The effect of selection for residual feed intake on scale-activity and scale-exit scores in Yorkshire gilts
L. J. Sadler A D , A. K. Johnson A , D. Nettleton B , C. R. G. Lewis C , J. M. Young A , S. M. Lonergan A and J. C. M. Dekkers AA Department of Animal Science, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA.
B Department of Statistics, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA.
C PIC Europe, Alpha Building, London Road, Nantwich, CW5 7JW, UK.
D Corresponding author. Email: Larry.Sadler@KraftHeinzCompany.com
Animal Production Science 56(11) 1875-1881 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN14849
Submitted: 3 October 2014 Accepted: 7 May 2015 Published: 27 July 2015
Abstract
The objectives of the present study were to use scale-activity and scale-exit scores to (1) determine the extent to which selection for improved residual feed intake (RFI) correlates with individual gilt temperament, (2) determine whether the timing of assessment affects the scores, and (3) determine whether gilts habituate to the process of weighing. To achieve these objectives, 192 grow–finish purebred Yorkshire gilts (39.7 ± 5.7 kg; 98 ± 6 days old) were utilised. Ninety-six gilts were from the 5th generation of a line selected for low residual feed intake (LRFI), and 96 gilts were from the 5th generation of a randomly selected control line (CRFI). Gilt activity and exit behaviour were scored on the weigh scale. The activity score was taken at two time points, namely, t = 0 (immediately on the back gate closing on the weight scale) and t = 15 (15 s later). Activity was assessed using a 5-point scoring system (1 = calm, minimal movement; 5 = continuous rapid movement and an escape attempt), and exit score was assessed using a 3-point scoring system (1 = no encouragement needed, full exit; 3 = encouragement needed). Gilts were weighed once every 2 weeks (each weighing considered a testing round) for a maximum of eight scores per gilt. Statistical differences were identified in all rounds for activity between genetic lines, except Rounds 2, 4 and 5. For both lines, gilt-activity scores decreased over rounds. The LRFI line began with a lower activity score (2.31 vs 2.65 ± 0.13), but did not experience as great of a drop in average score over rounds as did the CRFI gilts (0.62 vs 1.21). By the end of the trial, the CRFI gilts scored lower than the LRFI gilts. Activity was greater at t = 15 than at t = 0. Although timing affected the score, the pattern was similar, and so consistency will be more important than timing procedure. For exit scores, in Rounds 5 and 7, the LRFI line scored lower than the CRFI line, and there was a trend for the LRFI line to score lower in Round 6. Across all gilts, the mean exit score increased slowly throughout the trial. In conclusion, selection for lower RFI in purebred Yorkshires has an effect on activity score but this relationship is complex and warrants further research. The observation that gilts become habituated to the process of weighing supports the conclusion that the process is not aversive.
Additional keywords: scale-activity scoring, swine, temperament.
References
Burrow HM, Dillon RD (1997) Relationships between temperament and growth in a feedlot and commercial carcass traits of Bos indicus crossbreds. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 37, 407–411.| Relationships between temperament and growth in a feedlot and commercial carcass traits of Bos indicus crossbreds.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cai W, Casey DS, Dekkers JCM (2008) Selection response and genetic parameters for residual feed intake in Yorkshire swine. Journal of Animal Science 86, 287–298.
| Selection response and genetic parameters for residual feed intake in Yorkshire swine.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXhsVajsrY%3D&md5=177387501b711b60adfa9738fcdcea87CAS | 17998435PubMed |
Crump R (2004) Genetics of temperament: flight time and movement meter. In ‘Proceedings Animal Genetics and Breeding Unit Australia, Pig Genetic Workshop, 17–18 November’. Available at http://agbu.une.edu.au/pig_genetics/pdf/2004/Paper_13_RC_flitim_2004.pdf [Verified 1 July 2015]
D’Eath RB, Roehe R, Turner SP, Ison SH, Farish M, Jack MC, Lawrence AB (2009) Genetics of animal temperament: aggressive behaviour at mixing is genetically associated with the response to handling in pigs. Animal 3, 1544–1554.
| Genetics of animal temperament: aggressive behaviour at mixing is genetically associated with the response to handling in pigs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC38vpt1amtQ%3D%3D&md5=3b28a1fab5da216e6b62903017906cd3CAS | 22444987PubMed |
Fell LR, Colditz IG, Walker KH, Watson DL (1999) Associations between temperament, performance and immune function in cattle entering a commercial feedlot. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 39, 795–802.
| Associations between temperament, performance and immune function in cattle entering a commercial feedlot.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Grandin T (1993) Behavioral agitation during handling of cattle is persistent over time. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 36, 1–9.
| Behavioral agitation during handling of cattle is persistent over time.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Grandin T (1997) Assessment of stress during handling and transport. Journal of Animal Science 75, 249–257.
Grandin T, Curtis SE, Widowski TM, Thurmon JC (1986) Electro-immobilization versus mechanical restraint in an avoid-avoid choice test for ewes. Journal of Animal Science 62, 1469–1480.
Herd RM, Oddy VH, Richardson EC (2004) Biological basis for variation in residual feed intake in beef cattle. 1. Review of potential mechanisms. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44, 423–430.
| Biological basis for variation in residual feed intake in beef cattle. 1. Review of potential mechanisms.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Holl JW, Rohrer GA, Brown-Brandl TM (2010) Estimates of genetic parameters among scale activity scores, growth, and fatness in pigs. Journal of Animal Science 88, 455–459.
| Estimates of genetic parameters among scale activity scores, growth, and fatness in pigs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3cXktVOqtr4%3D&md5=d5e5703ca24f06ce93fee10fe01513d5CAS | 19820051PubMed |
Jones RM, Crump RE, Hermesch S (2011) Group characteristics influence growth rate and backfat of commercially raised grower pigs. Animal Production Science 51, 191–197.
| Group characteristics influence growth rate and backfat of commercially raised grower pigs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kenward MG, Roger JH (1997) Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Biometrics 53, 983–997.
| Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DyaK2svntVGitw%3D%3D&md5=13195cc9224b418578eefbd46ee7d9ecCAS | 9333350PubMed |
King DA, Pfeiffer CES, Randel RD, Welsh TH, Oliphint RA, Baird BE, Curley KO, Vann RC, Hale DS, Savell JW (2006) Influence of animal temperament and stress responsiveness on the carcass quality and beef tenderness of feedlot cattle. Meat Science 74, 546–556.
| Influence of animal temperament and stress responsiveness on the carcass quality and beef tenderness of feedlot cattle.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3MbnsFCgug%3D%3D&md5=99d6f5e15f7292ff501c512bed61da4bCAS | 22063059PubMed |
Koch RM, Swiger LA, Chambers D, Gregory KE (1963) Efficiency of feed use in beef cattle. Journal of Animal Science 22, 486–494.
Lewis CRG, Hulbert LE, McGlone JJ (2008) Novelty causes elevated heart rate and immune changes in pigs exposed to handling, alleys, and ramps. Livestock Science 116, 338–341.
| Novelty causes elevated heart rate and immune changes in pigs exposed to handling, alleys, and ramps.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Matthews LR (2008) Animal behavior and welfare. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48, 1014–1021.
| Animal behavior and welfare.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
NRC (1998) ‘National Research Council: nutrient requirements of swine.’ 10th edn. (National Academies Press: Washington, DC)
Petherick JC, Holroyd RG, Doogan VJ, Venus BK (2002) Productivity, carcass and meat quality of lot-fed Bos indicus cross steers grouped according to temperament. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 42, 389–398.
| Productivity, carcass and meat quality of lot-fed Bos indicus cross steers grouped according to temperament.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Phillips M, Grandin T, Graffam W, Irlbeck NA, Cambre RC (1998) Crate conditioning of bongo (Tragelaphus eurycerus) for veterinary and husbandry procedures at the Denver zoological gardens. Zoo Biology 17, 25–32.
| Crate conditioning of bongo (Tragelaphus eurycerus) for veterinary and husbandry procedures at the Denver zoological gardens.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Poscoe PJ (1986) Humaneness of an electroimmobilization unit for cattle. American Journal of Veterinary Research 47, 2252–2256.
Rempel LA, Rohrer GA, Brown-Brandl TM (2009) Prepubertal scoring of scale activity in gilts and its potential relationship to subsequent fertility and reproduction performance in Landrace–Duroc–Yorkshire cross females. In ‘Proceedings of 8th international conference on pig reproduction’. (Eds H Rodriguez-Martinez, JL Valet, AJ Ziecik) Banff, Alberta, Canada. Reproduction 66(Suppl), 177.
Rohrer GA, Brown-Brandl TM, Rempel LA, Schneider JF, Holl JW (2013) Genetic analysis of behavior traits in swine production. Livestock Science 157, 28–37.
| Genetic analysis of behavior traits in swine production.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sadler LJ, Johnson AK, Lonergan SM, Nettleton D, Dekkers JCM (2011) The effect of selection for residual feed intake on general behavioral activity and the occurrence of lesions in Yorkshire gilts. Journal of Animal Science 89, 258–266.
| The effect of selection for residual feed intake on general behavioral activity and the occurrence of lesions in Yorkshire gilts.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXotl2rtA%3D%3D&md5=daa402dd706a245b6613c95eeaf8a90eCAS | 20833769PubMed |
Smith RM, Gabler NK, Young JM, Cai W, Boddicker NJ, Anderson MJ, Huff-Lonergan E, Dekkers JCM, Lonergan SM (2011) Effects of selection for decreased residual feed intake on composition and quality of fresh pork. Journal of Animal Science 89, 192–200.
| Effects of selection for decreased residual feed intake on composition and quality of fresh pork.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXotl2kug%3D%3D&md5=0df9511ef941a7d3d8961cbca6bfa597CAS | 20817860PubMed |
Turner SP, White IMS, Brotherstone S, Farnworth MJ, Knap PW, Penny P, Mendl M, Lawrence AB (2006) Heritability of post-mixing aggressiveness in grower-stage pigs and its relationship with production traits. Animal Science 82, 615–620.
| Heritability of post-mixing aggressiveness in grower-stage pigs and its relationship with production traits.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vann RC, Randel RD, Welsh TH, Willard ST, Carroll JA, Brown MS, Lawrence TE (2006) Influence of breed type and temperament on feedlot growth and carcass characteristics of beef steers. Journal of Animal Science 84, 396
Voisinet B, Grandin T, Tatum J, O’Connor S, Struthers J (1997a) Feedlot cattle with calm temperaments have higher average daily gains than cattle with excitable temperaments. Journal of Animal Science 75, 892–896.
Voisinet BD, Grandin T, O’Connor SF, Tatum JD, Dessing MJ (1997b) Bos Indicus-cross feedlot cattle with excitable temperaments have tougher meat and higher incidence of borderline dark cutters. Meat Science 46, 367–377.
| Bos Indicus-cross feedlot cattle with excitable temperaments have tougher meat and higher incidence of borderline dark cutters.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3MbnsVynsg%3D%3D&md5=ed79f3065fd56b3185a340f24c06df38CAS | 22062320PubMed |
Waynert DF, Stookey JM, Schwartzkopf-Genswein KS, Watts JM, Waltz CS (1999) The response of beef cattle to noise during handling. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 62, 27–42.
| The response of beef cattle to noise during handling.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Yoder CL, Maltecca C, Cassady JP, Flowers WL, Price S, See MT (2011) Breed differences in pig temperament scores during a performance test and their phenotypic relationship with performance. Livestock Science 136, 93–101.
| Breed differences in pig temperament scores during a performance test and their phenotypic relationship with performance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
