The objectives of this study were to (1) calculate aggressive interactions around the water bowl drinkers and to (2) determine preference for a water bowl location when pigs were offered either one, two or three water bowl drinkers per pen. Information is available on the current drinker to nursery pig’s ratios (drinker: pigs). In the UK producers are recommended 1:15, while in the US it is 1:10 for nursery pigs. A total of 225 crossbred were seven weeks of age. Conventional nursery pens had plastic flooring and all pigs had ad-libitum access to a commercially formulated diet. Water was delivered through a single stainless steel water bowl drinker and was provided ad libitum. All pigs received a natural light cycle from a curtain sided building. Nine pens were used for behavioral measures. Three treatments were compared. Treatment one (TRT 1; n = 3) was defined as one water bowl drinker per pen. Treatment two (TRT 2; n = 3) was defined as two water bowl drinkers per pen. Treatment three (TRT 3; n = 3) was defined as three water bowl drinkers per pen. One day prior to visual recording of drinking behavior, all pigs in a pen were identified with an individual number. One 12 V black and white CCTV camera was positioned over each water bowl drinker and behavior was recorded from 0700 to 1300 h over two consecutive days onto a DVR at 1 frame per second. The acquisition of drinking behavior (defined as the pig having its head in the water bowl drinker for 5 s or longer) was obtained by three experienced observers who viewed the recordings using 24 h mode (5 frame / s) onto the Observer software. Total number of aggressive interactions and length of aggression around the water bowl drinker over the 6 h period was not (P \u3c 0.05) different between the treatments. The total amount of time that nursery pigs spent when offered two (F vs. O) water bowl drinkers in a pen did not (P = 0.47) differ. However, when pigs were offered three (F vs. O vs. A) water bowl drinkers in a pen there was a difference (P \u3c 0.0001) for total amount of time spent at all three locations. In conclusion, pigs displayed a water bowl drinker preference with the alley location being the least favored; however, there were no difference in the number or length of aggressive interactions.
展开▼
机译:这项研究的目的是(1)计算水杯饮水器周围的侵略性相互作用,以及(2)确定给每只猪提供一,两个或三个水杯饮水器的猪对水杯位置的偏好。有关当前饮水器与保育猪的比例(饮水器:猪)的信息可用。在英国,建议生产者为1:15,而在美国,育成猪的建议为1:10。总共225头杂种是7周龄。常规的育苗栏有塑料地板,所有的猪都可以自由采食商业配制的饲料。水通过一个不锈钢水碗饮水器输送,并随意提供。所有的猪都从幕墙建筑获得自然光循环。九支钢笔用于行为测量。比较了三种治疗。治疗一(TRT 1; n = 3)定义为每支钢笔喝一碗水。治疗二(TRT 2; n = 3)定义为每支笔喝两个水碗。治疗三(TRT 3; n = 3)定义为每支钢笔喝三碗水。在视觉记录饮酒行为的前一天,笔中的所有猪都被标识了一个单独的编号。将一个12 V黑白CCTV摄像机放置在每个水杯饮水器上,并在连续两天的0700至1300 h内以每秒1帧的速度记录到DVR上。饮酒行为的获取(定义为头在水碗饮水器中呆了5秒钟或更长时间的猪)是由三名经验丰富的观察者获得的,他们使用24小时模式(5帧/秒)在Observer软件上查看了记录。在6 h期间,水碗饮水器周围的攻击性互动总数和攻击时间长度在两个处理之间没有差异(P <0.05)。当给一支笔提供两个(F vs. O)饮水杯饮水器时,保育猪所花费的总时间没有差异(P = 0.47)。但是,当给猪提供三个(F vs. O vs. A)钢笔饮水器时,在这三个位置花费的总时间存在差异(P \ u3c 0.0001)。总之,猪表现出对水碗饮水器的偏爱,而胡同位置是最不受欢迎的。但是,积极互动的次数或持续时间没有差异。
展开▼