ArticleJournal of animal science2025
Impact of farrowing crate enrichment strategies on the welfare and performance of sows, suckling piglets, and post-weaned piglets.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In conventional pig production, lactating sows are typically housed in farrowing crates that restrict movement and environmental engagement, raising welfare concerns. Farrowing pens also lack behavioral stimulation for suckling piglets, hindering species-specific behaviors. Environmental enrichment may improve welfare by redirecting behaviors-such as chewing-away from conspecifics in piglets and pen fixtures in sows. However, few studies have explored its effects in farrowing crates, particularly regarding optimal placement within these spatial constraints. This study evaluated the impacts of enrichment strategies on the welfare and performance of 37 lactating sows and their litters from birth through early post-weaning. Sows and litters were divided into three groups: both had access to enrichments (SPE), only piglets had access (PE), and a control group with no enrichments (CON). Point-source objects (PorkyPlays and wooden blocks on rope) were placed 2 d after sows moved into farrowing crates until 2 wk post-weaning. Sow salivary cortisol was collected at four timepoints, and pressure sores were assessed at 8 timepoints from 24 h after crate entry to weaning. Piglet tear stains and skin lesions were recorded throughout the lactation phase. Suckling piglet average daily gain (ADG) was analyzed at days 1 to 7, 7 to 14, and 14 to weaning. In the nursery, salivary cortisol, tear stains, and skin lesions were measured on days 1, 7, and 14 post-weaning, with an additional cortisol sample at day 0 post-weaning. Nursery piglet ADG was analyzed from weaning to day 14 post-weaning. CON sows were more likely to have a pressure sore compared to SPE sows (P = 0.02); PE sows tended to have a higher likelihood of developing a pressure sore than SPE sows (P = 0.097). No treatment effect was found for salivary cortisol of sows or nursery piglets. However, CON piglets had the largest tear stains during lactation (P < 0.001) and nursery (P = 0.001). Treatment affected piglet skin lesions during lactation, with CON piglets having more ear (P < 0.001) and front (P = 0.002) lesions and a higher overall lesion score (P < 0.0001). No treatment effect was found for ADG, piglet crushing, or nursery skin lesions. In conclusion, enrichment strategies in farrowing crates improved piglet skin health and tear stains without affecting performance. Enrichment access for sows tended to reduce pressure sores, suggesting enrichments can enhance welfare in farrowing crate systems.
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.