Abstract

Article Details: Received: 2020-10-20 | Accepted: 2020-11-27 | Available online: 2021-01-31 https://doi.org/10.15414/afz.2021.24.mi-prap.62-66 Abstract Attractivity of two different enrichment objects was investigated in paper. Eight piglets were housed in pen with slatted floor. Pen environment was enriched with two hanging objects – PET bottle and horseshoe. Interactions with enrichment objects were evaluated during two consecutive days. PET bottle was more attractive, total number of interactions was 600 on day 1 and 451 on day 2. Horseshoe has very low attractiveness, number of interactions on day 1 was only 64 and 74 on day 2. Exploration of more attractive object was decreasing between days. Exploration of less attractive object was increasing. We recommend use of different enrichment objects for prolonged duration of exploration and occupation by manipulation, but both objects should be attractive for piglets. Keywords: environment, enrichment, piglets, keyword, keyword References Averos, X., et al. (2010). A meta-analysis of the combined effect of housing and environmental enrichment characteristics on the behaviour and performance of pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science , 127(3-4), 73–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2010.09.010 Bolt, S. L. and George, A. J. (2019). The use of environmental enrichment on farms benefits animal welfare and productivity. Livestock, 24(4), 183–188. https://doi.org/10.12968/live.2019.24.4.183 Buijs, S. and Muns, R. (2019). A Review of the Effects of Non-Straw Enrichment on Tail Biting in Pigs. Animals , 9(10), 824. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9100824 Chen, Ch. et al. (2020). A computer vision approach for recognition of the engagement of pigs with different enrichment objects. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture , 175, 105580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2020.105580 Council directive 2008/120/EC of 18 December 2008 laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs. Available online: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/120/2019-12-14 (accessed on 15 October 2020). Elkmann, A. and Hoy, S. (2009). Frequency of occupation with different simultaneously offered devices by fattening pigs kept in pens with or without straw. Livestock Science, 124(1-3), 330–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2008.12.008 Ernst, K. et al. (2018). Play behavior and environmental enrichment in pigs. Available online: https://www.wur.nl/upload_mm/e/f/b/6af2e2db-430e-4771-8f7d-6f5b974eab5e_final%20report%20ACT%202060%20juli%202018%20op%20website%20.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2020). Godyn, D. et al. (2019). Effects of environmental enrichment on pig welfare-A Review. Animals , 9(6), 383. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9060383 Jensen, P. (2002). The ethology of domestic animals . New York: CABI Publishing. Wood-Gush, D. G. M. and Beilharz, R. G. (1983). The enrichment of a bare environment for animals in confined conditions. Applied Animal Ethology , 10(3), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3762(83)90142-6 Young, R. J. (2003). Enrichment for captive animals . Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science Ltd.

Highlights

  • Environmental enrichment is a key factor of animal welfare as well as farm animal production

  • 3 Results and discussion Analysis of the interactions with the enrichment objects by the pigs showed that PET bottle was more attractive

  • Increased number of interactions with less attractive objects is in accordance with Averós et al (2010) reported the provision of different enrichment objects increases the duration of exploration

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Environmental enrichment is a key factor of animal welfare as well as farm animal production. Housing systems for farm animals differs from natural environment but enrichment stimulate and allow animals show normal behavior. Environmental enrichment motivates the expression of natural behavior in pigs, e.g. exploration, rooting, etc. Several types of non-straw enrichment are in use with considerable effect on undesired behavior as tail biting. Enrichment objects should be changed regularly for permanent attractivity and occupation by manipulation in prevention of abnormal behavior (Averós et al, 2010; Ernst et al, 2018; Buijs and Muns, 2019). Aim of the present study was to evaluate the differences in exploration and use of two different type of physical enrichment. Two hanging objects – a PET bottle and a horseshoe were used as enrichment objects. In study we tested hypothesis that the number of interactions with PET bottle will be higher than interactions with the horseshoe

Material and methods
Results and discussion
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call