尹國安,李想,劉洪貴
(1.黑龍江八一農(nóng)墾大學(xué)動(dòng)物科技學(xué)院,大慶163319;2.東北農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)動(dòng)物科技學(xué)院)
墊料(如秸稈、草殼、蘑菇料、鋸末、泥土等)被認(rèn)為是傳統(tǒng)漏縫地板的替代,稻秸、麥秸等秸稈則是最常用的墊草,福利專家在評估豬的畜舍體系時(shí)多認(rèn)為稻草等墊料的使用非常重要[1]。盡管報(bào)道,提供多種墊料時(shí),豬更喜歡泥土、蘑菇料、木屑等墊料地面,而稻草僅優(yōu)于水泥地面,但是稻草在實(shí)踐中更容易獲取,也更廉價(jià)[2]。秸稈的影響復(fù)雜且在很大程度上受品種、管理和畜舍影響[3]。墊草通常被認(rèn)為可以提高豬的舒適性和福利[4],并可以減少氨氣排放[5]。
豬大部分時(shí)間都在趴臥,趴臥時(shí)的充分舒適對它們的福利是重要的。墊草是一種合適的、有彈性的用于仔豬運(yùn)動(dòng)和休息的墊料,它能最大化地板接觸面積,降低肢蹄負(fù)荷[3],豬還可以通過拱翻稻草調(diào)節(jié)趴臥區(qū)的微環(huán)境[6]。然而特定地板材料或墊料物質(zhì)的選擇取決于豬舍內(nèi)的溫?zé)釛l件,豬在寒冷的環(huán)境喜歡躺在稻草上,而在高溫時(shí)選擇在裸露地面。而且,地板的最適溫度也可能隨豬的年齡或母豬的繁殖階段而改變[3]。但是,除非溫度較高時(shí),與光禿禿的水泥地板相比,稻草對豬來說更受偏愛、更舒適。
墊草對畜舍衛(wèi)生及健康的影響受畜舍及管理等多重因素的影響,因此為數(shù)不多的文獻(xiàn)也相互矛盾。
通常認(rèn)為墊草對畜舍衛(wèi)生有不利影響并加重疾病傳播,因?yàn)榈静菰黾迂i接觸糞尿污染物并被感染的幾率,如耶爾森氏菌和食道口線蟲[3]。Arey還發(fā)現(xiàn)墊草可能增加豬舍粉塵污染[4],但Scott等連續(xù)4年的研究沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)粉塵濃度的顯著差異,盡管和漏縫地板舍相比墊草舍育肥豬的呼吸系統(tǒng)疾病更多[7],可見墊草舍給豬的呼吸系統(tǒng)帶來更大風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。
很多研究表明墊草系統(tǒng)可減少運(yùn)動(dòng)障礙[8-9]、肢蹄損害和其他腿部損傷[10-11],但其他研究并未發(fā)現(xiàn)墊草會(huì)減少皮膚損傷[12],還有試驗(yàn)顯示墊料系統(tǒng)中嚴(yán)重腳傷更多[13]。Scott等的研究則顯示不同地面條件下豬面臨不同的足傷風(fēng)險(xiǎn),在全漏縫地板舍中嚴(yán)重的足跟/足拓糜爛較多,而在墊草舍蹄指損傷更嚴(yán)重[7]。但是,墊草系統(tǒng)可以降低肢腿損傷造成的細(xì)菌感染、流感感染和胃腸道疾病的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)[7]。
可見,墊草和健康之間的關(guān)系并不確定,有些疾病/傷害在稻草舍更為普遍,而對其他疾病/傷害則是相反的[3]。
墊草對行為的影響主要是作為環(huán)境豐富物,很難找到像稻草一樣有吸引力以長時(shí)間“娛樂”豬的玩具[3],而且墊草在趴臥時(shí)也可操控[14],增加了墊草的利用程度。另外,墊草也在一定程度滿足豬的采食行為需求,并作為筑巢材料滿足母豬的筑巢動(dòng)機(jī)。同時(shí),斷乳后墊草環(huán)境能減少斷乳混群爭斗,但斷乳前墊草環(huán)境會(huì)增加混群爭斗[15]。
稻草是“拱咬和咀嚼的焦點(diǎn)”[6],因?yàn)榇罅垦芯縖6-7,14-18]的研究結(jié)果表明,在貧瘠環(huán)境中豬的口吻部行為往往針對圈舍裝置或同伴,而飼養(yǎng)在稻草上的豬更加活躍,花更多的時(shí)間跑動(dòng)和轉(zhuǎn)圈,拱翻和咀嚼稻草,并有更多游戲行為,異常行為減少。而且,墊草舍育肥豬的行為多樣性較高[19]。厚墊草比流動(dòng)稻草能提供更大的福利優(yōu)勢,因?yàn)獒槍Φ静菪袨橛须S稻草提供量增加的趨勢[4],但定期供應(yīng)少量的稻草比厚墊草系統(tǒng)更具吸引力[20]。然而,秸稈和不良的社會(huì)行為的關(guān)系是復(fù)雜的,額外的空間提供或畜舍類型也可能有很大影響[3,21]。Andersen等還報(bào)道,對穩(wěn)定的寬松群養(yǎng)母豬來說,提供稻草可能不是減少侵略的重要因素[10]。而且稻草和異常行為之間的關(guān)系因限飼水平不同而更復(fù)雜化,稻草對于限飼豬的攻擊行為影響更大[22]。此外,數(shù)量有限的新鮮稻草的吸引力可能成為對有限的資源的攻擊性競爭的誘因[23],利用稻草作為地面飼喂豬的墊料也顯示會(huì)加重攻擊的激烈程度[24]。
飼料及表達(dá)覓食行為受限制被認(rèn)為是母豬口吻部規(guī)癖行為發(fā)生的主要原因,給母豬提供足夠豐富的環(huán)境使他們能夠表達(dá)覓食行為或減少母豬的采食動(dòng)機(jī)可以防止這些規(guī)癖發(fā)生[25]。秸稈也可以成為限飼妊娠母豬重要的食物來源,不僅增加飽腹感,而且在撒地飼喂時(shí)處理和攝取食物的總時(shí)間也有所增加。已經(jīng)證明提供大量的富纖維飼料能降低口吻部行為異常的頻率同時(shí)增加休息時(shí)間[26],而同時(shí)提供稻草則可更好地避免口吻部規(guī)癖行為發(fā)生[27]。但稻草對采食動(dòng)機(jī)的影響似乎微不足道,因?yàn)榛旌系静莸娘暳蠜]有阻止豬尋找食物[28],也沒有充分減少自主采食量[29],王昕陟[30]也發(fā)現(xiàn)能量攝入是影響采食動(dòng)機(jī)的主要因素,粗纖維作用較小。但是,Olsen認(rèn)為即使有足夠的稻草、空間和活動(dòng)區(qū),添加粗飼料也可以減少改向的口吻部行為[31]。另外,社會(huì)地位也可能極大地改變?nèi)吼B(yǎng)母豬稻草的有效性,因?yàn)檎贾鲗?dǎo)地位的母豬使用豐富物更多,從屬母豬更不活躍,且在早晨非繁忙時(shí)間操控豐富物更多[32]。
秸稈對母豬的筑巢非常重要,懷孕母豬在產(chǎn)仔前一天有很強(qiáng)烈的稻草需求,并強(qiáng)烈喜好在墊草趴臥地產(chǎn)仔,但這取決于稻草供應(yīng)量[3]。但是,在(半)自然環(huán)境母豬使用各種材料來筑巢,母豬在獲得秸稈和樹枝時(shí)筑的巢更好,而只有稻草可能不會(huì)引起足夠的反饋,并使有些母豬長時(shí)間保持筑巢沖動(dòng),在產(chǎn)仔時(shí)更加不安[33]。在產(chǎn)仔/哺乳時(shí),環(huán)境提供稻草對母豬的母性行為產(chǎn)生有利的影響:更多的哺乳期快速授乳哼叫、更多授乳后慢速哼叫、更多指向仔豬的發(fā)聲和探察,對仔豬的求救發(fā)聲更加敏感,在分離試驗(yàn)表現(xiàn)出更短的仔豬識別時(shí)間,但這種提高的母性行為對仔豬存活率沒有穩(wěn)定的作用[3]。
墊草舍母豬的日間皮質(zhì)醇濃度在分娩前、分娩當(dāng)日和哺乳28 d以上時(shí)均顯著較低[34-36]。可見墊草對減少母豬的應(yīng)激有一定作用,但以上研究多是與限位欄對比,所以其差異可能更多受限位環(huán)境影響。
有研究顯示貧瘠畜舍的生長豬日間皮質(zhì)醇升高[36],有的研究卻沒發(fā)現(xiàn)墊草舍對保育豬或生長豬皮質(zhì)醇濃度的影響[36-38],這可能與環(huán)境處理時(shí)間短有關(guān),因?yàn)殚L期使用木屑墊料也能降低母豬的晝夜皮質(zhì)醇水平[39]。還有研究中墊草舍的生長豬的日間皮質(zhì)醇濃度較高[37,40-41],可能是因?yàn)殚L期貧瘠環(huán)境使皮質(zhì)醇晝夜節(jié)律不明顯[37],也可能是HPA軸在持續(xù)應(yīng)激時(shí)發(fā)生適應(yīng)性變化,更不活躍[42]。另外,墊草舍還可以減少豬屠宰前應(yīng)激,皮質(zhì)醇濃度升高也較少[41]。通常認(rèn)為長期處于應(yīng)激狀態(tài)對免疫系統(tǒng)有抑制作用,但墊草對免疫機(jī)能的影響沒有確切的證據(jù)[36],De Groot等[40]對生長豬的研究中也僅發(fā)現(xiàn)白細(xì)胞淋巴細(xì)胞分化的微小差異,而Bolhuis等[43]的研究中墊草舍生長豬的體液免疫反應(yīng)較弱,但受個(gè)體適應(yīng)特性差異的影響。
墊草舍對生產(chǎn)性能的影響在研究結(jié)果中并不一致,大量研究表明在墊草舍飼養(yǎng)的生長育肥豬的采食量和日增重增加[8,14,23,44],并有更好的飼料轉(zhuǎn)化率[44],但也有研究表明飼料轉(zhuǎn)化率沒有顯著差異[8,45],而對保育豬的研究多顯示墊草對生長速度和飼料轉(zhuǎn)化率沒有顯著影響[11]。這可能與墊草作用時(shí)間有關(guān),因?yàn)橛醒芯匡@示短期(2~6周)提供稻草對育肥豬的生產(chǎn)性能沒有顯著影響[38]。Averós等[21]對大量研究結(jié)果的薈萃分析顯示墊草有改善飼料轉(zhuǎn)化率的微弱趨勢。
墊草舍能提高豬的生產(chǎn)性能主要是因?yàn)閴|草舍豬更多的活動(dòng)導(dǎo)致的高采食量[8,23],其他可能因素包括增加的腸道容量、采食稻草帶來的更多能量、秸稈使豬能夠維持溫?zé)岘h(huán)境節(jié)省的能量[46]。但是,墊草作用因空間、地板類型、健康等的影響而不易確定[21,44],因?yàn)樵谝豁?xiàng)控制其他環(huán)境因素的研究中沒發(fā)現(xiàn)少量稻草對生長豬采食量、日增重、料重比的顯著影響[36]。另外墊草作用還因豬個(gè)體適應(yīng)特性的差異而影響[45]。
墊草對胴體重、背膘厚等胴體性能影響的不一致結(jié)果[8,13,16,41,44],則可能是增重差異導(dǎo)致的屠宰日齡的差異造成的。墊草還可能使豬肉系水力更高[41],并對肉的風(fēng)味產(chǎn)生影響[47]。另外,墊草因?yàn)槠淇墒橙胄?,還可緩解低飼糧水平對群養(yǎng)母豬增重和背膘的影響[48]。
總之,墊草對豬福利的影響大部分是有益的。盡管其增加生產(chǎn)成本和特定疾病的風(fēng)險(xiǎn),并帶來管理上的不便,其仍是最可行的提高豬福利的途徑,并有可能提高生產(chǎn)性能。
[1]Spoolder H,De Rosa G,Ho¨rning B,et al.Integrating parameters to assess on-farm welfare.Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on the assessment of animal welfare at farm and group level[J].Anim Welf,2003(12):529-534.
[2]Beattie V E,Walker N,Sneddon IA.Preference testing of substratesby growing pigs[J].Anim Welf,1998(7):27-34.
[3]Tuyttens FA M.The importance of straw for pig and cattle welfare:A review[J].Appl.Anim.Behav.Sci.2005,92:261-282.
[4]Arey D S.Effectof straw on the behaviour and performance of growing pigs in“Straw Flow”pens[J].Farm Build.Prog.1993,112:24-25.
[5]Philippe F X,Laitat M,Nicks B,et al.Ammonia and greenhouse gas emissions during the fattening of pigs kept on two types of straw floor[J].Agr Ecosyst Environ,2012,150:45-53.
[6]Fraser D F,Phillips PA,Thompson B K,et al.Effect of straw on the behaviour of growing pigs[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,1991,30:307-318.
[7]Scott K,Chennells D J,Campbell FM,et al.The welfare of finishing pigs in two contrasting housing systems:Fullyslatted versus straw-bedded accommodation[J].Livest Sci,2006,103:104-115.
[8]Lyons C A P,Bruce J M,F(xiàn)owler V R,et al.A comparison of productivity and welfare of growing pigs in four intensive systems[J].Livest Prod Sci,1995,43:265-274.
[9]Guy JH,Rowlinson P,Chadwick JP et al.Behaviour of two genotypes of growing-finishing pig in three different housing systems[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2002,75:193-206.
[10]Andersen I L,B?e K E.Straw bedding or concrete floor for loose-housed pregnant sows:consequences for aggression,production and physical health[J].Acta Agric Scand Sect,1999,49:190-191.
[11]王昕陟,張飛,邊連全.墊草對仔豬腳傷和生長性能的影響[J].中國畜牧雜志,2004,40(2):53-55.
[12]Scott K,Taylor L,Gill B P,et al.Influence of different types of environmental enrichment on the behaviour of finishing pigs in two different housing systems 2.Ratio of pigs to enrichment[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2007,105:51-58.
[13]Gentry JG,McGlone JJ,Blanton JR,et al.Alternative housing systems for pigs:Influences on growth,composition,and pork quality[J].Am Soc Animal Sci,2002,80:1781-1790.
[14]Van de Weerd H A,Docking G M,Day JE L,et al.Effects of species-relevant environmental enrichment on the behaviour and productivity of finishing pigs[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2006,99:230-247.
[15]Melotti L,Oostindjer M,Bolhuis J E,et al.Coping personality type and environmental enrichment affect aggression atweaning in pigs[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2011,133:144-153.
[16]Van de Weerd H A,Docking C M,Day JE L,et al.The development of harm ful social behaviour in pigs with intact tails and different enrichment backgrounds in two housing systems[J].Anim Sci,2005,80:289-298.
[17]Day J E L,Weerd H A V,Edwards S A,et al.The effect of varying lengths of straw bedding on the behaviour of growing pigs[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2008,109:249-260.
[18]Oostindjer M,van den Brand H,Kemp B,et al.Effects of environmental enrichment and loose housing of lactating sows on piglet behaviour before and after weaning[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2011,134:31-41.
[19]Hirt H,Wechsler B.Behavioural diversity as a measure of welfare:a study in pigs[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,1994,40:82-83.
[20]Hunter E J,Jones T A,Guise H J,et al.The relationship between tail biting in pigs,docking procedure and other management practices[J].Vet J,2001,161:72-79.
[21]Averós X,Brossard L,Dourmad J,et al.A metaanalysis of the combined effect of housing and environmental enrichment characteristics on the behaviour and performance of pigs[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2010,127:73-85.
[22]Kelley K W,McGlone J J,Gaskins C T.Porcine aggression:measurement and effects of crowding and fasting[J].JAnim Sci,1980,50:336-341.
[23]Morgan C A,Deans L A,Lawrence A B,et al.The effets of straw bedding on the feeding and social behaviour of growing pigs fed by means of single-space feeders[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,1998,58:23-33.
[24]Whittaker X,Edwards S A,Spoolder H A M,et al.Effects of straw bedding and high fibre diets on the behaviour of floor fed group-housed sows[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,1999,63:25-39.
[25]Lawrence A B,Terlouw E M C,Kyriazakis I.The behavioural effects of undernutrition in confined farm animals[J].Proc Nutr Soc,1993,52:219-229.
[26]Bergeron R,Bolduc J,Ramonet Y,et al.Feeding motivation and stereotypies in pregnant sows fed increasing levels of fibre and/or food[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2000,70:27-40.
[27]Stewart C L,Boyle L A,O’Connell N E.The effect of increasing dietary fibre and the provision of straw racks on the welfare of sows housed in small static groups[J].Anim Welf,2011,20:633-640.
[28]Lawrence A B,Illius A W.Methodology for measuring hunger and food needs using operant conditioning in the pig[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,1989,24:273-285.
[29]Brouns F,Edwards S A,English P R.Influence of fibrous feed ingredients on voluntary intake of dry sows[J].Anim Feed Sci Tech,1995,54:301-313.
[30]王昕陟.用操作式條件反應(yīng)技術(shù)測定豬的采食動(dòng)機(jī)及其影響因素的研究[D].哈爾濱:東北農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué),2004.
[31]Olsen A W.Behaviour of growing pigs kept in pens with outdoor runs:I.Effect of access to roughage and shelter on oral activities[J].Livest Prod Sci,2001,69:255-264.
[32]Elmore M R P,Garner JP,Johnson A K,et al.Getting around social status:Motivation and enrichment use of dominant and subordinate sows in a group setting[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2011,133:154-163.
[33]Damm B I,Vestergaard KS,Schr?der-Petersen D L,et al.The effects of branches on prepartum nest-building in gilts with access to straw[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2000,69:113-124.
[34]Jarvis S,Vegt B JV D,Lawrence A B,et al.The effect of parity and environmental restriction on behavioural and physiological responses of pre-parturient pigs[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2001,71:203-216.
[35]Jarvis S,D’Eath,R B,Robson SK,et al.The effect of confinement during lactation on the hypothalamicpituitary-adrenal axis and behaviour of primiparous sows[J].Physiol Behav,2006,87:345-352.
[36]尹國安.不同畜舍環(huán)境對豬的生產(chǎn)性能、行為表達(dá)及生理狀況的影響[D].哈爾濱:東北農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué),2010.
[37]De Jong I C,Prelle I T,Van de Burgwal J A,et al.Effects of environmental enrichment on behavioral responses to novelty,learning,and memory,and the circadian rhythm to cortisol in growing pigs[J].Physiol Behav,2000,68:571-578.
[38]Peeters E,Driessen B,Moons C P H,et al.Effect of temporary straw bedding on pigs’behaviour,performance,cortisol and meat quality[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2006,98:234-248.
[39]De Leeuw JA,Ekkel E D.Effects of feeding level and the presence of a foraging substrate on the behaviour and stress physiological response of individually housed gilts[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2004,86:15-25.
[40]De Groot J,De Jong IC,Prelle IT,et al.Immunity in barren and enriched housed pigs differing in baseline cortisol concentration[J].Physiol Behav,2000,71:217-223.
[41]Klont R E,Hulsegge B,Hoving-Bolink A H,et al.Relationships between behavioral and meat quality characteristics of pigs raised under barren and enriched housing conditions[J].Am Soc Animal Sci,2001,79:2835-2843.
[42]Schrader L,Ladewig J.Temporal differences in the responses of the pituitary adrenocortical axis,the sympathoadrenomedullar axis,heart rate,and behaviour to a daily repeated stressor in domestic pigs[J].Physiol Behav,1999,66(5):775-783.
[43]Bolhuis JE,Parmentier H K,Schouten W G P,et al.Effects of housing and individual coping characteristics on immune responses of pigs[J].Physiol Behav,2003,79:289-296.
[44]Guy J H,Rowlinson P,Chadwick J P,et al.Growth performance and carcass characteristics of two genotypes of growing-finishing pig in three different housing systems[J].Anim Sci,2002,74:493-502.
[45]Bolhuis J E,Schouten W G P,Schrama JW,et al.Effects of rearing and housing environment on behaviour and performance of pigs with different coping characteristics[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2006,101:68-85.
[46]Van de Weerd H A,Day J E L.A review of environmental enrichment for pigs housed in intensive housing systems[J].Appl Anim Behav Sci,2009,116:1-20.
[47]Maw S J,F(xiàn)owler V R,Hamilton M,et al.Effect of husbandry and housing of pigs on the organoleptic properties of bacon[J].Livest Prod Sci,2001,68:119-130.
[48]Spoolder H A M.Effects of food motivation on stereotypies and aggression in group housed sows[D].The Netherlands:Wageningen Agricultural University,1998.