ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022
The Effects of Pen Size and Design, Bedding, Rooting Material and Ambient Factors on Pen and Pig Cleanliness and Air Quality in Fattening Pig Houses.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Pen Partition Design and Hiding Facilities on Elimination and Lying Behavior of Finishing Pigs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Effects of Housing and Environmental Enrichment on Performance, Welfare, and Air Quality in Fattening Pigs.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Diurnal and day-to-day movement patterns of finishing pigs on deep straw bedding during the last 20 d before slaughter.Journal of animal science · 2026Article
- Influence of group size on performance and tail biting in growing-finishing pigs with intact tails.Animal welfare (South Mimms, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There are several environmental and ambient factors that can affect pig eliminative behaviour. The aim of this survey was to investigate factors related to the physical and ambient environment that have the strongest effects on pig and pen cleanliness and ammonia concentration. Data were collected from 87 pig farms and analysed using mixed (ammonia concentration) or generalized linear (pen and pig cleanliness) model in SAS. The pen was cleaner when pen partitions were open compared to closed (p = 0.010) and increased with increasing amount of litter (p = 0.002), using straw (p = 0.002) as rooting material. Pig cleanliness was higher when pen partitions in the eliminative area were open compared to closed (p = 0.007) and increased with increasing space per pig in the resting area (p < 0.001), with decreasing temperature (p < 0.001), and lowering of air velocity (p = 0.003). Other factors that increased cleanliness was using straw as rooting material (p = 0.028) and increasing amount of litter in the resting area (p = 0.002). Ammonia concentration was reduced with increasing floor space in the eliminative area (p < 0.001) and increasing amount of litter (p = 0.006). Our results pinpoint physical and ambient conditions affecting pen and pig cleanliness and air quality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.