Performance of rabbit does housed in collective pens and individual cages

IF 0.8 4区农林科学 Q3 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE

World Rabbit Science Pub Date : 2019-12-23 DOI:10.4995/wrs.2019.11540

L. Machado, E. Martínez-Paredes, C. Cervera

{"title":"Performance of rabbit does housed in collective pens and individual cages","authors":"L. Machado, E. Martínez-Paredes, C. Cervera","doi":"10.4995/wrs.2019.11540","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In society today, there is increasing concern for the welfare of farm animals. New models of rabbit breeding are proposed, such as group housing of rabbit does in a semi-group system or environmental enrichment of individual housing. This work aimed to evaluate the reproductive performance and metabolic aspects of rabbit does housed in collective pens, comparing them to individual cages provided with a platform. Forty-eight animals were distributed in 24 individual cages (40×98×57 cm; width, length and height) and four collective pens (six does per pen; 240×100×65 cm) and remained during four cycles. The does previously housed in collective pens gained less weight and reached lighter weights by the first insemination day (3669 vs. 3872 g; P <0.01), but regained weight over the cycles and had a similar weight during the experiment (4306 vs. 4329 g). It was observed that there was a lower feed intake in the period before delivery in collective pens, which contributed to the lower kit birth weights (57.2 vs. 60.1 g/kit for collective pens and individual cage respectively, P <0.05). There were no differences in perirenal fat thickness, litter size at birth and milk yield, although does housed in collective pens had a lower feed intake (499 vs. 526 g dry matter/d for collective pens and individual cage, respectively; P <0.001) and lost more perirenal fat after grouping (–0.05 vs. +0.15 mm for collective pens and individual cage, respectively; P <0.05), and produced less milk the day after grouping (221 vs. 283 g for collective pens and individual cage, respectively; P <0.05). In collective pens, a higher number of inseminations to reach a pregnancy (1.43 vs. 1.24 for collective pens and individual cage, respectively; P <0.05) and lower number of weaned (56 vs. 66 for collective pens and individual cage, respectively; P <0.05) kits per doe per year were revealed for does in individual cages. Overall, the use of collective pens prejudiced some parameters and needs to be economically evaluated for adoption on commercial rabbit farms.","PeriodicalId":23902,"journal":{"name":"World Rabbit Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Rabbit Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2019.11540","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

Abstract

In society today, there is increasing concern for the welfare of farm animals. New models of rabbit breeding are proposed, such as group housing of rabbit does in a semi-group system or environmental enrichment of individual housing. This work aimed to evaluate the reproductive performance and metabolic aspects of rabbit does housed in collective pens, comparing them to individual cages provided with a platform. Forty-eight animals were distributed in 24 individual cages (40×98×57 cm; width, length and height) and four collective pens (six does per pen; 240×100×65 cm) and remained during four cycles. The does previously housed in collective pens gained less weight and reached lighter weights by the first insemination day (3669 vs. 3872 g; P <0.01), but regained weight over the cycles and had a similar weight during the experiment (4306 vs. 4329 g). It was observed that there was a lower feed intake in the period before delivery in collective pens, which contributed to the lower kit birth weights (57.2 vs. 60.1 g/kit for collective pens and individual cage respectively, P <0.05). There were no differences in perirenal fat thickness, litter size at birth and milk yield, although does housed in collective pens had a lower feed intake (499 vs. 526 g dry matter/d for collective pens and individual cage, respectively; P <0.001) and lost more perirenal fat after grouping (–0.05 vs. +0.15 mm for collective pens and individual cage, respectively; P <0.05), and produced less milk the day after grouping (221 vs. 283 g for collective pens and individual cage, respectively; P <0.05). In collective pens, a higher number of inseminations to reach a pregnancy (1.43 vs. 1.24 for collective pens and individual cage, respectively; P <0.05) and lower number of weaned (56 vs. 66 for collective pens and individual cage, respectively; P <0.05) kits per doe per year were revealed for does in individual cages. Overall, the use of collective pens prejudiced some parameters and needs to be economically evaluated for adoption on commercial rabbit farms.

查看原文本刊更多论文

集体围栏和单独笼子中兔子的表现

在当今社会，人们越来越关心农场动物的福利。提出了兔子繁殖的新模式，如在半群体系统中进行群体饲养或个体饲养的环境富集。这项工作旨在评估集体围栏中兔子的繁殖性能和代谢方面，并将其与配有平台的单独笼子进行比较。48只动物分布在24个单独的笼子（40×98×57厘米；宽、长和高）和4个集体围栏（每个围栏6个；240×100×65厘米）中，并在4个周期内保持。之前被安置在集体围栏中的母犬在第一次受精日体重增加较少，达到较轻的体重（3669对3872克；P<0.01），但在整个周期内体重恢复，在实验期间体重相似（4306对4329克）。观察到，集体围栏分娩前一段时间的采食量较低，这有助于降低试剂盒的出生重量（集体围栏和单独笼子分别为57.2和60.1克/试剂盒，P<0.05）。肾周脂肪厚度、出生时的产仔数和产奶量没有差异，尽管圈养在集体围栏中的母犬的采食量较低（集体围栏和单独笼子分别为499克和526克干物质/天；P<0.001），分组后肾周脂肪损失较多（集体围栏或单独笼子分别是-0.05毫米和+0.15毫米；P<0.05），分组后第二天产奶量减少（集体围栏和单独笼子分别为221克和283克；P<0.05），在个体笼中，每只母鹿每年的受精次数较高（集体围栏和个体笼分别为1.43和1.24；P<0.05），断奶次数较低（集体围栏或个体笼分别是56和66；P<0.05）。总的来说，集体围栏的使用影响了一些参数，需要对其进行经济评估，以便在商业养兔场采用。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

World Rabbit Science 农林科学-奶制品与动物科学

CiteScore

1.70

自引率

25.00%

发文量

审稿时长

>36 weeks

期刊介绍： World Rabbit Science is the official journal of the World Rabbit Science Association (WRSA). One of the main objectives of the WRSA is to encourage communication and collaboration among individuals and organisations associated with rabbit production and rabbit science in general. Subject areas include breeding, genetics, production, management, environment, health, nutrition, physiology, reproduction, behaviour, welfare, immunology, molecular biology, metabolism, processing and products. World Rabbit Science is the only international peer-reviewed journal included in the ISI Thomson list dedicated to publish original research in the field of rabbit science. Papers or reviews of the literature submitted to World Rabbit Science must not have been published previously in an international refereed scientific journal. Previous presentations at a scientific meeting, field day reports or similar documents can be published in World Rabbit Science, but they will be also subjected to the peer-review process. World Rabbit Science will publish papers of international relevance including original research articles, descriptions of novel techniques, contemporaryreviews and meta-analyses. Short communications will only accepted in special cases where, in the Editor''s judgement, the contents are exceptionally exciting, novel or timely. Proceedings of rabbit scientific meetings and conference reports will be considered for special issues. World Rabbit Science is published in English four times a year in a single volume. Authors may publish in World Rabbit Science regardless of the membership in the World Rabbit Science Association, even if joining the WRSA is encouraged. Views expressed in papers published in World Rabbit Science represent the opinion of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the WRSA or the Editor-in-Chief.