Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T16:39:04.775Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A test of a free-access two-level pen for fattening pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

D. Fraser ,
P. A. Phillips  and
B. K. Thompson
D. Fraser
Affiliation:
Animal Research Centre, Agriculture Canada, Ottawa, Canada K1A 0C6
P. A. Phillips
Affiliation:
Engineering and Statistical Research Institute, Agriculture Canada, Ottawa, Canada K1A 0C6
B. K. Thompson
Affiliation:
Engineering and Statistical Research Institute, Agriculture Canada, Ottawa, Canada K1A 0C6
Get access

Abstract

Two prototype two-tiered pens were constructed for fattening pigs. The pens consisted of a solid or porous upper floor located 0-8 m above a slatted lower floor, with a short ramp joining the two levels. Food was available only on the upper level and water only on the lower. Eleven groups, each of 15 to 18 pigs were housed in the two-tiered pens for 8 weeks, starting at 10 weeks of age, while matched control groups were housed in a conventional pen offering the same amount of total floor space. During the 1st week, some pigs were slow to adapt to the two-tiered system and average weight gain was lower than in the control pen. Over the 8 weeks, however, weight gain and food conversion ratios were very similar in the two pen types. The animals made effective use of the two levels, and kept the upper level free from dung. Physical condition of pigs in the two-tiered pen was as good as, or better than, that of the controls. The two-tiered design offers several potential advantages in terms of animal production and behavioural problems.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , April 1986 , pp. 269 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1986

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

REFERENCES

Altmann, J. 1974. Observational study of behaviour: sampling methods. Behaviour 49: 227–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anonymous. 1971. Two-storey weaner pen design. Fm Building Prog. 23: 11–12.Google Scholar
Cromwell, G. L., Hays, V. W. and Kratzer, D. D. 1972. Calcium and phosphorus levels for pigs reared on slats, concrete or dirt. J. Anim. Sci. 35: 215 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Elliot, J. I. and Doige, C. E. 1973. Effects of type of confinement on performance and on the occurrence of locomotory disturbances in market pigs. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 53: 211–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friend, D. W., Elliot, J. I., Fortin, A., Larmond, E., Wolynetz, M. S. and Butler, G. 1982. Reproductive performance and meat production of gilts bred at puberty and restricted in feed intake. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 62: 877–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiley-Worthington, M. 1977. Behavioural Problems of Farm Animals. Oriel Press, London.Google Scholar
McGlone, J. J. and Curtis, S. E. 1981. A behavior/performance study to evaluate an alternative nursery pen design for swine. J. Anim. Sci. 53: Suppl. 1, pp. 129–130 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Svajgr, A. J., Lucas, L. E., Mandigo, R. W. and Peo, E. R. Jr, 1968. Effect of floor structure in confinement and drylot space allotment on growth. carcass and bone development in G-F swine. J. Anim. Sci. 27: 1136–1137 (Abstr.).Google Scholar