You are here

Головна » 2020 » Scientific Journal of Veterinary Medicine 2'2020

Influence of stress factors on adaptive and behavioral responses in sows and piglets

The article presents data from the scientific literature describing the influence of stress factors on pigs in modern production conditions. It was established that stress factors that affect sows during gestation period affect fetal development and are important determinants of behavioral disorders in piglets in the future. Conditions for keeping and feeding pregnant sows play an important role in ensuring the behavior of future offspring. Stress of sows in the late stages of gestation can cause a negative longterm effect on the functioning of the immune system of piglets. This reduces the ability of piglets to be effectively protected against infections during lactation and weaning periods. Changes in the endocrine and neurotransmitter systems depend on the gestational period, with late pregnancy being the most sensitive phase in pigs. Ensuring optimal housing conditions for sows and newborn piglets is an important condition for the proper development of protective, feeding and behavioral reflexes and, accordingly, the realization of their productive qualities. Stress factors also affect pigs in the postnatal period of their development. The main stress-inducing factors are the conditions of feeding, maintenance and technological methods associated with ensuring veterinary wellbeing. Early social isolation during the early postnatal life of animals causes persistent changes in their behavioral responses and physiological mechanisms of adaptation. Raising pigs in a depleted environment may indicate the presence of chronic stress and, accordingly, a decrease in the level of welfare, protective and productive qualities in animals. The methods that can reduce stress and improve animal welfare is environmental enrichment and adaptation of the housing environment according to the behavioral needs of animals. Ecological enrichment can be used to preserve or restore physiological homeostasis and behavioral disorders in the post-stress period.

Key words: stress, pigs, adaptation, behavior, immune system, productivity.

 

 

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


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


N. Nischemenco


STOVBETSKA L. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6672-5560


A. Emelianenko


  1. Einarsson, S., Brandt, Y., Lundeheim, N., Madej, A. (2009). Stress and its influence on reproduction in pigs: A review. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica. Vol. 50(1), 48, рр. 20– 28. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/1751-0147-50-48.
  2. Bacou, E., Haurogné, K., Mignot, G., Allard, M., De Beaurepaire, L., Marchand, J., Terenina, E. (2016). Acute social stress-induced immunomodulation in pigs high and low responders to ACTH. Physiol. Behav. Vol. 1, 169, рр. 1–8. Available at: https://doi:10.1016/j.physbeh. 2016.11.012.
  3. Couret, D., Jamin, A., Kuntz-Simon, G. (2009). Maternal stress during late gestation has moderate but longlasting effects on the immune system of the piglets. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. Vol. 15, 131(1‑2), рр. 17–24. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetimm.2009.03.003.
  4. Tuchscherer, M., Kanitz, E., Otten, W., Tuchscherer, A. (2002). Effects of prenatal stress on cellular and humoral immune responses in neonatal pigs. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. Vol. 86(3–4), рр. 195–203. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0165-2427(02)00035-1.
  5. Lay, D.C., Kattesh, H.G., Cunnick, J.E. (2011). Effect of prenatal stress on subsequent response to mixing stress and a lipopolysaccharide challenge in pigs. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 89(6), рр. 1787–1794. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2527/ jas.2010-3612.
  6. Kanitz, E., Otten, W., Tuchscherer, M. (2006). Changes in endocrine and neurochemical profiles in neonatal pigs prenatally exposed to increased maternal cortisol. J. Endocrinol. Vol. 191(1), рр. 207–214. Available at: https:// doi.org/10.1677/joe.1.06868.
  7. Kranendonk, G., Hopster, H., Fillerup, M. (2006). Cortisol administration to pregnant sows affects noveltyinduced locomotion, aggressive behaviour, and blunts gender differences in their offspring. Horm. Behav. Vol. 49(5), рр. 663–672. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. yhbeh.2005.12.008.
  8. Kranendonk, G., Hopster, H., Fillerup, M. (2006). Lower birth weight and attenuated adrenocortical response to ACTH in offspring from sows that orally received cortisol during gestation. Domest. Anim. Endocrinol. Vol. 30(3), рр. 218–238. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. domaniend.2005.07.001.
  9. Bernardino, T., Tatemoto, P., Morrone, B. (2016). Piglets Born from Sows Fed High Fibre Diets during Pregnancy Are Less Aggressive Prior to Weaning. PLoS. One. Vol. 1, 11(12), рр. 845–852. Available at: https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone. 0167363.
  10. McGlone, J.J., Fullwood, S.D. (2001). Behavior, reproduction, and immunity of crated pregnant gilts: effects of high dietary fiber and rearing environment. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 79(6), рр. 1466–1474. Available at:https://doi. org/10.2527/2001.7961466.
  11. Quesnel, H., Meunier-Salaün, M., Hamard, A. (2009). Dietary fiber for pregnant sows: influence on sow physiology and performance during lactation. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 87(2), рр. 532–543. Available at:https://doi. org/10.2527/jas.2008-1231.
  12. Jensen, M.B., Schild, S.L., Theil, P.K. (2016). The effect of varying duration of water restriction on drinking behaviour, welfare and production of lactating sows. Animal. Vol. 10(6), рр. 961–969. Available at: https://doi. org/10.1017/S1751731115002736.
  13. Leibbrandt, V.D., Johnston, L.J., Shurson, G.C. (2001). Effect of nipple drinker water flow rate and season on performance of lactating swine. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 79(11), рр. 2770–2775. Available at:https://doi.org/PMID: 11768104.
  14. Sorrells, A.D., Eicher, S.D., Scott, K.A. (2006). Postnatal behavioral and physiological responses of piglets from gilts housed individually or in groups during gestation. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 84(3), рр. 757–766. Available at: https:// doi.org/PMID: 16478968.
  15. McLean, K.A., Lawrence, A.B., Petherick, J.C. (2002). Investigation of the relationship between farrowing environment, sex steroid concentrations and maternal aggression in gilts. Anim. Reprod. Sci. Vol. 27, 50(1-2), рр. 95–109. Available at: https://doi.org/PMID: 9615183.
  16. Oliviero, C., Heinonen, M., Valros, A. (2008). Effect of the environment on the physiology of the sow during late pregnancy, farrowing and early lactation. Anim. Reprod. Sci. Vol. 105(3–4), рр. 365–377. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2007.03.015.
  17. Pedersen, L.J., Jensen, T. А. (2008). Effects of late introduction of sows to two farrowing environments on the progress of farrowing and maternal behavior. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 86(10), рр. 2730–2737. Available at: https://doi. org/10.2527/jas.2007-0749.
  18. Gu, Z., Gao, Y., Lin, B. (2011). Impacts of a freedom farrowing pen design on sow behaviours and performance. Prev. Vet. Med. Vol. 15, 102(4), рр. 296–303. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed. 2011.08.001.
  19. Xiaojun, Z., Congcong, Li, Yue, Hao, Xianhong, Gu (2020). Effects of different farrowing environments on the behavior of sows and piglets. J. Animals. Vol. 10, рр. 320– 330. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10020320.
  20. Bovey, K.E., Widowski, T.M., Dewey, C.E. (2014). The effect of birth weight and age at tail docking and ear notching on the behavioral and physiological responses of piglets. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 92(4), рр. 1718–1727. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-7063.
  21. Weaver, S.A., Aherne, F.X., Meaney, M.J. (2000). Neonatal handling permanently alters hypothalamicpituitary- adrenal axis function, behaviour, and body weight in boars. J. Endocrinol. Vol. 164(3), рр. 349–359. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1677/joe.0.1640349.
  22. Tuchscherer, M., Kanitz, E., Puppe, B., Tuchscherer, A. (2006). Early social isolation alters behavioral and physiological responses to an endotoxin challenge in piglets. Horm. Behav. Vol. 50(5), рр. 753–761. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2006.06.026.
  23. Kanitz, E., Tuchscherer, M., Puppe, B. (2004). Consequences of repeated early isolation in domestic piglets (Sus scrofa) on their behavioural, neuroendocrine, and immunological responses. Brain Behav. Immun. Vol. 18(1), рр. 35–45. Available at: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/ s0889-1591(03)00085.
  24. Chaloupková, H., Illmann, G., Neuhauserová, K. (2007). Preweaning housing effects on behavior and physiological measures in pigs during the suckling and fattening periods. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 85(7), рр. 1741–1749. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2006-504.
  25. Li, Y.Z., Johnston, L.J. (2009). Behavior and performance of pigs previously housed in large groups. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 87(4), рр. 1472–1478. Available at: https:// doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1202.
  26. Otten, W., Puppe, B., Kanitz, E. (2002). Physiological and behavioral effects of different success during social confrontation in pigs with prior dominance experience. Physiol. Behav. Vol. 75(1–2), рр. 127–133. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0031-9384(01)00630-8.
  27. Bornett, H.L., Morgan, C.A., Lawrence, A.B., Mann, J. (2000). The effect of group housing on feeding patterns and social behaviour of previously individually housed growing pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. Vol. 1, 70(2), рр. 127–141. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168- 1591(00)00146-5.
  28. Carreras, R., Arroyo, L., Mainau, E. (2017). Can the way pigs are handled alter behavioural and physiological measures of affective state? Behav. Processes. Vol. 142, рр. 91–98. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. beproc.2017.06.005.
  29. Marchant-Forde, J.N., Jr Lay, D.C., McMunn, K.A. (2014). Postnatal piglet husbandry practices and wellbeing: the effects of alternative techniques delivered in combination. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 92(3), рр. 1150–1160. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6929.
  30. Sutherland, M.A., Niekamp, S.R., RodriguezZas, S.L., Salak-Johnson, J.L. (2006). Impacts of chronic stress and social status on various physiological and performance measures in pigs of different breeds. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 84(3), рр. 588–596. Available at: https://doi. org/10.2527/2006.843588.
  31. Merlot, E., Vincent, A., Thomas, F. (2012). Health and immune traits of Basque and Large White pigs housed in a conventional or enriched environment. Animal. Vol. 6(8), рр. 1290–1299. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1751731112000080.
  32. Fragomeni, B.O., Lourenco, D.A., Tsuruta, S. (2016). Modeling response to heat stress in pigs from nucleus and commercial farms in different locations in the United States. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 94(11), рр. 4789–4798. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2016-0536.
  33. Casal, N., Manteca, X., Escribano, D. (2017). Effect of environmental enrichment and herbal compound supplementation on physiological stress indicators (chromogranin A, cortisol and tumour necrosis factor-α) in growing pigs. Animal. Vol. 11(7), рр. 1228–1236. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731116002561.
  34. Klont, R.E., Hulsegge, B.А., Hoving-Bolink, A.H. (2001). Relationships between behavioral and meat quality characteristics of pigs raised under barren and enriched housing conditions. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 79(11), рр. 2835–2843. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0161832.
  35. Marcet Rius, M., Cozzi, A., Bienboire-Frosini, C. (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(10), рр. 2138–2146. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S175173111800006X.
  36. De Jong, I.C., Prelle, I.T., Burgwal, van de J.A. (2000). Effects of environmental enrichment on behavioral responses to novelty, learning, and memory, and the circadian rhythm in cortisol in growing pigs. Physiol. Behav. Vol. 68(4), рр. 571–578. Available at: https://doi. org/ 10.1016/s0031-9384(99)00212-7.
  37. Zonderland, J.J., Schepers, F., Bracke, M.B. (2011). Characteristics of biter and victim piglets apparent before a tail-biting outbreak. Animal. Vol. 5(5), рр. 767–775. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731110002326.
  38. Muns, R., Rault, J., Hemsworth, P. (2015). Positive human contact on the first. Physiol Behav. Vol. 1, 151, рр. 162–167. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. physbeh.2015.06.030.
  39. Zebunke, M., Puppe, B., Langbein, J. (2013). Effects of cognitive enrichment on behavioural and physiological reactions of pigs. Physiol Behav. Vol. 13, 118, рр. 70–79. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh. 2013.05.005.
  40. Moustsen, V.A., Hales, J. В., Lahrmann, H.P. (2013). Confinement of lactating sows in crates for 4 days after farrowing reduces piglet mortality. Animal. Vol. 7(4), рр. 648–654. Available at:https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1751731112002170.
  41. Condous, P.C., Plush, K.J., Tilbrook, A.J., Wettere, W.H. (2016). Reducing sow confinement during farrowing and in early lactation increases piglet mortality. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 94(7), рр. 3022–3029. Available at:https:// doi.org/10.2527/jas.2015-0145.
  42. Van der Staay, F.J., Schuurman, T., Hulst, M. (2010). Effects of chronic stress: a comparison between tethered and loose sows. Physiol. Behav. Vol. 11, 100(2), рр. 154–164. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. physbeh.2010.02.020.
AttachmentSize
PDF icon poroshinska_2_2020.pdf481.57 KB
2020
Scientific Journal of Veterinary Medicine 2'2020