not sufficient in any treatment to encourage preferential resource access. Indeed, although the pattern did not reach statistical significance, the lightest weight pigs actually performed a slightly greater percentage of their total daily drinking time during the peak drinking period of 1700–2059 h than either heavy or medium weight pigs. In addition, it was the lightest weight pigs which performed the lowest percentage of their daily drinking time

Ž .

during the period 0500–0859 h. However, Turner et al. 1999 reported that the percentage of drinking bouts which ended while another pig was queuing was signifi-cantly greater when drinkers were offered at a ratio of one per 20 animals. Despite this,

(12)

( ) S.P. Turner et al.rApplied Animal BehaÕiour Science 67 2000 321–334

332

it was noted that pigs very often expressed a preference to queue for an occupied drinker rather than to use an unoccupied one. It is plausible that small differences in drinking behaviour resulting from weight category or treatment effects may be masked by large inter-individual differences in drinking behaviour between pigs. The dramatic range of 7–98 visits to the drinkers in 1 day, displayed in Fig. 1b, highlights this possibility.

The higher lesion score of the heavier animals may be indicative of their attempt to

Ž .

attain a high social rank. Beilharz and Zeeb 1982 reported that dominant cattle had probably achieved their rank by being aggressive in the past, although this is in contrast

Ž . Ž .

to earlier work by Rasmussen et al. 1962 and Beilharz and Mylrea 1963 . The low lesion score of the light weight animals may reflect their avoidance of aggressive situations. The lack of an interaction between weight and treatment on lesion score and the lack of an effect of treatment on pooled focal pig lesion score, as reported by Turner

Ž .

et al. 1999 , further suggests that the intensity of competition was similar in each treatment. Aggression also did not appear to influence the daily number of visits a pig made to the drinkers, the mean drinking bout length or the total time spent drinking per day as indicated by the lack of a strong correlation between mean lesion score and these parameters of drinking behaviour. However, the percentage of drinking bouts terminated by aggression was significantly greater in the groups of 60 pigs provided with three

Ž .

drinkers in the report by Turner et al. 1999 . Despite this, it was also observed that the total number of aggressive acts per pig, including those specifically at the drinkers, was similar for each treatment.

The ADG of the focal pigs was not significantly influenced by treatment, weight category or their interaction. Regarding the mean performance of the pen as a whole,

Ž .

Turner et al. 1999 found no significant effect of treatment on ADG. However, in the present experiment, pigs of lower inter-quartile start weight displayed a poorer perfor-mance when in a large group size of 60 with only three drinkers. This pattern was repeated in those pigs of an upper-interquartile start weight, indicating that low weight animals were not being selected against specifically. The similarity between the pen mean ADG for each treatment indicates that the medium weight pigs performed well in a group of 60 pigs with three drinkers. Once again, the absence of an interaction between weight category and treatment on performance in our experiment suggests that the competition pressure was not sufficient to highlight a rank effect, should one exist.

5. Conclusion

Drinking behaviour of growing pigs showed high individual variation that was unrelated to liveweight. Preferential access of heavier animals to resources was not observed, and, moreover, light weight animals were not penalised with respect to their drinking behaviour, the aggression they received, or their ADG in any treatment. It is probable that the restriction imposed by each of the treatments was not adequate to cause an affect of weight on these parameters. Thus, in a large group of 60 pigs, with one drinker per 20 animals, the welfare and performance of the lightest individuals did not suffer. Conditions which increase the competition for drinker access, such as a reduced water flow rate, higher ambient temperature or a different feeding strategy,

(13)

might still give rise to an effect of pig hierarchy, with the subordinate animals being compromised.

Acknowledgements

SPT gratefully acknowledges the support of the Cruden Foundation. SAC receives financial support from SERAD. The authors wish to thank Mrs. V. C. Bland and all of the staff at Tillycorthie Farm for their assistance.

References

Barber, J., Brooks, P.H., Carpenter, J.L., 1988. The effect of water delivery rate and drinker number on the

Ž .

water use of growing pigs. Anim. Prod. 46, 521, Abstr. .

Beilharz, R.G., Mylrea, P.J., 1963. Social position and behaviour of dairy heifers in yards. Anim. Behav. 11, 522–527.

Beilharz, R.G., Zeeb, K., 1982. Social dominance in dairy cattle. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 8, 79–97.

Bigelow, J.A., Houpt, T.R., 1988. Feeding and drinking patterns in young pigs. Physiol. Behav. 43, 99–109. Botermans, J.A.M., Svendsen, J., Westrom, B., 1997. Competition at feeding of growing–finishing pigs. In:

Ž .

Bottcher, R.W., Hoff, S.J. Eds. , Proc. 5th Int. Symp., Bloomington, Minnesota. Livestock Environment V Vol. 2 American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Michigan, USA, pp. 591–598.

Brooks, P.H., Carpenter, J.L., 1993. The water requirement of growing–finishing pigs — theoretical and

Ž .

practical considerations. In: Cole, D.J.A., Haresign, W., Garnsworthy, P.C. Eds. , Recent Developments in Pig Nutrition Vol. 2 Nottingham Univ. Press, UK, pp. 179–200.

Ž .

Chapple, R.P., 1993. Effect of stocking arrangement on pig performance. In: Batterham, E.S. Ed. , Proc. 4th Biennial Conference of the Australian Pig Science Association. Manipulating Pig Production IV pp. 87–97.

Craig, J.V., 1986. Measuring social behaviour: social dominance. J. Anim. Sci. 62, 1120–1129.

de Haer, L.C.M., Merkst, J.W.M., 1992. Patterns of daily food intake in growing pigs. Anim. Prod. 54, 95–104.

Fraser, D., Rushen, J., 1987. Aggressive behaviour. Vet. Clin. North Am.: Food Anim. Pract. 3, 285–305.

Ž .

Gill, B.P., Barber, J., 1993. Circadian patterns of water use by growing pigs. In: Collins, E., Boon, C. Eds. , Livestock Environment IV. Proc. Fourth Int. Livest. Env. Symp., Warwick. American Society of Agricultural Engineers Michigan, USA, pp. 56–63.

Gonyou, H.W., Stricklin, W.R., 1981. Eating behavior of beef cattle groups fed from a single stall or trough. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 7, 123–133.

Hepherd, R.Q., Hanley, M., Armsby, A.W., Hartlet, C., 1983. Measurement of the water consumption in two herds of bacon pigs. Divisional Note DN1176, National Institute of Agricultural Engineering, Silsoe, UK. McBride, G., James, J.W., Hodgens, N., 1964. Social behaviour of domestic animals: IV. Growing pigs.

Anim. Prod. 6, 129–139.

McDonald, L.M., Crane, J., Stewart, A.H., Edwards, S.A., English, P.R., 1996. The effect of drinking trough space on the performance and behaviour of growing pigs in large groups on deep bedded straw. Anim. Sci.

Ž62 , 677–678, Abstr. .. Ž .

McGlone, J.J., 1986. Influence of resources on pig aggression and dominance. Behav. Processes 12, 135–144. Meese, G.B., Ewbank, R., 1973. The establishment and nature of the dominance hierarchy in the domesticated

pig. Anim. Behav. 21, 326–334.

Morrow, A.T.S., Walker, N., 1994. Effects of number and siting of single space feeders on performance and

Ž .

feeding behaviour of growing pigs. J. Agric. Sci. Cambridge 122, 465–470.

Rasmussen, O.G., Banks, E.M., Berry, T.H., Becker, D.E., 1962. Social dominance in gilts. J. Anim. Sci. 21, 520–522.

(14)

( ) S.P. Turner et al.rApplied Animal BehaÕiour Science 67 2000 321–334

334

Schnebel, E.M., Griswold, J.G., 1983. Agonistic interactions during competition for different resources in

Ž .

captive European wild pigs Sus scrofa . Appl. Anim. Ethol. 10, 291–300.

Schouten, W.G.P., 1986. Rearing conditions and behaviour in pigs. PhD Thesis, Wageningen, The Nether-lands, 39–71.

Spoolder, H.A.M., Edwards, S.A., Corning, S., 1999. Effects of group size and feeder space allowance on

Ž .

welfare in finishing pigs. Anim. Sci., in press .

Stricklin, W.R., 1983. Matrilinear social dominance and spatial relationships among Angus and Hereford cows. J. Anim. Sci. 57, 1397–1405.

Stricklin, W.R., Gonyou, H.W., 1981. Dominance and eating behavior of beef cattle fed from a single stall. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 7, 135–140.

Syme, G.J., 1974. Competitive orders as measures of social dominance. Anim. Behav. 22, 931–940.

Ž .

Tennessen, T., Gonyou, H.W., 1981. Methods to determine dominance in cattle. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 61 , 1088,

ŽAbstr. ..

Turner, S.P., Edwards, S.A., Bland, V.C., 1999. The influence of drinker allocation and group size on the drinking behaviour, welfare and production of growing pigs. Anim. Sci. 68, 617–624.

(1)

3.5. Aggression

Analysis of the lesion scores for each body area separately showed no significant influences of treatment. The total lesion score for the whole body was therefore used in

Ž .

than light weight animals over the whole trial period 13.2, 10.8 and 8.8 S.E.D. 1.18

lesionsrpig for heavy, medium and light weight categories, P-0.005 . By 3 days

Ž .

post-mixing, significantly P-0.001 declined to half this value by the end of the first week and reached a plateau by the end of the second week. This pattern varied little

Ž .

between weight categories Fig. 3 .

The mean of the five lesion score recordings over time per pig did not significantly

Ž . Ž .

correlate with the daily number of drinker visits rs0.24 , mean bout length rs0.02

Ž .

and total daily drinking time rs0.18 . 3.6. Performance

Considering the focal pigs, the heavy individuals had a higher ADG than the medium

and light weight animals 0.73, 0.65 and 0.66 S.E.D. 0.030 kgrday, respectively,

P-0.05 . The ADG of the focal pigs was investigated for a possible detrimental effect on the light weight animals. No such interaction between treatment and weight category

occurred, and the ADG of the pooled focal pigs was similar for each treatment Table

2 . When considering all the animals within the pen, pigs beginning the experiment with an upper inter-quartile start weight had a higher ADG than those in the lower quartile,

Ž .

irrespective of treatment 0.69 vs. 0.62 S.E.D. 0.027 kgrday, P-0.01 , although this

(2)

Table 2

Ž .

ADG kgrpigrday of focal pigs and, considering all members of the pen, pigs of lower and upper inter-quartile start weight in the four combinations of group size and drinker allocation

Treatment S.E.M. Significance

60 pigs, 20 pigs, 60 pigs, 20 pigs, Drinkers Group Drinkers=

3 drinkers 1 drinker 6 drinkers 2 drinkers size group size

Pooled focal pigs 0.70 0.70 0.65 0.67 0.024

Lower quartile 0.53 0.68 0.68 0.58 0.037

Upper quartile 0.63 0.80 0.70 0.64 0.037

pattern only reached significance after 2 weeks on trial. The lower quartile animals

Ž .

gained most slowly in a group of 60 with three drinkers P-0.05 . This pattern was

Ž .

repeated by the animals with an upper inter-quartile start weight P-0.01 , and the interaction between start weight and treatment was not significant.

4. Discussion

Ž .

the contention of Brooks and Carpenter 1993 that no single value for water require-ment can be defined with our present state of knowledge.

The diurnal pattern of drinking behaviour showed a clear increase in the late afternoon and a low overnight. Most previous reports of diurnal patterns of drinking

Ž_{Bigelow and Houpt, 1988; Gill and Barber, 1993 or water use Hepherd et al., 1983}. Ž .

different allowances of open water trough space were compared McDonald et al.,

Ž .

The drinking behaviour parameters recorded in detail for individual pigs closely

Ž .

(3)

Ž .

group as a whole Turner et al., 1999 . In this study, where water was provided via bite drinkers, the number of daily drinking bouts and their duration were both greater than

Ž .

those recorded in the study by McDonald et al. 1996 , where water was consumed from an open trough and greater ingestion rates would have been possible. However, in

Ž .

growing pigs is, at best, tenuous. Rasmussen et al. 1962 and Meese and Ewbank

Ž1973 failed to find such a relationship in pigs, while Tennessen and Gonyou 1981. Ž .

Ž .

reported a similar finding in cattle. In contrast, McBride et al. 1964 , working with young pigs, described a positive correlation between weight and social rank; a finding

Ž .

supported by Stricklin 1983 in cattle. The magnitude of weight difference within a group may be influential in this context; the difference in weight between the heavy and

Ž .

light weight focal pigs in the present study was substantial 26% .

It is also debatable whether a high social rank confers preferential access to

Ž .

resources. Syme 1974 found lower correlations between dominance and competitive

Ž .

orders than predicted from this assumption. McGlone 1986 observed that the most aggressive pigs spent the greatest time drinking, but that generally, dominance was not

Ž .

of pig is still a valid one as the critical interest was how liveweight and by inference,

competitive ability itself influenced resource access.

heavy, medium and light weight animals. From the results of various workers Morrow and Walker, 1994, and Botermans et al., 1997 in pigs; Gonyou and Stricklin, 1981, and

Ž .

(4)

The higher lesion score of the heavier animals may be indicative of their attempt to

Ž .

attain a high social rank. Beilharz and Zeeb 1982 reported that dominant cattle had probably achieved their rank by being aggressive in the past, although this is in contrast

Ž . Ž .

Ž .

The ADG of the focal pigs was not significantly influenced by treatment, weight category or their interaction. Regarding the mean performance of the pen as a whole,

Ž .

5. Conclusion

(5)

might still give rise to an effect of pig hierarchy, with the subordinate animals being compromised.

Acknowledgements

References

Barber, J., Brooks, P.H., Carpenter, J.L., 1988. The effect of water delivery rate and drinker number on the Ž .

water use of growing pigs. Anim. Prod. 46, 521, Abstr. .

Beilharz, R.G., Mylrea, P.J., 1963. Social position and behaviour of dairy heifers in yards. Anim. Behav. 11, 522–527.

Beilharz, R.G., Zeeb, K., 1982. Social dominance in dairy cattle. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 8, 79–97.

Ž .

Bottcher, R.W., Hoff, S.J. Eds. , Proc. 5th Int. Symp., Bloomington, Minnesota. Livestock Environment V Vol. 2 American Society of Agricultural Engineers, Michigan, USA, pp. 591–598.

Brooks, P.H., Carpenter, J.L., 1993. The water requirement of growing–finishing pigs — theoretical and Ž .

practical considerations. In: Cole, D.J.A., Haresign, W., Garnsworthy, P.C. Eds. , Recent Developments in Pig Nutrition Vol. 2 Nottingham Univ. Press, UK, pp. 179–200.

Ž .

Craig, J.V., 1986. Measuring social behaviour: social dominance. J. Anim. Sci. 62, 1120–1129.

de Haer, L.C.M., Merkst, J.W.M., 1992. Patterns of daily food intake in growing pigs. Anim. Prod. 54, 95–104.

Fraser, D., Rushen, J., 1987. Aggressive behaviour. Vet. Clin. North Am.: Food Anim. Pract. 3, 285–305. Ž . Gill, B.P., Barber, J., 1993. Circadian patterns of water use by growing pigs. In: Collins, E., Boon, C. Eds. ,

Livestock Environment IV. Proc. Fourth Int. Livest. Env. Symp., Warwick. American Society of Agricultural Engineers Michigan, USA, pp. 56–63.

Gonyou, H.W., Stricklin, W.R., 1981. Eating behavior of beef cattle groups fed from a single stall or trough. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 7, 123–133.

Anim. Prod. 6, 129–139.

pig. Anim. Behav. 21, 326–334.

Morrow, A.T.S., Walker, N., 1994. Effects of number and siting of single space feeders on performance and Ž .

feeding behaviour of growing pigs. J. Agric. Sci. Cambridge 122, 465–470.

Rasmussen, O.G., Banks, E.M., Berry, T.H., Becker, D.E., 1962. Social dominance in gilts. J. Anim. Sci. 21, 520–522.

(6)

Schnebel, E.M., Griswold, J.G., 1983. Agonistic interactions during competition for different resources in Ž .

captive European wild pigs Sus scrofa . Appl. Anim. Ethol. 10, 291–300.

Schouten, W.G.P., 1986. Rearing conditions and behaviour in pigs. PhD Thesis, Wageningen, The Nether-lands, 39–71.

Spoolder, H.A.M., Edwards, S.A., Corning, S., 1999. Effects of group size and feeder space allowance on Ž .

welfare in finishing pigs. Anim. Sci., in press .

Stricklin, W.R., 1983. Matrilinear social dominance and spatial relationships among Angus and Hereford cows. J. Anim. Sci. 57, 1397–1405.

Stricklin, W.R., Gonyou, H.W., 1981. Dominance and eating behavior of beef cattle fed from a single stall. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 7, 135–140.

Syme, G.J., 1974. Competitive orders as measures of social dominance. Anim. Behav. 22, 931–940. Ž . Tennessen, T., Gonyou, H.W., 1981. Methods to determine dominance in cattle. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 61 , 1088,

ŽAbstr. ..

Turner, S.P., Edwards, S.A., Bland, V.C., 1999. The influence of drinker allocation and group size on the drinking behaviour, welfare and production of growing pigs. Anim. Sci. 68, 617–624.

Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:A:Applied Animal Behaviour Science:Vol67.Issue4.2000:

The interaction of liveweight and the degree of

competition on drinking behaviour in growing pigs

at different group sizes

S.P. Turner

_{, A.G. Sinclair, S.A. Edwards}

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

PERENCANAAN PORTAL KELUAR KAMPUS III UMM

PERENCANAAN ULANG (REDESIGN) STRUKTUR ATAS PROYEK RUMAH SUSUN SEDERHANA 2 (RUSUNAWA) UMM MALANG DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN BALOK PRATEGANG PARSIAL

PERSEPSI MAHASISWA TENTANG MATERI TAYANGAN SANG PEMBURU DI LATIVI ( Studi Pada Mahasiswa Jurusan Ilmu Komunikasi UMM Angkatan 2002)

APRESIASI MAHASISWA TERHADAP TAYANGAN Â“OPERA VAN JAVAÂ” DI TRANS7 (Studi Pada Mahasiswa Jurusan Ilmu Komunikasi UMM Angkatan 2008)

FAKTOR-FAKTOR PENYEBAB KESULITAN BELAJAR BAHASA ARAB PADA MAHASISWA MA’HAD ABDURRAHMAN BIN AUF UMM

38 Mahasiswa UMM Pilih KKN di Padang

FPP UMM Seleksi Sarjana Membangun Desa

Lagi, UMM Tambah Mahasiswa Asing

Pengajian Muhammadiyah di UMM Akan Hadirkan BJ Habibie

Robert John Pope: UMM Miliki Intellectual Honesty

Dukungan

Links

Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:A:Applied Animal Behaviour Science:Vol67.Issue4.2000:

The interaction of liveweight and the degree of

competition on drinking behaviour in growing pigs

at different group sizes

S.P. Turner

, A.G. Sinclair, S.A. Edwards

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

PERENCANAAN PORTAL KELUAR KAMPUS III UMM

PERENCANAAN ULANG (REDESIGN) STRUKTUR ATAS PROYEK RUMAH SUSUN SEDERHANA 2 (RUSUNAWA) UMM MALANG DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN BALOK PRATEGANG PARSIAL

PERSEPSI MAHASISWA TENTANG MATERI TAYANGAN SANG PEMBURU DI LATIVI ( Studi Pada Mahasiswa Jurusan Ilmu Komunikasi UMM Angkatan 2002)

APRESIASI MAHASISWA TERHADAP TAYANGAN Â“OPERA VAN JAVAÂ” DI TRANS7 (Studi Pada Mahasiswa Jurusan Ilmu Komunikasi UMM Angkatan 2008)

FAKTOR-FAKTOR PENYEBAB KESULITAN BELAJAR BAHASA ARAB PADA MAHASISWA MA’HAD ABDURRAHMAN BIN AUF UMM

38 Mahasiswa UMM Pilih KKN di Padang

FPP UMM Seleksi Sarjana Membangun Desa

Lagi, UMM Tambah Mahasiswa Asing

Pengajian Muhammadiyah di UMM Akan Hadirkan BJ Habibie

Robert John Pope: UMM Miliki Intellectual Honesty

Dokumen yang Anda mencari sudah siap untuk unduhkan

_{, A.G. Sinclair, S.A. Edwards}