Are human voices used by pigs (Sus scrofa domestica) when developing their relationship with humans? - Archive ouverte HAL Accéder directement au contenu
Poster De Conférence Année : 2019

Are human voices used by pigs (Sus scrofa domestica) when developing their relationship with humans?

Résumé

The human-pig relationship develops through visual, tactile, olfactory, and auditory interactions. Our objective was to determine the effect of human voices on the development of the human-pig relationship. We hypothesised that human voice facilitates human-pig relationship development and handling. We studied the behaviour of 90 weaned female piglets divided into three treatments: human presence with voice (HPV), human presence without voice (HP), control (CTRL). For the HPV piglets the experimenter was present idle for 5 min/day in the pen during three weeks and a female voice was broadcast from a speaker around the neck of the experimenter. The HP treatment was the same but a recorded background noise was broadcast from the speaker. For the CTRL piglets only routine husbandry care was provided. Piglets were then tested twice in a 3×3 m test area in the presence of the experimenter for 5 min. For test 1 the voice was broadcast for HPV piglets and the background noise for the others. For test 2 only the background noise was broadcast, HPV piglets were thus deprived of the human voice they were used to. Lastly, we recorded the time it took to move the animals from their pen to the truck (for transfer to the finishing pen), with a human voice broadcast for HPV piglets and a background noise broadcast for the others. We analysed the treatment effect with linear mixed models (R studio Version 1.1.453, means and sem are reported), except for the duration of transfer which was analysed with the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test (median and IQ are reported). Significance limit was fixed at P<0.05. In test 1 previous human presence decreased piglet fear reactions, but human voice broadcast had no effect. Indeed, the time spent gazing at the experimenter was lower in HPV and HP piglets (17.1±0.9 s and 22.6±1.5 s respectively) than in CTRL piglets (46.5±3.3 s, P<0.05). They also investigated the experimenter earlier (HPV: 50.9±3.0 s; HP: 44.7±2.6 s vs CTRL: 170.7±3.5 s, P<0.05). In test 2, HPV piglets deprived of a human voice expressed more stress reactions: their latency to move was longer compared to the others (38.6±2.2 s vs HP: 18.5±0.8 and CTRL: 59.0±2.8 s, P<0.05). HPV piglets also had more physical and vocal interactions: they stayed longer in the experimenter area than HP and CTRL piglets (37.0±0.8% vs HP: 29.5±0.7% and CTRL: 25.9±0.7, P<0.05), and grunted more (47.6±1.6 grunts vs HP: 40.5±1.1 and CTRL: 27.6±1.2 grunts, P<0.05). We found no effect of the treatment on the time taken to move animals from their pen to the truck (P<0.05). In conclusion, broadcasting a human voice did not modify pig response to human presence and handling in auditory conditions similar to treatment sessions (i.e. test 1 and moving). However, not broadcasting human voice (test 2) induced stress responses and increased interactive behaviour, which suggests that piglets identified human voice as part of the experimenter’s necessary properties.
Fichier non déposé

Dates et versions

hal-02267856 , version 1 (19-08-2019)

Identifiants

  • HAL Id : hal-02267856 , version 1
  • PRODINRA : 479345

Citer

Céline Tallet, Sandy Bensoussan, Raphaëlle Tigeot, Marie-Christine Meunier-Salaün. Are human voices used by pigs (Sus scrofa domestica) when developing their relationship with humans?. 53. Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology (ISAE), Aug 2019, Bergen, Norway. Wageningen Academic Publishers, 2019, Proceedings of the 53rd congress of the ISAE. Animal lives worth living. ⟨hal-02267856⟩
49 Consultations
0 Téléchargements

Partager

Gmail Facebook X LinkedIn More