Feeding frequencies and their effect on behavior of nursing sows

Somerahally Basavaraju  Prasanna; Rasbehari Bhar; Yajaman Bajjappa Rajeshwari; Shankarappa  Bhajantri; Mathad Shivamurthaiah Rudraswamy

doi:10.14269/2318-1265/jabb.v5n1p29-35

Keywords:

Abstract

The understanding of feeding behavior may be useful to evaluate the performance of animals fed different diets. Twenty-four non-castrated Red Norte × Nelore males with an average initial body weight of 439.8 ± 59.6 kg and 21.7 ± 2.7 months of age were distributed in three experimental groups, and housed in individual (twelve animals) or collective pens (twelve animals in three collective pens) at the Dairy and Beef Research and Education Center of the Instituto Federal Goiano (Iporá Campus). The experiment lasted 84 days (14 of adaptation and 70 days for data collection). Animals were fed diets containing sugar cane in natura (CI), sugar cane silage (SCS) or corn silage (CS) as sources of forage. Feeding behavior was determined every 14 days for one-hour intervals beginning at 0, 1, 5, and 9 hours post-feeding. Eating, resting and rumination activities were monitored for three-minute intervals through visual observations from individual animals. Time spent with eating was greater (P<0.05) for CS (21.8 ± 1.2 minutes/hour) and time spent with resting was greater (P<0.05) for CI and SCS (38.8 and 36.5 ± 1.5 minutes/hour, respectively). Animals housed individually increased (P<0.05) time spent with both eating (19.7 ± 1.0 minutes/hour) and rumination (8.2 ± 0.6 minutes/hour), while time spent with resting was greater (P<0.05) for the collective pen-housing (38.9±1.2 minutes/hour). Corn silage can be recommended for beef cattle feeding in feedlot system due to an increased time spent with eating.
References
1. Association Of Official Analytical Chemists – AOAC (2000) Official methods of analysis. 17th ed. AOAC International.
2. Bhandari SK, Li S, Ominski KH et al (2008) Effects of the chop lengths of alfalfa silage and oat silage on feed intake, milk production, feeding behavior, and rumen fermentation of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. doi: 10.3168/jds.2007-0358
3. Bürger PJ, Pereira JC, Queiroz AC, Silva JFC, Valadares Filho SC, Cecon PR, Casali ADP (2000) Comportamento ingestivo em bezerros holandeses alimentados com dietas contendo diferentes níveis de concentrado. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 29:236-242.
4. Carvalho ER, Schmelz-Roberts NS, White HM, Wilcox S, Eicher S, Donkin SS (2014) Eating, resting and rumination activities of transition dairy cows fed with glycerol. Global Science and Technology 7:130-141.
5. Custodio SAS, Marques KO, Silva DAL, Goulart RO, Paim TP, Carvalho ER (2015) Performance of beef cattle in feedlot system fed different sources of forage and housed in individual or collective pens. http://sbz2015.com.br/resumos/R0065-1.PDF Accessed in October 2nd 2016.
6. Dado RG, Allen MS (1993) Continuous computer acquisition of feed and water intakes, chewing, reticular motility, and ruminal pH of cattle. Journal of Dairy Science. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(93)77492-5
7. Deswysen AG, Dutilleul P, Godfrin JP, Ellis WC (1993) Nycterohemeral eating and ruminanting patterns in heifers fed grass or corn silage: analysis by finite fourier transform. Journal of Animal Science 71:2739-2747.
8. Fischer V, Deswysen AG, Amouche EH, Dutilleul P, Lobato JFP (1998) Efeitos da pressão de pastejo sobre o comportamento ingestivo e o consumo voluntário de ovinos em pastagem. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 27:164-170.
9. Fischer V, Deswysen AG, Dèspres L, Dutilleul P, Lobato JFP (1997) Comportamento ingestivo de ovinos recebendo dieta à base de feno durante um período de seis meses. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 26:1032-1038.
10. Forbes JM (2003) The multifactorial nature of food intake control. Journal of Animal Science. doi:10.2527/2003.8114_suppl_2E139x
11. Goering HK, Van Soest PJ (1970) Forage fiber analysis (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures and Some Applications) Agricultural Handbook nº 379. Agricultural Research Service – USDA, Washington, DC.
12. Gonçalves AL, Lana RP, Rodrigues MT, Vieira RAM, Queiroz AC, Henrique DS (2001) Padrão nictemeral do pH ruminal e comportamento alimentar de cabras leiteiras alimentadas com dietas contendo diferentes relações volumoso:concentrado. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 30:1886-1892.
13. Harvatine DI, Winkler JE, Devant-Guille M et al (2002) Whole linted cottonseed as a forage substitute: fiber effectiveness and digestion kinetics. Journal of Dairy Science. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(02)74275-6
14. Hosseinkhani A, DeVries TJ, Proudfoot KL et al (2008) The effects of feed bunk competition on the feed sorting behavior of close-up dry cows. Journal of Dairy Science. doi: 10.3168/jds.2007-0679
15. Lima MLM, Mattos WRS, Nussio LG, Carvalho ER, Castro FGF, Amaral AG (2014) Substituição parcial da forragem pelo caroço de algodão: comportamento ingestivo e consistência da camada flutuante da digesta ruminal. Global Science and Technology 7:129-139.
16. Martin P, Bateson P (2007) Measuring behavior: an introductory guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
17. Mertens DR (1987) Predicting intake and digestibility using mathematical models of ruminal function. Journal of Animal Science. doi:10.2527/jas1987.6451548x
18. National Research Council – NRC (2000) Nutrient requirements of beef cattle. 7th revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
19. Oliveira AS, Detmann E, Campos JMS, Pina DS, Souza SM, Costa MG (2011) Meta-análise do impacto da fibra em detergente neutro sobre o consumo, a digestibilidade e o desempenho de vacas leiteiras em lactação. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 40:1587-1595.
20. Olofsson J (1999) Competition for total mixed diets fed for ad libitum intake using one or four cows per feeding station. Journal of dairy science. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75210-0
21. R Core Team (2014) A language and environment for statistical computing. Viena: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Disponível em: http://www.R-project.org/. Acessado em 29 de junho de 2016.
22. Stricklin WR, Kautz-Scanavy CC (1984) The role of behavior in cattle production: a review of research. Applied Animal Ethology 11:359-390.
23. Sullivan ML, Cawdell-Smith AJ, Mader TL et al (2011) Effect of shade area on performance and welfare of short-fed feedlot cattle. Journal of Animal Science. doi: 10.2527/jas.2010-3152
24. Zopollatto M, Daniel JLP, Nussio LG (2009) Aditivos microbiológicos em silagens no Brasil: revisão dos aspectos da ensilagem e do desempenho de animais. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 38:170-189 (suplemento especial).

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

How to cite

Prasanna , S. B., Bhar , R., Rajeshwari , Y. B., Bhajantri , S., & Rudraswamy , M. S. (2017). Feeding frequencies and their effect on behavior of nursing sows. Journal of Animal Behaviour and Biometeorology, 5(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.14269/2318-1265/jabb.v5n1p29-35

[1] Association Of Official Analytical Chemists – AOAC (2000) Official methods of analysis. 17th ed. AOAC International.

[2] Bhandari SK, Li S, Ominski KH et al (2008) Effects of the chop lengths of alfalfa silage and oat silage on feed intake, milk production, feeding behavior, and rumen fermentation of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. doi: 10.3168/jds.2007-0358

[3] Bürger PJ, Pereira JC, Queiroz AC, Silva JFC, Valadares Filho SC, Cecon PR, Casali ADP (2000) Comportamento ingestivo em bezerros holandeses alimentados com dietas contendo diferentes níveis de concentrado. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 29:236-242.

[4] Carvalho ER, Schmelz-Roberts NS, White HM, Wilcox S, Eicher S, Donkin SS (2014) Eating, resting and rumination activities of transition dairy cows fed with glycerol. Global Science and Technology 7:130-141.

[5] Custodio SAS, Marques KO, Silva DAL, Goulart RO, Paim TP, Carvalho ER (2015) Performance of beef cattle in feedlot system fed different sources of forage and housed in individual or collective pens. http://sbz2015.com.br/resumos/R0065-1.PDF Accessed in October 2nd 2016.

[6] Dado RG, Allen MS (1993) Continuous computer acquisition of feed and water intakes, chewing, reticular motility, and ruminal pH of cattle. Journal of Dairy Science. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(93)77492-5

[7] Deswysen AG, Dutilleul P, Godfrin JP, Ellis WC (1993) Nycterohemeral eating and ruminanting patterns in heifers fed grass or corn silage: analysis by finite fourier transform. Journal of Animal Science 71:2739-2747.

[8] Fischer V, Deswysen AG, Amouche EH, Dutilleul P, Lobato JFP (1998) Efeitos da pressão de pastejo sobre o comportamento ingestivo e o consumo voluntário de ovinos em pastagem. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 27:164-170.

[9] Fischer V, Deswysen AG, Dèspres L, Dutilleul P, Lobato JFP (1997) Comportamento ingestivo de ovinos recebendo dieta à base de feno durante um período de seis meses. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 26:1032-1038.

[10] Forbes JM (2003) The multifactorial nature of food intake control. Journal of Animal Science. doi:10.2527/2003.8114_suppl_2E139x

[11] Goering HK, Van Soest PJ (1970) Forage fiber analysis (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures and Some Applications) Agricultural Handbook nº 379. Agricultural Research Service – USDA, Washington, DC.

[12] Gonçalves AL, Lana RP, Rodrigues MT, Vieira RAM, Queiroz AC, Henrique DS (2001) Padrão nictemeral do pH ruminal e comportamento alimentar de cabras leiteiras alimentadas com dietas contendo diferentes relações volumoso:concentrado. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 30:1886-1892.

[13] Harvatine DI, Winkler JE, Devant-Guille M et al (2002) Whole linted cottonseed as a forage substitute: fiber effectiveness and digestion kinetics. Journal of Dairy Science. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(02)74275-6

[14] Hosseinkhani A, DeVries TJ, Proudfoot KL et al (2008) The effects of feed bunk competition on the feed sorting behavior of close-up dry cows. Journal of Dairy Science. doi: 10.3168/jds.2007-0679

[15] Lima MLM, Mattos WRS, Nussio LG, Carvalho ER, Castro FGF, Amaral AG (2014) Substituição parcial da forragem pelo caroço de algodão: comportamento ingestivo e consistência da camada flutuante da digesta ruminal. Global Science and Technology 7:129-139.

[16] Martin P, Bateson P (2007) Measuring behavior: an introductory guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

[17] Mertens DR (1987) Predicting intake and digestibility using mathematical models of ruminal function. Journal of Animal Science. doi:10.2527/jas1987.6451548x

[18] National Research Council – NRC (2000) Nutrient requirements of beef cattle. 7th revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

[19] Oliveira AS, Detmann E, Campos JMS, Pina DS, Souza SM, Costa MG (2011) Meta-análise do impacto da fibra em detergente neutro sobre o consumo, a digestibilidade e o desempenho de vacas leiteiras em lactação. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 40:1587-1595.

[20] Olofsson J (1999) Competition for total mixed diets fed for ad libitum intake using one or four cows per feeding station. Journal of dairy science. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(99)75210-0

[21] R Core Team (2014) A language and environment for statistical computing. Viena: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Disponível em: http://www.R-project.org/. Acessado em 29 de junho de 2016.

[22] Stricklin WR, Kautz-Scanavy CC (1984) The role of behavior in cattle production: a review of research. Applied Animal Ethology 11:359-390.

[23] Sullivan ML, Cawdell-Smith AJ, Mader TL et al (2011) Effect of shade area on performance and welfare of short-fed feedlot cattle. Journal of Animal Science. doi: 10.2527/jas.2010-3152

[24] Zopollatto M, Daniel JLP, Nussio LG (2009) Aditivos microbiológicos em silagens no Brasil: revisão dos aspectos da ensilagem e do desempenho de animais. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 38:170-189 (suplemento especial).

Abstract

References

How to cite