Animal Production Systems Group, Wageningen University & Research, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Animal Production Systems Group, Wageningen University & Research, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Animal. 2024 Sep;18(9):101283. doi: 10.1016/j.animal.2024.101283. Epub 2024 Aug 2.
With an ongoing transition towards the use of Light Emitting Diodes, more knowledge is needed on which light settings optimise sustainability parameters in pig production. We studied the effects of four light intensities on social, environmental and economic sustainability indicators, including ammonia emissions, space use, pen fouling, weight gain, carcass quality, perception of the stockkeeper, costs of the light system, and use of drinking water, electricity and medicines. Light treatments included a low (45 lux), medium (198 lux) and high (968 lux) uniform intensity, and a spatial gradient treatment ranging from 71 lux in the front to 330 lux in the back of each pen. The latter treatment aimed to improve the space use of functional areas. A total of 448 growing-finishing pigs were studied on a commercial farm using two consecutive batches of four rooms containing eight pens with seven pigs. Light intensity influenced some aspects of space use and pen fouling. For example, the proportion of pigs lying in the resting area was higher in the high and medium light intensity treatment than in the low intensity and gradient treatment. Moreover, the high-intensity treatment resulted in more fouling with faeces in the feeding area compared with the low-intensity and the gradient treatment. Ammonia emissions were higher in the gradient than in the low intensity treatment (not measured in medium and high intensity treatment). Furthermore, light intensity did not affect weight gain, carcass quality, water use and medicine use. The stockkeeper was content to work in all light conditions, but slightly preferred the medium intensity due to optimal visibility. Concerning economic performance, the costs of the light system and electricity use increased in the following order: low intensity, gradient, medium intensity, and high intensity. In conclusion, contrary to expectation the spatial gradient did not notably improve space use or reduce pen fouling, but rather increased ammonia emissions in comparison with uniform light. This is likely because the gradient could not be applied in an optimal way in the existing housing conditions. Among the other sustainability indicators, mainly electricity use and costs of the light system differed per treatment. These aspects can be improved by further optimising the number of light sources needed per pen to achieve the targeted intensities.
随着向使用发光二极管的持续转变，我们需要更多的知识来了解哪些光照设置可以优化养猪生产的可持续性参数。我们研究了四种光照强度对社会、环境和经济可持续性指标的影响，包括氨排放、空间利用、猪圈污染、体重增加、胴体质量、饲养员感知、光照系统成本以及饮用水、电和药物的使用。光照处理包括低（45 勒克斯）、中（198 勒克斯）和高（968 勒克斯）均匀强度，以及从每个猪圈前部 71 勒克斯到后部 330 勒克斯的空间梯度处理。后一种处理旨在改善功能区的空间利用。在一个商业农场中，我们使用两批连续的四个房间，每个房间包含八个猪圈和七头猪，对 448 头育肥猪进行了研究。光照强度影响了空间利用和猪圈污染的某些方面。例如，在高光照强度和中光照强度处理下，猪躺在休息区的比例高于低光照强度和梯度处理下的比例。此外，高强度处理导致在喂食区的粪便污染比低强度和梯度处理更多。与低强度处理相比，梯度处理下的氨排放更高（中强度和高强度处理下未测量）。此外，光照强度对体重增加、胴体质量、水的使用和药物的使用没有影响。饲养员对所有光照条件都满意，但由于最佳能见度，他稍微更喜欢中等强度。关于经济表现，光照系统的成本和电力使用按以下顺序增加：低强度、梯度、中强度和高强度。总之，与预期相反，空间梯度并没有显著改善空间利用或减少猪圈污染，反而与均匀光照相比增加了氨排放。这可能是因为在现有的住房条件下，梯度不能得到最佳应用。在其他可持续性指标中，主要是电力使用和光照系统的成本因处理而异。通过进一步优化每头猪所需的光源数量以达到目标强度，可以改善这些方面。
