Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-5lx2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T11:29:16.593Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A note on hunger in the pig: sows on restricted rations will sustain an energy deficit to gain additional food

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

G. D. Hutson
G. D. Hutson
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia
Get access

Abstract

Hunger in pregnant sows maintained on commercial restricted rations was measured using an operant conditioning technique. Six sows were trained to lift a lever for a 2·7 g pellet reinforcement on a ratio of 10 lifts per reinforcement. After 1 h of stable responding (no pause greater than 5 min) the ratio was increased to 20 lifts. The point at which a sow stopped responding to this increasing ratio was used as a measure of strength of feeding motivation. Extinction was defined as occurring if the sow did not respond for a 2-h period. The six sows reached extinction at ratios of 70, 130, 210, 210, 230, and 430, and had stable intakes prior to extinction of 15, 22, 17, 10, 11, and 3 reinforcements per hour. Estimates of net energy deficits during responding prior to extinction were 271, 45, 271, 75, 242, and 441 kJlh. These results indicate that sows on restricted rations are still extremely hungry, to the extent that they are prepared to sustain an energy deficit to gain additional food.

Keywords

energy balancefood intakehungersows
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 52 , Issue 1 , February 1991 , pp. 233 - 235
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Cronin, G. M., Tartwijk, J. M. F. M. Van, Hel, W. Van Der and Verstegen, M. W. A. 1986. The influence of degree of adaptation to tether-housing by sows in relation to behaviour and energy metabolism. Animal Production 42: 257–268.Google Scholar
Ferster, C. B. and Skinner, B. F. 1957. Schedules of Reinforcement. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hodos, W. 1961. Progressive ratio as a measure of reward strength. Science 134: 943–944.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hutson, G. D. and Mourik, S. C. Van. 1981. Food preferences of sheep. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 21: 575–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, A. B., Appleby, M. C. and Macleod, H. A. 1988. Measuring hunger in the pig using; operant conditioning: the effect of food restriction. Animal Production 47: 131–137.Google Scholar
Sidman, M. and Stebbins, W. C. 1954. Satiation effects under fixed-ratio schedules of reinforcement. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 47: 114–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skinner, B. F. 1968. The Technology of Teaching. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.Google Scholar