You are here

Головна » Scientific Journal of Veterinary Medicine 1'2025

Physiological and veterinary approaches in the assessment of pig welfare

The article covers various aspects of pig welfare in agriculture, in particular, issues of physical health, housing conditions, feeding and social interactions. In particular, the five-domain model is considered, which is one of the most common and recognized frameworks for assessing animal welfare. It provides a systematic, comprehensive and organized approach to analyzing risks and opportunities for improving animal welfare. This model consists of five key domains, each of which covers certain areas. Four of them belong to the physical or functional areas: feeding, housing conditions, health status and behavioral interactions. The fifth domain concerns the emotional and psychological state of the animals. The first three domains reflect the main physiological and functional aspects that are influenced by feeding, environmenttal conditions and health. The fourth domain focuses on the physical and social conditions of the animal. Some researchers propose to elaborate on this aspect by distinguishing three separate categories of interactions: with the environment, with other animals and with humans. This approach allows a better understanding of the different types of behavioral relationships and their impact on the overall welfare of the animals. Feeding is an important factor determining the health, behavior and productivity of pigs. Studies show that two-time feeding can improve the percentage of low-fat meat without negatively affecting the behavior of the animals. The quality of the feed and feeding methods are important for improving the welfare of the animals, in particular, avoiding stress and behavioral disorders. Comfortable conditions, including space, microclimate and the possibility of natural behavior, are important for improving the welfare of pigs. Studies indicate the importance of sufficient space for sows, as well as the impact of social interaction on the level of stress and aggression. Interactions between animals and with humans are also important for welfare. Positive interactions with humans can reduce stress, while social conflicts among pigs can lead to aggression and stress. Stressful situations, such as moving animals to new groups or painful procedures, can impair welfare. It is important to consider the impact of such stressors on the health and behavior of pigs. This research paper highlights the need for a comprehensive approach to improving pig welfare by optimizing housing conditions, feeding, social interactions and taking into account the behavioral responses of the animals.

Key words: pigs, welfare, health, behavior, performance.

POROSHINSKA O. https://orcid.org/ 0000-0001-9882-1963


LUKYANENKO K. https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9869-6375


SHMAYUN S. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6458-6336


KOZIY V. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8221-6678


  1. Kells, N.J. (2022). Review: The Five Domains model and promoting positive welfare in pigs. Animal, Vol. 16, no. 2. DOI:10.1016/j.animal.2021.100378.
  2. Chapa, J.M., Maschat, K., Iwersen, M., Baumgartner, J., Drillich, M. (2020). Accelerometer systems as tools for health and welfare assessment in cattle and pigs – a review. Behav Processes, Vol. 181. DOI:10.1016/j.beproc.2020.104262.
  3. Pairis-Garcia, M., Moeller, S.J. (2017). The Common Swine Industry Audit: Future steps to assure positive on-farm animal welfare utilizing validated, repeatable and feasible animal-based measures. J. Anim Sci., Vol. 95, no. 3, pp. 1372–1381. DOI:10.2527/jas.2016.0960.
  4. Reiner, G. (2022). Swine Inflammation and Necrosis Syndrome (SINS) – a review. Tierarztl Prax Ausg G Grosstiere Nutztiere, Vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 323 332. DOI:10.1055/a-1950-7975.
  5. Zhang, K., Li, D., Huang, J., Chen, Y. (2020). Automated video behavior recognition of pigs using two-stream convolutional networks. Sensors (Basel), Vol. 20, no. 4, 1085 p. DOI:10. 3390/s20041085.
  6. Sommer, D.M., Young, J.M., Sun, X., LópezMartínez, G., Byrd, C.J. (2023). Are infrared thermography, feeding behavior, and heart rate variability measures capable of characterizing group-housed sow social hierarchies? J. Anim Sci., Vol. 101, 143 p. DOI:10.1093/jas/skad143.
  7. Pol, F., Kling-Eveillard, F., Champigneulle, F., Fresnay, E., Ducrocq, M., Courboulay, V. (2021). Human-animal relationship influences husbandry practices, animal welfare, and productivity in pig farming. Animal, Vol. 15, no. 2, 100103 p. DOI:10.1016/j.animal.2020.100103.
  8. Tarazona, A.M., Ceballos, M.C., Broom, D.M. (2019). Human relationships with domestic and other animals: One Health, One Welfare, One Biology. Animals (Basel), Vol. 10, no. 1, 43 p. DOI:10.3390/ani10010043.
  9. Leeb, C., Rudolph, G., Bochicchio, D., Edwards, S., Früh, B., Holinger, M., Holmes, D., Illmann, G., Knop, D., Prunier, A., Rousing, T., Winck ler, C., Dippel, S. (2019). Effects of three husbandry systems on health, welfare, and productivity of organic pigs. Animal, Vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 2025–2033. DOI:10.1017/S1751731119000041.
  10. Gupta, S. (2018). Systematic review of the literature: Best practices. Academic Radiology, Vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 1481–1490. DOI:10.1016/j.acra.2018.04.025.
  11. Vargas, L.B., Caldara, F.R., Lippi, I.C.C., de Oliveira, G.F., Odakura, A.M., Burbarelli, M.F.C., Garcia, R.G., Almeida Paz, I.C.L., Dos Santos, L.S. (2023). Environmental enrichment strategies for weaned pigs: Welfare and behavior. J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci., Vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 205–217. DOI:10.1080/10888705.2021.1967753.
  12. Mellor, D.J. (2017). Operational details of the Five Domains Model and its key applications to the assessment and management of animal welfare. Animals (Basel), Vol. 7, no. 8, 60 p. DOI:10.3390/ani7080060.
  13. Mellor, D.J., Beausoleil, N.J. (2015). Extending the ‘Five Domains’ model for animal welfare assessment to incorporate positive welfare states. Animal Welfare, Vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 241–253. DOI:10.7120/09627286.24.3.241.
  14. Colpoys, J.D., Johnson, A.K., Gabler, N.K. (2016). Daily feeding regimen impacts pig growth and behavior. Physiol Behav., Vol. 159, pp. 27–32. DOI:10.1016/j.physbeh.2016.03.003.
  15. Manu, H., Lee, S., Keyes, M.C., Cairns, J., Baidoo, S.K. (2020). Behavioral and cortisol responses to feeding frequency in pregnant sows under isocaloric intake. J. Anim Sci., Vol. 98, no. 8, 226 p. DOI:10.1093/jas/skaa226.
  16. Wang, Q.J., Guo, Y., Yao, C.Y., Zhang, K.H., Li, Q., Shan, C.H., Liu, P., Wang, M.Z., Zhu, F., An, L., Tian, J.H., Wu, Z.H. (2021). Loss of diurnal behavioral rhythms and impaired lipid metabolism in growing pigs with mistimed feeding. FASEB J., Vol. 35, no. 11. DOI:10.1096/fj.202100768R.
  17. Vargovic, L., Hermesch, S., Athorn, R.Z., Bunter, K.L. (2021). Feed intake and feeding behavior traits for gestating sows recorded using electronic sow feeders. J. Anim Sci., Vol. 99, no. 1, 395 p. DOI:10.1093/jas/skaa395.
  18. Lu, D., Jiao, S., Tiezzi, F., Knauer, M., Huang, Y., Gray, K.A., Maltecca, C. (2017). The relationship between different measures of feed efficiency and feeding behavior traits in Duroc pigs. J. Anim Sci., Vol. 95, no. 8, pp. 3370–3380. DOI:10.2527/jas.2017.1509.
  19. Salgado, H.H., Méthot, S., Remus, A., Létourneau-Montminy, M.P., Pomar, C. (2021). A novel feeding behavior index integrating several components of the feeding behavior of finishing pigs. Animal, Vol. 15, no. 7. DOI:10.1016/j.animal.2021.100251.
  20. Moser, J., Burla, J.B., Gygax, L. (2019). Executing specific foraging behaviours does not represent a general goal state of foraging in dry sows (Sus scrofa). Behav Processes, Vol. 164, pp. 115–122. DOI:10.1016/j.beproc.2019.05.005.
  21. Müller, L.K.F., Silva, A.S.D., Bottari, N.B., Santurio, J.M., Morsch, V.M., Piva, M.M., Mendes, R.E., Gloria, E.M., Paiano, D. (2019). Effects of fed mycotoxin-contaminated diets supplemented with spray-dried porcine plasma on cholinergic response and behavior in piglets. An Acad Bras Cienc, Vol. 91, no. 2. DOI:10.1590/0001-3765201920180419.
  22. DeDecker, A.E., Hanson, A.R., Walker, P.M., Salak-Johnson, J.L. (2014). Space allowance and high fiber diet impact performance and behavior of group-kept gestating sows. J Anim Sci., Vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 1666–1674. DOI:10.2527/jas.2013-6776.
  23. Verdon, M., Hansen, C.F., Rault, J.L., Jongman, E., Hansen, L.U., Plush, K., Hemsworth, P.H. (2015). Effects of group housing on sow welfare: a review. J Anim Sci., Vol. 93, no. 5, pp. 1999–2017. DOI:10.2527/jas.2014-8742.
  24. O Malley, C.I., Steibel, J.P., Bates, R.O., Ernst, C.W., Siegford, J.M. (2021). Time budgets of group-housed pigs in relation to social aggression and production. J Anim Sci., Vol. 99, no. 5, 110 p. DOI:10.1093/jas/skab110.
  25. Salak-Johnson, J.L., DeDecker, A.E., Le- vitin, H.A., McGarry, B.M. (2015). Wider stall space affects behavior, lesion scores, and productivity of gestating sows. J Anim Sci., Vol. 93, no. 10, pp. 5006–5017. DOI:10.2527/jas.2015-9017.
  26. Greenwood, E.C., Plush, K.J., van Wettere, W.H., Hughes, P.E. (2016). Group and individual sow behavior is altered in early gestation by space allowance in the days immediately following grouping. J Anim Sci., Vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 385–393. DOI:10.2527/jas.2015-9427.
  27. Calderón Díaz, J.A., Fahey, A.G., Boyle, L.A. (2014). Effects of gestation housing system and floor type during lactation on locomotory ability, body, limb, and claw lesions, and lying-down behavior of lactating sows. J Anim Sci., Vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 1675 1685. DOI:10.2527/jas.2013-6279.
  28. Goumon, S., Illmann, G., Moustsen, V.A., Baxter, E.M., Edwards, S.A. (2022). Review of temporary crating of farrowing and lactating sows. Front Vet Sci., Vol. 9. DOI:10.3389/fvets.2022.811810.
  29. Illmann, G., Goumon, S., Chaloupková, H. (2021). Assessment of lying down behaviour in temporarily crated lactating sows. Animal., Vol. 15, no. 2. DOI:10.1016/j.animal.2020.100130.
  30. Illmann, G., Goumon, S., Šimečková, M., Leszkowová, I. (2019). Effect of crate opening from day 3 postpartum to weaning on nursing and suckling behaviour in domestic pigs. Animal., Vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 2018–2024. DOI:10.1017/S1751731118003750.
  31. Wülbers-Mindermann, M., Berg, C., Illmann, G., Baulain, U., Algers, B. (2015). The effect of farrowing environment and previous experience on the maternal behaviour of sows in indoor pens and outdoor huts. Animal., Vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 669–676. DOI:10.1017/S1751731114003036.
  32. Illmann, G., Chaloupková, H., Melišová, M. (2016). Impact of sow prepartum behavior on maternal behavior, piglet body weight gain, and mortality in farrowing pens and crates. J Anim Sci., Vol. 94, no. 9, pp. 3978–3986. DOI:10.2527/jas.2016-0329.
  33. Chaloupková, H., Illmann, G., Neuhauserová, K., Simecková, M., Kratinová, P. (2011). The effect of nesting material on the nest-building and maternal behavior of domestic sows and piglet production. J Anim Sci., Vol. 89, no. 2, pp. 531–537. DOI:10.2527/jas.2010-2854.
  34. Yi, R., Wang, C., Zhang, X., Zhao, P., Zhang, M., Li, X., Cui, S., Liu, H., Bao, J. (2019). Maternal behavior, posture change, and production performance of lactating sows housed in an enriched environment. J Appl Anim Welf Sci., Vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 298–308. DOI:10.1080/1088 8705.2018.1512860.
  35. Goumon, S., Leszkowová, I., Šimecková, M., Illmann, G. (2018). Sow stress levels and behavior and piglet performances in farrowing crates and farrowing pens with temporary crating. J Anim Sci., Vol. 96, no. 11, pp. 4571–4578. DOI:10.1093/jas/sky324.
  36. Martelli, G., Nannoni, E., Grandi, M., Bonaldo, A., Zaghini, G., Vitali, M., Biagi, G., Sardi, L. (2015). Growth parameters, behavior, and meat and ham quality of heavy pigs subjected to photoperi ods of different duration. J Anim Sci., Vol. 93, no. 2, pp. 758–766. DOI:10.2527/jas.2014-7906.
  37. Mós, J.V.D.N., Nascimento, S.T., Murata, L.S., Dos Santos, V.M., Neto, A.J.S., de Oliveira, E.M., da Silva Lisboa, Á., de Freitas Silva, L. (2020). Thermal comfort of sows in a free-range system in the Brazilian Savanna. J Therm Biol., Vol. 88. DOI:10.1016/j.jtherbio.2019. 102489.
  38. Goumon, S., Brown, J.A., Faucitano, L., Bergeron, R., Widowski, T.M., Crowe, T., Connor, M.L., Gonyou, H.W. (2013). Effects of transport duration on maintenance behavior, heart rate, and gastrointestinal tract temperature of market-weight pigs in two seasons. J Anim Sci., Vol. 91, no. 10, pp. 4925–4935. DOI:10.2527/jas.2012-6081.
  39. Lyte, J.M., Lyte, M. (2019). Microbial endocrinology: Intersection of microbiology and neurobiology matters to swine health from infection to behavior. Animal., Vol. 13, no. 11, pp. 2689–2698. DOI:10.1017/S1751731119000284.
  40. Marcet Rius, M., Cozzi, A., Bienboire-Frosini, C., Teruel, E., Chabaud, C., Monneret, P., Leclercq, J., Lafont-Lecuelle, C., Pageat, P. (2018). Providing straw to allow exploratory behaviour in a pig experimental system does not modify putative indicators of positive welfare: Peripheral oxytocin and serotonin. Animal., Vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 2138–2146. DOI:10.1017/S175173111800006X.
  41. Lou, M., Ventura, B., Deen, J., Li, Y. (2022). Surgical castration changes struggle behavior and vocalizations in male piglets. J Appl Anim Welf Sci., Vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 410–417. DOI:10.1080/10888705.2021.1916938.
  42. Guay, K., Salgado, G., Thompson, G., Backus, B., Sapkota, A., Chaya, W., McGlone, J.J. (2013). Behavior and handling of physically and immunologically castrated market pigs on farm and going to market. J Anim Sci., Vol. 91, no. 11, pp. 5410–5417. DOI:10.2527/jas.2012-5726.
  43. Fu, L.L., Zhou, B., Li, H.Z., Liang, T.T., Chu, Q.P., Schinckel, A.P., Li, Y., Xu, F.L. (2019). Effects of tail docking and/or teeth clipping on behavior, lesions, and physiological indicators of sows and their piglets. Anim Sci J., Vol. 90, no. 9, pp. 1320 1332. DOI:10.1111/asj.13275.
  44. Reimert, I., Rodenburg, T.B., Ursinus, W.W., Duijvesteijn, N., Camerlink, I., Kemp, B., Bolhuis, J.E. (2013). Backtest and novelty behavior of female and castrated male piglets, with diverging social breeding values for growth. J Anim Sci., Vol. 91, no. 10, pp. 4589–4597. DOI:10.2527/jas.2013-6673.
  45. Balzani, A., Cordell, H.J., Edwards, S.A. (2016). Relationship of sow udder morphology with piglet suckling behavior and teat access. Theriogenology, Vol. 86, no. 8, pp. 1913–1920. DOI:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2016.06.007.
  46. Prunier, A., Averos, X., Dimitrov, I., Edwards, S.A., Hillmann, E., Holinger, M., Ilieski, V., Leming, R., Tallet, C., Turner, S.P., Zupan, M., Camerlink, I. (2020). Early life predisposing factors for biting in pigs. Animal, Vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 570–587. DOI:10.1017/S1751731119001940.
  47. Shair, H.N. (2014). Parental potentiation of vocalization as a marker for filial bonds in infant animals. Developmental Psychobiology, Vol. 56, no. 8, pp. 1689–1697. DOI:10.1002/dev.21222.
  48. van Nieuwamerongen, S.E., Bolhuis, J.E., van der Peet-Schwering, C.M., Soede, N.M. (2014). A review of sow and piglet behaviour and performance in group housing systems for lactating sows. Animal, Vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 448–460. DOI:10.1017/S1751731113002280.
  49. Muns, R., Manzanilla, E.G., Sol, C., Manteca, X., Gasa, J. (2013). Piglet behavior as a measure of vitality and its influence on piglet survival and growth during lactation. Journal of Animal Science, Vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 1838–1843. DOI:10.2527/jas.2012-5501.
  50. Zhang, C., Yang, H., Xu, Q., Liu, M., Chao, X., Chen, J., Zhou, B., Liu, Y. (2023). Comprehensive genome and transcriptome analysis identifies SLCO3A1 associated with aggressive behavior in pigs. Biomolecules, Vol. 13, no. 9, 1381 p. DOI:10.3390/biom13091381.
  51. Boumans, I.J.M.M., de Boer, I.J.M., Hofstede, G.J., Bokkers, E.A.M. (2018). How social factors and behavioural strategies affect feeding and social interaction patterns in pigs. Physiology & Behavior, Vol. 194, pp. 23–40. DOI:10.1016/j.phys beh.2018.04.032.
  52. Salak-Johnson, J.L. (2017). Social status and housing factors affect reproductive performance of pregnant sows in groups. Molecular Reproduction and Development, Vol. 84, no. 9, pp. 905–913. DOI:10.1002/mrd.22846.
  53. Kavlak, A.T., Strandén, I., Lidauer, M.H., Uimari, P. (2021). Estimation of social genetic in pigs. Animal, Vol. 15, no. 3. DOI:10.1016/j.animal.2020.100168.
  54. Vandermeulen, J., Bahr, C., Tullo, E., Fontana, I., Ott, S., Kashiha, M., Guarino, M., Moons, C.P., Tuyttens, F.A., Niewold, T.A., Berckmans, D. (2015). Discerning pig screams in production environments. PLOS ONE, Vol. 10, no. 4. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0123111.
  55. Garcia, M., Gingras, B., Bowling, D.L., Herbst, C.T., Boeckle, M., Locatelli, Y., Fitch, W.T. (2016). Structural classification of wild boar (Sus scrofa) vocalizations. Ethology, Vol. 122, no. 4, pp. 329–342. DOI:10.1111/eth.12472.
  56. Briefer, E.F., Sypherd, C.C., Linhart, P., Leliveld, L.M.C., Padilla de la Torre, M., Read, E.R., Guérin, C., Deiss, V., Monestier, C., Rasmussen, J.H., Špinka, M., Düpjan, S., Boissy, A., Janczak, A.M., Hillmann, E., Tallet, C. (2023). Author correction: Classification of pig calls produced from birth to slaughter according to their emotional valence and context of production. Scientific Reports, Vol. 13, no. 1. DOI:10.1038/s41598-023-45242-9.
  57. Špinka, M., Syrová, M., Policht, R., Linhart, P. (2018). Individual stability in vocalization rates of preweaning piglets. Journal of Animal Science, Vol. 96, no. 1, pp. 11–16. DOI: 10.1093/jas/skx014.
  58. Tallet, C., Linhart, P., Policht, R., Hammerschmidt, K., Šimeček, P., Kratinova, P., Špinka, M. (2013). Encoding of situations in the vocal repertoire of piglets (Sus scrofa): A comparison of discrete and graded classifications. PLOS ONE, Vol. 8, no. 8. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0071841.
  59. Illmann, G., Hammerschmidt, K., Spinka, M., Tallet, C. (2013). Calling by domestic piglets during simulated crushing and isolation: A signal of need? PLOS ONE, Vol. 8, no. 12. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0083529.
  60. Linhart, P., Ratcliffe, V.F., Reby, D., Špinka, M. (2015). Expression of emotional arousal in two different piglet call types. PLOS ONE, Vol. 10, no. 8. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0135414.
  61. Krugmann, K., Warnken, F., Krieter, J., Czycholl, I. (2019). Are behavioral tests capable of measuring positive affective states in growing pigs? Animals (Basel), Vol. 9, no. 5, 274 p. DOI:10.3390/ani9050274.
  62. Zhang, J., Yu, L., Yin, G. (2022). Evaluation of behavior and affective state of different-parity sows with strong/weak pupil light reflex. Animals (Basel), Vol. 12, no. 9, 1184 p. DOI:10. 3390/ani12091184.
  63. Li, X., Sun, H., Zhang, L., Liu, H., Li, J., Wang, C., Zhang, M., Bao, J. (2019). Technical note: Effects of age and confinement on pupillary light reflex in sows. Journal of Animal Science, Vol. 97, no. 5, pp. 2009–2014. DOI:10.1093/jas/skz100.
  64. Krugmann, K.L., Mieloch, F.J., Krieter, J., Czycholl, I. (2021). Can tail and ear postures be suitable to capture the affective state of growing pigs? Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, Vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 411–423. DOI:10.1080/10888705.2020.1846535.
  65. Iglesias, P.M., Camerlink, I. (2022). Tail posture and motion in relation to natural behaviour in juvenile and adult pigs. Animal, Vol. 16, no. 4. DOI:10.1016/j.animal.2022.100489.
  66. Rocha, L.M., Velarde, A., Dalmau, A., Saucier, L., Faucitano, L. (2016). Can the monitoring of animal welfare parameters predict pork meat quali ty variation through the supply chain (from farm to slaughter)? Journal of Animal Science, Vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 359–376. DOI:10.2527/jas.2015-9176.
  67. Manteuffel, C., Spitschak, M., Ludwig, C., Wirthgen, E. (2023). New perspectives in the objective evaluation of animal welfare, with focus on the domestic pig. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, Vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 518–529. DOI:10.1080/10888705.2021.1998774.
  68. Matthews, S.G., Miller, A.L., Clapp, J., Plötz, T., Kyriazakis, I. (2016). Early detection of health and welfare compromises through automated detection of behavioral changes in pigs. Veterinary Journal, Vol. 217, pp. 43–51. DOI:10.1016/j.tvjl.2016.09.005.
  69. Briefer, E.F., Sypherd, C.C., Linhart, P., Leliveld, L.M.C., Padilla de la Torre, M., Read, E.R., Guérin, C., Deiss, V., Monestier, C., Rasmussen, J.H., Špinka, M., Düpjan, S., Boissy, A., Janczak, A.M., Hillmann, E., Tallet, C. (2022). Classification of pig calls produced from birth to slaughter according to their emotional valence and context of production. Scientific Reports, Vol. 12, no. 1, 3409 p. DOI:10.1038/s41598-022-07174-8.
  70. Tynes, V.V. (2021). Miniature Pet Pig Behavioral Medicine. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Exotic Animal Practice, Vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 63–86. DOI:10.1016/j.cvex.2020.09.004.
  71. Sankarganesh, D., Kirkwood, R., Angayar kanni, J., Achiraman, S., Archunan, G. (2021). Pig pheromones and behaviors: A review. Theriogenology, Vol. 175, pp. 1–6. DOI:10.1016/j. theriogenolo gy.2021.08.032.
  72. Zhang, M.Y., Li, X., Zhang, X.H., Liu, H.G., Li, J.H., Bao, J. (2017). Effects of confinement duration and parity on stereotypic behavioral and physiological responses of pregnant sows. Physiology & Behavior, Vol. 179, pp. 369–376. DOI:10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.07.015.
  73. Fàbrega, E., Marcet-Rius, M., Vidal, R., Escribano, D., Cerón, J.J., Manteca, X., Velarde, A. (2019). The effects of environmental enrichment on the physiology, behaviour, productivity, and meat quality of pigs raised in a hot climate. Animals (Basel), Vol. 9, no. 5, 235 p. DOI:10.3390/ani9050235.
  74. Li, J., Li, X., Liu, H., Li, J., Han, Q., Wang, C., Zeng, X., Li, Y., Ji, W., Zhang, R., Bao, J. (2021). Effects of music stimulus on behavior response, cortisol level, and horizontal immunity of growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science, Vol. 99, no. 5. DOI:10.1093/jas/skab043.
  75. Urrea, V.M., Bridi, A.M., Ceballos, M.C., Paranhos da Costa, M.J.R., Faucitano, L. (2021). Behavior, blood stress indicators, skin lesions, and meat quality in pigs transported to slaughter at different loading densities. Journal of Animal Science, Vol. 99, no. 6. DOI:10.1093/jas/skab119.
  76. Dokmanovic, M., Ivanovic, J., Janjic, J., Boskovic, M., Laudanovic, M., Pantic, S., Baltic, M.Z. (2017). Effect of lairage time, behaviour, and gender on stress and meat quality parameters in pigs. Animal Science Journal, Vol. 88, no. 3, pp. 500–506. DOI:10.1111/asj.12649.
  77. Sommavilla, R., Faucitano, L., Gonyou, H., Seddon, Y., Bergeron, R., Widowski, T., Crowe, T., Connor, L., Scheeren, M.B., Goumon, S., Brown, J. (2017). Season, transport duration, and trailer compartment effects on blood stress indicators in pigs: Relationship to environmental, behavioral, and other physiological factors, and pork quality traits. Animals (Basel), Vol. 7, no. 2, 8 p. DOI:10.3390/ani7020008.
AttachmentSize
PDF icon poroshynska_1_2025.pdf814.07 KB
Scientific Journal of Veterinary Medicine 1'2025