Comparison of Two Free-Farrowing Systems and a Conventional Farrowing Crate System with Special Regard to Air Hygiene

Eyke Lühken,Jochen Schulz,Thies Nicolaisen,Nina Volkmann,Britta Risch,Nicole Kemper,Sandra Schnier

doi:10.3390/agriculture9010012

Eyke Lühken, Jochen Schulz + Show 5 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture9010012

Copy DOI

Abstract

The aim of this study was to analyze the air quality in two different commercially available free-farrowing systems in comparison with a conventional farrowing crate system. A group housing system for six lactating sows (GH) and a single loose-housing system (LH) were tested against systems with farrowing crates (FC) under similar conditions. In eight evaluated batches with 148 farrowings, measurements were performed at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end of the occupancy period of 33 days. The mean dust concentration was significantly higher in GH than in LH and FC at the mid-point. The mean ammonia concentration was significantly higher in GH compared to LH and FC at the beginning of occupancy. The mean concentration of endotoxins was significantly higher in FC than in LH and GH at the end of occupancy. Furthermore, the systems did not differ significantly from each other. Spearman’s analysis revealed correlations between dust and time of occupancy, between ammonia and carbon dioxide, and between ammonia and the inside temperature and outside temperature. The new husbandry systems offer animals more opportunities to move without endangering animal welfare through deteriorated air hygiene.

Highlights

Due to animal welfare concerns, the restricted movement of sows during their time in the farrowing crate has been intensively discussed in Germany and other countries
Three commercially available farrowing systems were installed for this trial: A group housing system (GH), a single loose-housing system (LH), and single pens with farrowing crates (FC) (Big Dutchman International GmbH, Vechta, Germany)
120 h-period prior to sampling were of 64.4% and 80.5% in GH, 58.3% and 85.1% in LH, and 58.4% and

Summary

Introduction

Due to animal welfare concerns, the restricted movement of sows during their time in the farrowing crate has been intensively discussed in Germany and other countries. Farrowing systems with no or only temporary confinement of sows have been shown to be beneficial for sows, whereas the benefits for piglets with regard to crushing is still a subject of controversy [1,2]. Besides the benefits regarding animal welfare, whether these free systems have any effect on hygiene status is of importance to the scientific field of animal hygiene. As air contaminants such as dust, airborne bacteria, and odorous compounds can negatively affect the health status of animals and workers [3,4], this issue is relevant to both animal health, and occupational health and safety. To date, the effects of different housing systems of livestock on air quality in general

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion