MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394605732 · doi:10.1093/tas/txae053

Burlap and buddies: the effects of social enrichment (preweaning mixing) and object enrichment (burlap) on piglet performance, behavior, and welfare in the preweaning environment

2024· article· en· W4394605732 on OpenAlexaff
Ashlyn Scott, Arielle Le Heiget, Reyna Stefanson, Jamie Ahloy‐Dallaire, M.T.M. King

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLitterBiologyAnimal welfareAnimal scienceBarnWelfareEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract When weaned in commercial operations, piglets are not only separated from their sow but also mixed with unfamiliar pigs in an unfamiliar environment with a new diet. These abrupt changes can be stressful for piglets, often having negative welfare consequences. Our objective was to study the effects of early-life preweaning socialization and object enrichment in the preweaning environment. We compared piglet performance, behavior, and welfare across six treatments that combined multi-litter group size (1 vs. 2 vs. 4 litters) and burlap (yes vs. no). We recorded piglet behavior and lesion-scored sows and piglets. Normal conforming data, expressed per experimental unit (and behavior data were averaged over time), were analyzed by ANOVA. When given the opportunity in the sow barn, piglets in multi-litter groups socialized with other litters. Burlap use (P = 0.08) was observed in < 5% of the observations but tended to increase in mixed litter groups. Cross-sucking was observed in ~12% of the observations within mixed litter groups and tended to increase with mixed group size (P = 0.08). While there was no difference in the proportion of piglets nursing (P > 0.10), piglets were less active in the single crate groups and most active in the groups of two litters mixed (P = 0.03). Additionally, observed piglet/sow biting behaviors did not differ between treatments; however, piglet-piglet biting (P = 0.07), and pen object manipulation (P = 0.07) tended to be observed more frequently in non-enriched groups. Piglet displacements were observed more often in non-enriched groups around the pen (P = 0.03) but tended to be observed more often in enriched groups at the teat (P = 0.07). Preweaning socialization and object enrichment had no impact on the average number of piglets weaned per sow or total piglet mortality (P > 0.10). However, the proportion of laid-on piglets decreased as the number of mixed litters increased (P = 0.02). The average number of lesions per piglet did not differ between treatments. Although the final lesion scores of sow teat and udder condition did not differ between treatments (P > 0.10), sow udder scores tended to worsen more in the single litters than in the mixed litters (P = 0.08). Overall, social and object enrichment allows piglets to socialize at a younger age and to redirect their attention toward an object (burlap) which does not negatively impact piglet or sow performance, or behavior, and may improve piglet welfare around weaning.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranslational Animal ScienceSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207