Assessment of welfare scorecard with respect to feeds and feeding practices for pigs in peri urban regions of Bengaluru

Introduction

From an early age, pigs naturally explore their surroundings and examine potential food sources through rooting, biting, sniffing, and tasting to assess the nutritional content. These behaviours have developed over thousands of years and remain deeply embedded in today's domestic pigs. Even when housed in familiar environments and given nutritionally complete diets, these instinctive behaviours persist. In fact, when domesticated pigs are placed in woodland settings, they still devote about 75% of their active time to foraging and feeding activities, despite having unlimited access to feed (Laskoski et al., 2019) [1] . The current study was undertaken to study the assessment of welfare score card for pigs with respect to feeds and feeding practices in peri urban region of Bengaluru.

Review of literature

Behaviours such as biting, pushing, and head-butting at the feeder, along with a rise in tail and ear biting, have been observed when poor environmental conditions lead to heightened competition and aggression among growing pigs (Laskoski et al., 2019) [1] . The various stages of lactation present significant challenges for both animals and farmers, as the nutritional demands shift throughout this period. Although sows are typically limit-fed before farrowing, their need for nutrients and energy increases substantially after giving birth to support adequate milk production for their fast-growing piglets (Cools et al., 2014) [2] . Ensuring sufficient feed intake during lactation is crucial to prevent a negative energy balance and to reduce excessive breakdown of body fat and muscle proteins (Pedersen et al., 2016) [3] . Currently, lactating sows are fed using a variety of feeding strategies, ranging from adlib (continuous 24-hour access to food) to restricted feeding (a set amount of feed given at fixed times). Research indicates that adlib feeding benefits lactating sows by promoting higher feed intake (Cools et al., 2014) [2] , better body condition and increased time spent standing and feeding.

Early mechanical sow-controlled adlib feeding systems allowed sows to manually release feed but did not track the quantity or timing of feed intake. More recently, computermonitored adlib feeding systems have been introduced, where sows activate an electronic sensor to access feed. These advanced systems allow sows to eat whenever they choose while accurately recording feed amounts and feeding times, offering farmers superior tools to monitor and tailor the sow's diet throughout lactation (Poulopoulou et al., 2018) [4] . From an early age, pigs naturally explore their surroundings and examine potential food sources through rooting, biting, sniffing, and tasting to assess the nutritional content (Studnitz et al., 2007) [5] . These behaviours have developed over thousands of years and remain deeply embedded in today's domestic pigs. Even when housed in familiar environments and given nutritionally complete diets, these instinctive behaviours persist (Studnitz et al., 2007) [5] . In fact, when domesticated pigs are placed in woodland settings, they still devote about 75% of their active time to foraging and feeding activities, despite having unlimited access to feed. Water plays a vital role in the nutrition and overall wellbeing of pigs. Sufficient water intake is necessary to ensure proper hydration, aid digestion, regulate body temperature, and support healthy growth and development. However, the amount of water pigs require varies depending on their age, physiological condition, and environmental factors. By recognizing and meeting the specific water needs at different stages of a pig's life, farmers can enhance animal health and contribute significantly to the productivity and success of their pig farming operations (Hasahya et al., 2023) [6] . Trace minerals (TMs) are vital nutrients required for numerous physiological functions in livestock. A deficiency in these minerals can lead to poor health and decreased productivity. Essential micronutrients such as manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn), and copper (Cu) play key roles in managing oxidative stress and are also crucial for the proper functioning of digestive enzymes and hormones involved in nutrient digestion and absorption. To meet the mineral requirements necessary for optimal growth and the production of high-quality animal products, inorganic trace minerals (ITMs) have traditionally been used as dietary supplements (Zhang et al., 2024) [7] .

Materials and Methods

Location of the study: Bengaluru Rural district lies in the southeastern part of the state, covering a geographical area of 229,519 hectares, which accounts for 1.2% of the state's total area. Located at 13°18′56.5″ N latitude and 77°30′53.1″ E longitude, the district is part of Bengaluru's peri-urban zone.

Parameters:

The data from twenty piggery farms in peri urban region of Bengaluru was collected with regard to feeds and feeding practices to assess welfare scores, through structured schedule in person. The farms were divided in to small (<100), medium (100 to 200) and large farms (>200) based on the number of pigs. Four welfare measures were considered viz., Feed ingredients, Feeding practices, Feeds storage space, Adequate supply of clean water for the study. Tabulation and analysis: After collecting responses from the participants, the data was carefully reviewed, verified, and numbered. The data were then coded, compiled, and tabulated according to standard procedures consistent with the study's objectives. statistical analysis will be carried out using Duncan's Multiple Range Test (DMRT). This post-hoc test is applied following a significant ANOVA result to determine which specific group means differ significantly from one another. The detailed data of all the welfare measures pertaining to feeds and feeding practices is presented in Table 1.

Results and Discussion

Feed ingredients:

The mean scores were lowest in (5.4±1.33) large farms and highest in (11.3±0.73) small farms. The statistical analysis indicated highly significant (p<0.011) differences among the groups. This indicates that the small farms had better in collecting and usage of feed ingredients, might be due to ease of handling the feed ingredients for smaller number of pigs. This in case of medium and large farms due to a greater number of animals, farmer where force depend on uniform commercial rations, leading to lower diversity scores. Similar patterns have been reported in India, where smallholder pig farmers frequently use kitchen waste, vegetables, and farm by-products to feed pigs, in contrast to larger farms using standardized feeds (Bhuyan, 2018) [8] . Such diversity may enhance welfare through variety but may not always ensure balanced nutrition.

Feeding practices: The mean scores for the feeding practices was lowest in medium farms (5.8±0.36) and highest in small farms (6±0.89). The statistical analysis indicated non-significant (p<1.000) differences among the groups. Proper feeding practices are crucial to ensure adequate nutrient intake, reduce competition at feeding points, and promote uniform growth. While the scores indicate that farms generally follow acceptable feeding methods, further improvements in feed distribution and frequency could enhance pig welfare and productivity (Patience et al., 2015) [9] .

Feeds storage space and hygiene:

The mean scores for feeds storage space and hygiene was lowest in small farms (1.00±0.06) and highest in (2.50±0.20) large farms. The statistical analysis indicated highly significant (p<0.037) differences among the groups. Further, it was found that the feed storage space and hygiene was significantly (p<0.037) higher in large farms when compared to small and medium farms. This suggests that large farms maintain better storage facilities, reducing contamination risks and spoilage, while small farms often lack proper storage structures, leading to compromised feed quality. Similar observations were reported by Kumaresan et al. (2009) [10] , who noted that smallholder pig farmers in North-Eastern India frequently stored feed in unhygienic conditions, increasing the risk of fungal contamination and reduced pig performance.

Adequate supply of clean water:

The mean scores for Adequate supply of clean water was found to be similar in similar in all the piggery farms (5.00±0.00). The statistical analysis indicated non-significant (p<1.000) differences among all the farms. Water is the most essential nutrient, and unrestricted access to clean water is fundamental for maintaining hydration, digestion, thermoregulation, and overall welfare in pigs. Lack of clean water or inadequate supply can lead to dehydration, reduced feed intake, and impaired growth performance, whereas continuous availability supports health and productivity (Verdon et al., 2018) [11] . The uniform scores suggest that all farms recognized the importance of water provision, though water quality monitoring remains equally critical.

Overall welfare score for Feeds and feeding practices:

The overall mean welfare scores for Feeds and feeding practices lowest in medium farms (17.20±0.94) and it was highest in small farms (23.30±2.02). The statistical analysis indicated non-significant (p<0.054) differences among the groups. Further it was found that overall welfare score for feeds and feeding practices was significantly higher (p<0.004) in small farms when compare to medium and large farms. This indicates that feed-related welfare standards were generally maintained across farm sizes, aligning with earlier studies that highlight consistent feeding management practices in pig farms regardless of scale (Nkansah et al., 2019) [12] .

Plate 1: Collection of information and giving welfare scores with respect to Feeds and feeding practices in and around peri-urban regions of Bengaluru.

Conclusion

Feeding-related welfare indicators demonstrated clear differences among farm sizes. Small farms ensured better feed quality and ingredient diversity, while large farms maintained superior feed storage hygiene. Medium farms lagged behind in most parameters. Overall, effective feed management and hygienic storage practices are crucial for improving welfare and productivity in pig farms.

References

1. Laskoski F, Faccin JE, Vier CM, Gonçalves MA, Orlando UA, Kummer R, et al. Effects of pigs per feeder hole and group size on feed intake onset, growth performance, and ear and tail lesions in nursery pigs with consistent space allowance. J Swine Health Prod. 2019;27:12-18.
2. Cools A, Maes D, Decaluwé R, Buyse J, van Kempen TATG, Liesegang A, et al. Ad libitum feeding during the peripartal period affects body condition, reproduction results and metabolism of sows. Anim Reprod Sci. 2014;145:130-140.
3. Pedersen TF, Bruun TS, Feyera T, Larsen UK, Theil PK. A two-diet feeding regime for lactating sows reduced nutrient deficiency in early lactation and improved milk yield. Livest Sci. 2016;191:165-173.
4. Poulopoulou I, Eggemann A, Moors E, Lambertz C, Gauly M. Does feeding frequency during lactation affect sows' body condition, reproduction and production performance? J Anim Sci. 2018;89(6):15911598.
5. Studnitz M, Jensen MB, Pedersen LJ. Why do pigs root and in what will they root? On the exploratory behaviour of pigs in relation to environmental enrichment. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2007;107(3-4):183197.
6. Hasahya E, Oba P, Nsadha Z, Doyle R, Ouma EA, Dione M. Herd health management training manual for animal health care workers. Nairobi (Kenya): International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI); 2023.
7. Zhang G, Huang J, Sun Z, Guo Y, Lin G, Zhang Z, et al. Effects of trace mineral source on growth performance, antioxidant activity, and meat quality of pigs fed an oxidized soy oil supplemented diet. Antioxid. 2024;13:1227.
8. Bhuyan R. Feeding practices for growing pigs in Nagaland. Indian J Anim Nutr. 2018;35(4):436-440. https://doi.org/10.56093/IJAN.V35I4.73671.
9. Patience JF, Rossoni-Serão MC, Gutiérrez NA. Feed efficiency in swine: biology and application. J Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2015;6(1):1-9.
10. Kumaresan A, Bujarbaruah KM, Pathak KA, Chhetri B, Ahmed SK, Haunshi S. Performance of pigs reared under traditional tribal low-input production system and chemical composition of non-conventional feed resources. Livest Sci. 2007;107(2-3):294-298.
11. Verdon M, Morrison RS, Hemsworth PH. Rearing piglets in multi-litter group lactation systems: effects on piglet welfare and performance. Anim. 2018;12(9):1896-1904.
12. Nkansah J, Ansah T, Aning KG, Okantah SA. Assessment of pig production and feeding practices in selected regions of Ghana. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2019;51(5):1193-1201.