Cargando…

Comparison of Vocalization Patterns in Piglets Which Were Crushed to Those Which Underwent Human Restraint

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Piglet crushing (the process by which a sow sits or lies on and crushes her piglet) is a welfare issue in pig husbandry. In order to understand why crushing occurs, and avoid hardship to a piglet, recordings of distressed piglets are often used to simulate crushing events to measure...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chapel, Nichole M., Lucas, Jeffrey R., Radcliffe, Scott, Stewart, Kara R., Lay, Donald C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6115786/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30096782
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani8080138
_version_ 1783351461282840576
author Chapel, Nichole M.
Lucas, Jeffrey R.
Radcliffe, Scott
Stewart, Kara R.
Lay, Donald C.
author_facet Chapel, Nichole M.
Lucas, Jeffrey R.
Radcliffe, Scott
Stewart, Kara R.
Lay, Donald C.
author_sort Chapel, Nichole M.
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: Piglet crushing (the process by which a sow sits or lies on and crushes her piglet) is a welfare issue in pig husbandry. In order to understand why crushing occurs, and avoid hardship to a piglet, recordings of distressed piglets are often used to simulate crushing events to measure sows’ behavior. Unfortunately, it is not known if the call produced by the distressed piglet is similar to a piglet being crushed, making the evaluation of the results difficult. We recorded calls of piglets during crushing and compared the calls to those produced by restrained piglets. When crushed, piglets have a deeper call than piglets which are restrained by a human. Restrained piglets call as loudly as crushed piglets. In conclusion, sufficient differences exist between restrained and crushed piglets that restrained calls alone should not be used to understand the conditions in which a sow will respond to the distress calls of her piglets. Future research should include measuring sow behavior in response to Crushed and Restrained calls. ABSTRACT: Though many studies focused on piglet crushing utilizing piglet vocalizations to test sow response, none have verified the properties of test vocalizations against actual crushing events. Ten sows were observed 48 h after parturition, and crushing events were recorded from all sows. When a crushing event occurred, a second piglet within the same litter was used to solicit a vocalization through manual restraint to compare restrained piglets’ call properties to those of crushed piglets’. A total of 659 Restrained calls and 631 Crushed calls were collected. Variables were gathered at the loudest point in a call, and as an average across the entire call. Crushed piglets had a lower fundamental frequency (p < 0.01; Crushed: 523.57 ± 210.6 Hz; Restrained: 1214.86 ± 203.2 Hz) and narrower bandwidth (p < 0.01; Crushed: 4897.01 ± 587.3 Hz; Restrained: 6674.99 ± 574.0 Hz) when analyzed at the loudest portion of a call. Overall, piglets which were crushed had a lower mean peak frequency than those which were restrained (p = 0.01; 1497.08 ± 239.4 Hz and 2566.12 ± 235.0 Hz, respectively). Future research should focus on measuring sow reactivity to Crushed and Restrained piglets to continue to improve research practices.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6115786
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61157862018-08-31 Comparison of Vocalization Patterns in Piglets Which Were Crushed to Those Which Underwent Human Restraint Chapel, Nichole M. Lucas, Jeffrey R. Radcliffe, Scott Stewart, Kara R. Lay, Donald C. Animals (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: Piglet crushing (the process by which a sow sits or lies on and crushes her piglet) is a welfare issue in pig husbandry. In order to understand why crushing occurs, and avoid hardship to a piglet, recordings of distressed piglets are often used to simulate crushing events to measure sows’ behavior. Unfortunately, it is not known if the call produced by the distressed piglet is similar to a piglet being crushed, making the evaluation of the results difficult. We recorded calls of piglets during crushing and compared the calls to those produced by restrained piglets. When crushed, piglets have a deeper call than piglets which are restrained by a human. Restrained piglets call as loudly as crushed piglets. In conclusion, sufficient differences exist between restrained and crushed piglets that restrained calls alone should not be used to understand the conditions in which a sow will respond to the distress calls of her piglets. Future research should include measuring sow behavior in response to Crushed and Restrained calls. ABSTRACT: Though many studies focused on piglet crushing utilizing piglet vocalizations to test sow response, none have verified the properties of test vocalizations against actual crushing events. Ten sows were observed 48 h after parturition, and crushing events were recorded from all sows. When a crushing event occurred, a second piglet within the same litter was used to solicit a vocalization through manual restraint to compare restrained piglets’ call properties to those of crushed piglets’. A total of 659 Restrained calls and 631 Crushed calls were collected. Variables were gathered at the loudest point in a call, and as an average across the entire call. Crushed piglets had a lower fundamental frequency (p < 0.01; Crushed: 523.57 ± 210.6 Hz; Restrained: 1214.86 ± 203.2 Hz) and narrower bandwidth (p < 0.01; Crushed: 4897.01 ± 587.3 Hz; Restrained: 6674.99 ± 574.0 Hz) when analyzed at the loudest portion of a call. Overall, piglets which were crushed had a lower mean peak frequency than those which were restrained (p = 0.01; 1497.08 ± 239.4 Hz and 2566.12 ± 235.0 Hz, respectively). Future research should focus on measuring sow reactivity to Crushed and Restrained piglets to continue to improve research practices. MDPI 2018-08-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6115786/ /pubmed/30096782 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani8080138 Text en © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Chapel, Nichole M.
Lucas, Jeffrey R.
Radcliffe, Scott
Stewart, Kara R.
Lay, Donald C.
Comparison of Vocalization Patterns in Piglets Which Were Crushed to Those Which Underwent Human Restraint
title Comparison of Vocalization Patterns in Piglets Which Were Crushed to Those Which Underwent Human Restraint
title_full Comparison of Vocalization Patterns in Piglets Which Were Crushed to Those Which Underwent Human Restraint
title_fullStr Comparison of Vocalization Patterns in Piglets Which Were Crushed to Those Which Underwent Human Restraint
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Vocalization Patterns in Piglets Which Were Crushed to Those Which Underwent Human Restraint
title_short Comparison of Vocalization Patterns in Piglets Which Were Crushed to Those Which Underwent Human Restraint
title_sort comparison of vocalization patterns in piglets which were crushed to those which underwent human restraint
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6115786/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30096782
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani8080138
work_keys_str_mv AT chapelnicholem comparisonofvocalizationpatternsinpigletswhichwerecrushedtothosewhichunderwenthumanrestraint
AT lucasjeffreyr comparisonofvocalizationpatternsinpigletswhichwerecrushedtothosewhichunderwenthumanrestraint
AT radcliffescott comparisonofvocalizationpatternsinpigletswhichwerecrushedtothosewhichunderwenthumanrestraint
AT stewartkarar comparisonofvocalizationpatternsinpigletswhichwerecrushedtothosewhichunderwenthumanrestraint
AT laydonaldc comparisonofvocalizationpatternsinpigletswhichwerecrushedtothosewhichunderwenthumanrestraint