Behavioral reactions, welfare and productivity of sows using different holding systems during lactation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31210/spi2026.29.02.06Keywords:
lactating sow, farrowing system, animal welfare, behaviour, physical activity, stereotypic behaviour, maternal behaviour, lactational performance, reproductive performanceAbstract
Improving the welfare of lactating sows while maintaining high reproductive performance remains one of the major challenges in modern pig production. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of an alternative farrowing system consisting of individual pens with deep permanent bedding and free access to a communal resting area, compared with conventional fixed farrowing crates with slatted flooring, on sow behaviour, welfare, lactational performance, and reproductive traits. A comprehensive behavioural assessment was conducted throughout lactation using ethological observations combined with an integrated welfare evaluation. The alternative housing system significantly increased physical activity and the time sows spent in an upright posture while encouraging the use of the communal resting area. Despite these behavioural changes, the total daily resting time remained similar between the housing systems (702.2±13.7 vs. 696.6±12.8 min/day; p>0.05). Free movement almost completely eliminated stereotypic behaviour, reducing its frequency by more than 95 % (p<0.001), and improved the integrated welfare index from 67.4 to 89.6 points, corresponding to an increase from a satisfactory to a very good welfare level. Maternal behaviour was not adversely affected, indicating that sow–piglet interactions were maintained under the alternative housing conditions. Housing system had no significant effect on litter size, piglet birth weight, or litter weight at birth. Although sows kept in the alternative system consumed slightly more feed because of greater physical activity, their lactational performance was only marginally lower, resulting in a slight reduction in litter weight at weaning. Nevertheless, integrated reproductive performance indices remained comparable between the two housing systems. The findings demonstrate that individual farrowing pens with free access to a communal resting area and deep sand–straw bedding substantially improve behavioural welfare without compromising the reproductive performance of lactating sows. The proposed housing system represents a promising welfare-oriented alternative for implementation in modern commercial pig production.
References
1. Arellano, P. E., Pijoan, C., Jacobson, L. D., & Algers, B. (1992). Stereotyped behaviour, social interactions and suckling pattern of pigs housed in groups or in single crates. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 35(2), 157–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(92)90006-w
2. Barnett, J. L., Hemsworth, P. H., Cronin, G. M., Jongman, E. C., & Hutson, G. D. (2001). A review of the welfare issues for sows and piglets in relation to housing. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 52(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1071/ar00057
3. Baxter, E. M., Bowers, N., King, R., Brocklehurst, S., & Edwards, S. A. (2024). Factors contributing to high performance of sows in free farrowing systems. Porcine Health Management, 10(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40813-024-00366-w
4. Baxter, E. M., Lawrence, A. B., & Edwards, S. A. (2012). Alternative farrowing accommodation: welfare and economic aspects of existing farrowing and lactation systems for pigs. Animal, 6(1), 96–117. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1751731111001224
5. Baxter, E. M., Moustsen, V. A., Goumon, S., Illmann, G., & Edwards, S. A. (2022). Transitioning from crates to free farrowing: A roadmap to navigate key decisions. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 9, 998192. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.998192
6. Bonde, M., Rousing, T., Badsberg, J. H., & Sørensen, J. T. (2004). Associations between lying-down behaviour problems and body condition, limb disorders and skin lesions of lactating sows housed in farrowing crates in commercial sow herds. Livestock Production Science, 87(2-3), 179–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livprodsci.2003.08.005
7. Broom, D. M. (1986). Indicators of poor welfare. British Veterinary Journal, 142(6), 524–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-1935(86)90109-0
8. Ceballos, M. C., Rocha Góis, K. C., Parsons, T. D., & Pierdon, M. (2021). Impact of duration of farrowing crate closure on physical indicators of sow welfare and piglet mortality. Animals, 11(4), 969. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11040969
9. Chantziaras, I., Dewulf, J., Van Limbergen, T., Klinkenberg, M., Palzer, A., Pineiro, C., Aarestrup Moustsen, V., Niemi, J., Kyriazakis, I., & Maes, D. (2018). Factors associated with specific health, welfare and reproductive performance indicators in pig herds from five EU countries. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 159, 106–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.09.006
10. Cheon, S. N., Jeong, S. H., Yoo, G. Z., Lim, S. J., Kim, C. H., Jang, G. W., & Jeon, J. H. (2022). Effect of alternative farrowing pens with temporary crating on the performance of lactating sows and their litters. Journal of Animal Science and Technology, 64(3), 574–587. https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2022.e36
11. Chidgey, K. L., Morel, P. C. H., Stafford, K. J., & Barugh, I. W. (2016). Observations of sows and piglets housed in farrowing pens with temporary crating or farrowing crates on a commercial farm. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 176, 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2016.01.004
12. Chidgey, K. L., Udomteerasuwat, N., Morel, P. C. H., & Castillo-Alcala, F. (2022). Animal welfare compromises associated with causes of death in neonatal piglets. Animals, 12(21), 2933. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12212933
13. Condous, P. C., Plush, K. J., Tilbrook, A. J., & van Wettere, W. H. E. J. (2016). Reducing sow confinement during farrowing and in early lactation increases piglet mortality1. Journal of Animal Science, 94(7), 3022–3029. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2015-0145
14. Courboulay, V., & Boulot, S. (2025). 4. Impacts of three types of farrowing pens (crate, temporary confinement, lift crate and temporary confinement) on the performance and behaviour of sows and piglets. Animal - Science Proceedings, 16(6), 852–853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anscip.2025.08.005
15. Dalmau, A., Velarde, A., Scott, K., Edwards, S., Veissier, I., Keeling, L., Butterworth, A., van Overbeke, G., & Bedaux, V. (2009). Welfare Quality assessment protocol for pigs (sows and piglets, growing and finishing pigs). Welfare Quality Consortium.
16. Dawkins, M. (2004). Using behaviour to assess animal welfare. Animal Welfare, 13(S1), S3–S7. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0962728600014317
17. Dumniem, N., Boonprakob, R., Parsons, T. D., & Tummaruk, P. (2023). Pen versus crate: A comparative study on the effects of different farrowing systems on farrowing performance, colostrum yield and piglet preweaning mortality in sows under tropical conditions. Animals, 13(2), 233. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13020233
18. Nielsen, S. S., Alvarez, J., Bicout, D. J., Calistri, P., Canali, E., Drewe, J. A., Garin‐Bastuji, B., Gonzales Rojas, J. L., Schmidt, G., Herskin, M., Michel, V., Miranda Chueca, M. Á., Mosbach‐Schulz, O., Padalino, B., Roberts, H. C., Stahl, K., Velarde, A., Viltrop, A., Winckler, C., Edwards, S., Ivanova, S., Leeb, C., Wechsler, B., Fabris, C., Lima, E., Mosbach‐Schulz, O., Van der Stede, Y., Vitali, M., & Spoolder, H. (2022). Welfare of pigs on farm. EFSA Journal, 20(8), e07421. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7421
19. Einarsson, S., Sjunnesson, Y., Hultén, F., Eliasson-Selling, L., Dalin, A.-M., Lundeheim, N., & Magnusson, U. (2014). A 25 years experience of group-housed sows–reproduction in animal welfare-friendly systems. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, 56(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/1751-0147-56-37
20. Ferreira, A. S., Costa, P. M. A., Pereira, J. A. A., & Gomes, J. C. (1988). Estimativa de produção de leite de porca. Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia, 17(3), 203–211.
21. Glencorse, D., Plush, K., Hazel, S., D’Souza, D., & Hebart, M. (2019). Impact of non-confinement accommodation on farrowing performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis of farrowing crates versus pens. Animals, 9(11), 957. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9110957
22. Goumon, S., Illmann, G., Moustsen, V. A., Baxter, E. M., & Edwards, S. A. (2022). Review of temporary crating of farrowing and lactating sows. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 9, 811810. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.811810
23. Hales, J., Moustsen, V. A., Nielsen, M. B. F., & Hansen, C. F. (2014). Higher preweaning mortality in free farrowing pens compared with farrowing crates in three commercial pig farms. Animal, 8(1), 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1751731113001869
24. Ibach, S., Chou, J.-Y., Battini, M., & Parsons, T. D. (2024). A systematic approach to defining and verifying descriptors used in the qualitative behavioral assessment of sows. Animal Welfare, 33, e8. https://doi.org/10.1017/awf.2024.6
25. Kinane, O., Butler, F., & O’Driscoll, K. (2022). Freedom to move: Free lactation pens improve sow welfare. Animals, 12(14), 1762. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12141762
26. Kim, J. H., Ni, J.-Q., Ogundare, W., Schinckel, A. P., Minor, R. C., Johnson, J. S., & Casey, T. M. (2025). Sow and piglet behavior characterization using visual observation, sensor detection, and video recording. Applied Sciences, 15(6), 3018. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15063018
27. Kramarenko, S. S., Luhovyi, S. I., Lykhach, A. V., & Kramarenko, O. S. (2019). Analiz biometrychnykh danykh u rozvedenni ta selektsii tvaryn [Analysis of biometric data in animal breeding and selection: A textbook]. Mykolaiv National Agrarian University. (in Ukrainian)
28. Krempa, N. Yu., Kozenko, O. V., Gutyj, B. V., Dvyliuk, I. V., Magrelo, N. V., Klym, H. V., Martyshuk, T. V., Vus, U. M., & Vysotskyi, A. O. (2024). Assessment of the level of welfare under modern pig-keeping technologies, taking into account their ethological needs and characteristics. Scientific Messenger of LNU of Veterinary Medicine and Biotechnologies, 26(116), 284–291. https://doi.org/10.32718/nvlvet11641
29. Loftus, L., Bell, G., Padmore, E., Atkinson, S., Henworth, A., & Hoyle, M. (2020). The effect of two different farrowing systems on sow behaviour, and piglet behaviour, mortality and growth. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 232, 105102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2020.105102
30. Marchant-Forde, J. N. (Ed.). (2009). The welfare of pigs. Springer Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8909-1
31. Min, Y., Choi, Y., Kim, J., Kim, D., Jeong, Y., Kim, Y., Song, M., & Jung, H. (2020). Comparison of the Productivity of primiparous sows housed in individual stalls and group housing systems. Animals, 10(11), 1940. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10111940
32. Moustsen, V. A., Seddon, Y. M., & Hansen, M. J. (2023). Animal board invited review: The need to consider emissions, economics and pig welfare in the transition from farrowing crates to pens with loose lactating sows. Animal, 17(9), 100913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2023.100913
33. Nicolaisen, T., Lühken, E., Volkmann, N., Rohn, K., Kemper, N., & Fels, M. (2019). The effect of sows’ and piglets’ behaviour on piglet crushing patterns in two different farrowing pen systems. Animals, 9(8), 538. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9080538
34. Olsson, A.-C., Botermans, J., & Englund, J.-E. (2018). Piglet mortality – A parallel comparison between loose-housed and temporarily confined farrowing sows in the same herd. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A – Animal Science, 68(1), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064702.2018.1561934
35. Ott, S., Moons, C. P. H., Kashiha, M. A., Bahr, C., Tuyttens, F. A. M., Berckmans, D., & Niewold, T. A. (2014). Automated video analysis of pig activity at pen level highly correlates to human observations of behavioural activities. Livestock Science, 160, 132–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2013.12.011
36. Payne, H. G., Moore, K. L., Gardiner, A., Gardiner, A. J., Gardiner, R., Loudon, E., & Cronin, G. M. (2009). Piglet survival in farrowing pens in a hoop structure versus in farrowing crates in an environmentally controlled building. In Manipulating pig production XII (p. 138). Australasian Pig Science Association. https://library.dpird.wa.gov.au/conf_papers/239
37. Povod, M. H., Lykhach, V. Ya., Lykhach, A. V., & Oboronko, D. M. (2022). Praktychna realizatsiia isnuiuchykh ta udoskonalenykh tekhnolohii vyrobnytstva produktsii svynarstva [Practical implementation of existing and improved technologies for pig production: A monograph]. Ilion. (in Ukrainian)
38. Seddon, Y. M., & Moustsen, V. A. (2023). 64. The farrowing environment sets the conditions for sow and piglet productivity as well as their welfare. Animal - Science Proceedings, 14(6), 787–792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anscip.2023.08.065
39. Sossidou, E. N., Banias, G. F., Batsioula, M., Termatzidou, S.-A., Simitzis, P., Patsios, S. I., & Broom, D. M. (2025). Modern pig production: Aspects of animal welfare, sustainability and circular bioeconomy. Sustainability, 17(11), 5184. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17115184
40. Tsereniuk, O. M., Khvatov, A. I., & Stryzhak, T. A. (2010). Otsinka efektyvnosti indeksiv materynskoi produktyvnosti svynei [Evaluation of the effectiveness of maternal productivity indices of pigs]. Zbirnyk Naukovykh Prats Vinnytskoho Natsionalnoho Ahrarnoho Universytetu. Seriia: Tvarynnytstvo, 3(42), 73–77. (in Ukrainian)
41. Vandresen, B., & Hötzel, M. J. (2021). “Mothers should have freedom of movement” — citizens’ attitudes regarding farrowing housing systems for sows and their piglets. Animals, 11(12), 3439. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11123439
42. Pitts, A. D., Weary, D. M., Fraser, D., Pajor, E. A., & Kramer, D. L. (2002). Alternative housing for sows and litters. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 76(4), 291–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-1591(02)00012-6
43. Yun, J., Swan, K.-M., Farmer, C., Oliviero, C., Peltoniemi, O., & Valros, A. (2014). Prepartum nest-building has an impact on postpartum nursing performance and maternal behaviour in early lactating sows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 160, 31–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2014.08.011
44. Hlukhenkyi, S. L., & Lykhach, V. Ya. (2024). Productivity of sows with the design features of machine equipment in farrowing shop. Taurian Scientific Herald, 140, 406–418. https://doi.org/10.32782/2226-0099.2024.140.49
45. Ladyka, V. I., Khmelnychyi, L. M., & Povod, M. H. (2023). Tekhnolohiia vyrobnytstva i pererobky produktsii tvarynnytstva: Pidruchnyk dlia aspirantiv [Technology of production and processing of livestock products: A textbook for postgraduate students]. Oldi+. (in Ukrainian)
