Advances in Current BiologyAdvances in Current BiologyУспехи современной биологии0042-13243034-6347The Russian Academy of Sciences65326010.31857/S0042132423020047KMBEZJArticlesСтатьиEthological Basis for the Relationship between Humans and Miniature PigsЭтологические основы взаимоотношений человека и карликовых свиней-компаньоновBystrovaN. A.БыстроваН. А.natasha.b.phd@gmail.comSevertsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution, Russian Academy of SciencesИнститут проблем экологии и эволюции им. А.Н. Северцова РАН01032023143213814803022025Copyright ©; 2023, Russian Academy of SciencesCopyright ©; 2023, Российская академия наук2023Russian Academy of SciencesРоссийская академия наукhttps://journals.eco-vector.com/0042-1324/article/view/653260

Traditionally pigs are perceived as farm animals, but in the last 70–80 years they are serving some other purposes, particularly as companion animals. It is necessary to have structured and comprehensive data on the specifics of their perception, communication and social behavior to manage their behavior and welfare effectively. This article gathers and analyzes information from currently available publications and studies conducted on wild boars, domestic pigs of productive breeds and miniature pigs, characterizing the functioning of their sense organs, specifics of social behavior and communication with humans.

Содержание свиней в качестве лабораторных животных и животных-компаньонов стало возможным лишь в последние 70–80 лет (Bollen et al., 2010). В связи с этим актуальными стали проблемы эффективного управления их поведением и контроля за благополучием. Для успешного решения этих задач необходимо наличие структурированных и всесторонних данных об особенностях коммуникации свиней, их социального поведения и восприятия ими информации из внешней среды. В данной статье собрана и анализируется информация из немногочисленных в настоящее время актуальных публикаций об исследованиях, характеризующих работу органов чувств, специфику социального поведения и межвидовой коммуникации диких кабанов, домашних свиней продуктивных пород и карликовых домашних свиней.

pigsminiature pigssense organs specificssocial behaviorhuman animal communicationpig trainingкарликовые свиньифункционирование органов чувствсоциальное поведениекоммуникация с человекомобучение свинейАвтор выражает благодарность за помощь в поиске материалов и подготовке статьи к.б.н. В.А. Зайцеву, к.б.н. С.Л. Баскиной, д.б.н. Л.М. Баскину.Баскин Л.М. Поведение копытных животных. М.: Наука, 1976. 295 с.Баскина С.Л. О чем думает лошадь и как научиться ее понимать. М.: Аквариум, 2008. 224 с.Бочаров В.И., Орлов А.П. Дрессировка служебных собак. М.: ДОСААФ, 1957. 199 с.Гладырь Е.А., Эрнст Л.К., Костюнина О.В. Изучение генома свиней (Sus scrofa) с использованием ДНК-маркеров // Сельскохоз. биол. 2009. № 2. С. 16–25.Дуров В.Л. Дрессировка животных. Психологические наблюдения над животными, дрессированными по моему методу (40-летний опыт). М.: Универсальное изд-во, 1924. 505 с.Животноводство, зоогигиена и ветеринарная санитария: учебник для учащихся средних специальных учебных заведений по специальности “Ветеринарная медицина” / Ред. В.А. Медведский. Витебск: ВГАВМ, 2006. 322 с.Зайцев В.А. Синхронизация поведения и индивидуальные дистанции в группах кабанов (Sus scrofa L.) // Журн. общ. биол. 1992. Т. 53. № 2. С. 243–257.Зайцев В.А. Вожаки, лидеры и разведчики у кабанов // Бюл. моск. общ. испыт. природы. Отд. биол. 1999. Т. 104. № 1. С. 10–17.Зубко В.Н. Служебное собаководство. М.: ДОСААФ, 1987. 382 с.Комлацкий В.И., Величко Л.Ф. Биологические основы производства свинины. Краснодар: КубГАУ, 2010. 175 с.Комлацкий В.И., Величко Л.Ф. Селекция свиней. Учеб. пособие. Краснодар: КубГАУ, 2019. 155 с.Комлацкий В.И., Величко Л.Ф., Величко В.А. Биология и этология. Учеб. пособие. Краснодар: КубГАУ, 2017. 130 с.Майнхардт Х. Моя жизнь среди кабанов. М.: Лесная промышленность, 1983. 129 с.Мотузко Н.С., Никитин Ю.И. Физиологические основы этологии сельскохозяйственных животных. Витебск: ВГАВМ, 2003. 50 с.Панкова Н.Л. Роль кабана (Sus scrofa) в динамике растительности водоемов Окского заповедника // Рос. журн. биол. инвазий. 2013. Т. 6. № 3. С. 69–87.Панкова Н.Л., Панков А.Б. О маркировочном поведении самцов дикого кабана Sus scrofa в естественных условиях // Тр. Окского гос. природ. биосфер. заповед. Вып. 39. Рязань: Рязан. обл. типография, 2020. С. 118–135.Adamczyk K., Górecka-Bruzda A., Nowicki J. et al. Perception of environment in farm animals – a review // Ann. Anim. Sci. 2015. V. 15. P. 565–589. https://doi.org/10.1515/aoas-2015-0031Albiach-Serran A., Bräuer J., Cacchione T. et al. The effect of domestication and ontogeny in swine cognition (Sus scrofa scrofa and S. s. domestica) // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2012. V. 141. P. 25–35.Alves L.K.S., Gameiro A.H., Schinckel A.P., Garbossa C.A.P. Development of a swine production cost calculation model // Animals. 2022. V. 12. P. 2229.Basic miniature pig care, 2019. https://petsontheshorevh.com/storage/app/media/Mini-Pig-Basic-Care-Client-Handout-1.pdfBenjamin M.E. Pig trucking and handling – stress and fatigued pig // Adv. Pork Prod. 2005. V. 16. P. 57–66.Bensoussan S., Cornil M., Meunier-Salaün M.-C., Tallet C. Piglets learn to use combined human-given visual and auditory signals to find a hidden reward in an object choice task // PLoS One. 2016. V. 11. Iss. 10. P. e0164988. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0164988Bensoussan S., Tigeot R., Lemasson A. et al. Domestic piglets (Sus scrofa domestica) are attentive to human voice and able to discriminate some prosodic features // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2018. V. 210. P. 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2018.10.009Bensoussan S., Tigeot R., Meunier-Salaün M.-C., Tallet C. Broadcasting human voice to piglets (Sus scrofa domestica) modifies their behavioural reaction to human presence in the home pen and in arena tests // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2020. V. 225. P. 104965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2020.104965Black N.J., Cheng T.-Y., Arruda A.G. Characterizing the connection between swine production sites by personnel movements using a mobile application-based geofencing platform // Prevent. Veterin. Med. 2022. V. 208. P. 105753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2022.105753Blasetti A., Boitani L., Riviello M.C., Visalberghi E. Activity budgets and use of enclosed space by wild boars (Sus scrofa) in captivity // Zoo Biol. 1988. V. 7. P. 69–79. https://doi.org/10.1002/zoo.1430070108Bollen P.J.A., Hansen A.K., Alstrup A.K.O. The laboratory swine. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2010. 138 p. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781439815304Brajon S., Laforest J.-P., Bergeron R. et al. The perception of humans by piglets: recognition of familiar handlers and generalisation to unfamiliar humans // Anim. Cogn. 2015. V. 18. P. 1299–1316.Burghardt G.M., Albright J.D., Davis K.M. Motivation, development and object play: comparative perspectives with lessons from dogs // Behaviour. 2016. V. 153. P. 767–793.Caballero-Hernández A.I., Castrejón-Pineda F., Martínez-Gamba R. et al. Survival and viability of Ascaris suum and Oesophagostomum dentatum in ensiled swine faeces // Bioresour. Technol. 2004. V. 94. P. 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2003.12.008Chan W.Y., Cloutier S., Newberry R.C. Barking pigs: differences in acoustic morphology predict juvenile responses to alarm calls // Anim. Behav. 2011. V. 82. P. 767–774.Duffera M., Robarge W.P., Mikkelsen R.L. Estimating the availability of nutrients from processed swine lagoon solids through incubation studies // Bioresour. Technol. 1999. V. 70. P. 261–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(99)00039-5Figueroa J., Solà-Oriol D., Manteca X., Pérez J.F. Social learning of feeding behaviour in pigs: effects of neophobia and familiarity with the demonstrator conspecific // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2013. V. 148. P. 120–127.Goumon S., Špinka M. Emotional contagion of distress in young pigs is potentiated by previous exposure to the same stressor // Anim. Cogn. 2016. V. 19. Iss. 3. P. 501–511.Goursot C., Düpjan S., Tuchscherer A. et al. Visual laterality in pigs: monocular viewing influences emotional reactions in pigs // Anim. Behav. 2019. V. 154. P. 183–192.Ha T.-H., Mahasti N.N.N., Lu M.-C., Huang Y.-H. Ammonium-nitrogen recovery as struvite from swine wastewater using various magnesium sources // Separ. Purific. Technol. 2022. V. 308. P. 122870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2022.122870Hall I.R., Brown G.T., Zambonelli A. Taming the truffle: the history, lore, and science of the ultimate mushroom. Portland: Timber Press, 2007. 304 p.Heining P., Ruysschaert T. The use of minipig in drug discovery and development: pros and cons of minipig selection and strategies to use as a preferred nonrodent species // Toxicol. Pathol. 2016. V. 44. P. 467–473.Hemsworth P.H. Behavioural principles of pig handling // Livestock handling and transport / Ed. T. Grandin. Wallingford: CABI, 1993. P. 261–279.Hemsworth P.H., Gonyou H.W., Dziuk P.J. Human communication with pigs: the behavioural response of pigs to specific human signals // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1986. V. 15. Iss. 1. P. 45–54.Imeah B., Penz E., Rana M., Trask C. Economic analysis of new workplace technology including productivity and injury: the case of needle-less injection in swine // PLoS One. 2020. V. 15. P. e0233599.Kiley-Worthington M. The tail movements of ungulates, canids and felids with particular reference to their causation and function as displays // Behaviour. 1976. V. 56. P. 69–115.Klopfer F.D., Butler R.L. Color vision in swine // Am. Zool. 1964. V. 4. P. 294.Koba Y., Tanida H. How do miniature pigs discriminate between people? The effect of exchanging cues between a non-handler and their familiar handler on discrimination // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1999. V. 61. Iss. 3. P. 239–252.Koba Y., Morita A., Rushen J. et al. Miniature pigs’ abilities to discriminate people based on their photographs // Jap. J. Anim. Psychol. 2012. V. 62. Iss. 1. P. 1–10.Maigrot A.-L., Hillmann E., Briefer E.F. Cross-species discrimination of vocal expression of emotional valence by Equidae and Suidae // BMC Biol. 2022. V. 20. Iss. 1. P. 106. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-022-01311-5Marcet-Rius M., Cozzi A., Bienboire-Frosini C. et al. Selection of putative indicators of positive emotions triggered by object and social play in mini-pigs // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2018. V. 202. P. 13–19.Marcet-Rius M., Fàbrega E., Cozzi A. et al. Are tail and ear movements indicators of emotions in tail-docked pigs in response to environmental enrichment? // Animals. 2019. V. 9. Iss. 7. P. 449.McCall C.A. A review of learning behavior in horses and its application in horse training // J. Anim. Sci. 1990. V. 68. P. 75–81.Mellor D.J. Updating animal welfare thinking: moving beyond the “Five freedoms” towards “A life worth living” // Animals. 2016. V. 6. Iss. 3. P. 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6030021Meynhardt H. Schwarzwild-Report. Vier Jahre unter Wildschweinen. Berlin: Verlag J. Neumann-Neudamm, 1981. 208 S.Meynhardt H. Schwarzwild-Report. Mein Leben unter Wildschweinen. Leipzig, Radebeul: Verlag J. Neumann-Neudamm, 1990. 220 S.Miklósi A., Kubinyi E., Topál J. et al. A simple reason for a big difference: wolves do not look back at humans, but dogs do // Curr. Biol. 2003. V. 13. P. 763–766.The encyclopedia of applied animal behaviour and welfare / Eds D. Mills, J.N. Marchant-Forde, P.D. McGreevy et al. Wallingford: CABI, 2010. 684 p.Munksgaard L., De Passillé A.M., Rushen J. et al. Discrimination of people by dairy cows based on handling // J. Dairy Sci. 1997. V. 80. P. 1106–1112.Munksgaard L., De Passillé A.M., Rushen J., Ladewig J. Dairy cows’ use of colour cues to discriminate between people // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1999. V. 65. Iss. 1. P. 1–11.Nawroth C., Ebersbach M., von Borell E. Are juvenile domestic pigs (Sus scrofa domestica) sensitive to the attentive states of humans? The impact of impulsivity on choice behaviour // Behav. Proc. 2013. V. 96. P. 53–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2013.03.002Nawroth C., Ebersbach M., von Borell E. Juvenile domestic pigs (Sus scrofa domestica) use human-given cues in an object choice task // Anim. Cogn. 2014. V. 17. Iss. 3. P. 701–713. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-013-0702-3Nawroth C., Ebersbach M., von Borell E. Are domestic pigs (Sus scrofa domestica) able to use complex human-given cues to find a hidden reward? // Anim. Welf. 2016. V. 25. P. 185–190. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.25.2.185Neitz J., Jacobs G. Spectral sensitivity of cones in an ungulate // Vis. neurosci. 1989. V. 2. P. 97–100.Newberry R.C., Wood-Gush D.G.M. The development of some behaviour patterns in piglets under semi-natural conditions // Anim. Prod. 1988. V. 46. P. 103–109.Noonan G.J., Rand J.S., Priest J. et al. Behavioural observations of piglets undergoing tail docking, teeth clipping and ear notching // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1994. V. 39. P. 203–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(94)90156-2Ocepek M., Newberry R.C., Andersen I.L. Which types of rooting material give weaner pigs most pleasure? // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2020. V. 231. P. 105070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2020.105070Overall K.L. Clinical behavioral medicine for small animals. St. Louis: Mosby, 1997. 544 p.Puppe B., Schön P.C., Tuchscherer A., Manteuffel G. Castration-induced vocalisation in domestic piglets, Sus scrofa: complex and specific alterations of the vocal quality // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005. V. 95. P. 67–78.Reimert I., Bolhuis J.E., Kemp B., Rodenburg T.B. Indicators of positive and negative emotions and emotional contagion in pigs // Physiol. Behav. 2013. V. 109. P. 42–50.Roy R.C., Roy S. Swine communication // Encyclopedia of animal cognition and behavior / Eds J. Vonk, T. Shackelford. Cham: Springer, 2019. P. 6809–6813.Rybarczyk P., Rushen J., De Passillé A.M. Recognition of people by dairy calves using colour of clothing // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2003. V. 81. Iss. 4. P. 307–319.Schrader L., Todt D. Vocal quality is correlated with levels of stress hormones in domestic pigs // Ethology. 2010. V. 104. Iss. 10. P. 859–876.Starling M.J., Branson N., Cody D., McGreevy P.D. Conceptualising the impact of arousal and affective state on training outcomes of operant conditioning // Animals (Basel). 2013. V. 3. Iss. 2. P. 300–317.Swindle M., Smith A.C. Comparative anatomy and physiology of the pig // Scand. J. Lab. Anim. Sci. 1998. V. 25. P. 11–21.Tallet C., Linhart P., Policht R. et al. Encoding of situations in the vocal repertoire of piglets (Sus scrofa): a comparison of discrete and graded classifications // PLoS One. 2013. V. 8. Iss. 8. P. e71841. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071841Tanida H., Nagano Y. The ability of miniature pigs to discriminate between a stranger and their familiar handler // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1998. V. 56. Iss. 2–4. P. 149–159.Tanida H., Miura A., Tanaka T., Yoshimoto T. The role of handling in communication between humans and weanling pigs // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1994. V. 40. Iss. 3–4. P. 219–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(94)90063-9Tanida H., Miura A., Tanaka T., Yoshimoto T. Behavioral response to humans in individually handled weanling pigs // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1995. V. 42. Iss. 4. P. 249–259.Terlouw E.M.C., Porcher J. Repeated handling of pigs during rearing. I. Refusal of contact by the handler and reactivity to familiar and unfamiliar humans // J. Anim. Sci. 2005. V. 83. Iss. 7. P. 1653–1663.Tynes V.V. Miniature pet pig behavioral medicine // Vet. Clin. North Am. Exot. Anim. Pract. 2021. V. 24. P. 63–86.Viscardi A.V., Hunniford M., Lawlis P. et al. Development of a piglet grimace scale to evaluate piglet pain using facial expressions following castration and tail docking: a pilot study // Front. Vet. Sci. 2017. V. 4. P. 11.Wang J., Ben W.W., Yang M. et al. Dissemination of veterinary antibiotics and corresponding resistance genes from a concentrated swine feedlot along the waste treatment paths // Environ. Int. 2016. V. 92–93. P. 317–323.Warren-Smith A., McGreevy P. The use of blended positive and negative reinforcement in shaping the halt response of horses (Equus caballus) // Anim. Welfare. 2007. V. 16. P. 481–488.Weary D.M., Braithwaite L.A., Fraser D. Vocal response to pain in piglets // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1998. V. 56. P. 161–172.Wondrak M., Conzelmann E., Veit A., Huber L. Pigs (Sus scrofa domesticus) categorize pictures of human heads // Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2018. V. 205. P. 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2018.05.009Yang H.Y., Galang K.G., Gallegos A. et al. Sling training with positive reinforcement to facilitate porcine wound studies // JID Innov. 2021. V. 1. P. 100016.