Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Space allowance modulates behavioural patterns and coccidial burden in Sirohi goat kids.

Created on 31 Jul 2026

Authors

Hina Ashraf Waiz

Published in

Tropical animal health and production. Volume 58. Issue 7. Jul 31, 2026. Epub Jul 31, 2026.

Abstract

This study evaluated the effects of different space allowances on the behaviour and coccidial load in intensively reared Sirohi goat kids. Seventy-two healthy Sirohi goat kids (approximately three months of age) with similar initial body weights were randomly allocated to four space allowance treatments: 0.8 m²/kid (T1), 0.9 m²/kid (T2), 0.7 m²/kid (T3), and 0.6 m²/kid (T4), with three replicate pens of six kids each. Daily behavioural observations were conducted over 90 days using scan sampling, and faecal samples were collected on Days 0, 30, 60, and 90 to measure coccidial oocyst counts (OPG). Results showed that space allowance significantly affected behavioural responses and coccidial burden (p < 0.05). Kids in lower space allowances (0.6 and 0.7 m²/kid) exhibited more feeding, standing, drinking, and agonistic behaviours, while resting, locomotor activity, self-grooming, and affiliative interactions decreased compared to those in higher allowances (0.8 and 0.9 m²/kid). Stereotypic and eliminative behaviours were not significantly affected (p > 0.05). Coccidial burden increased over the experimental period, being highest in kids at 0.6 m²/kid (T4) and lowest in those at 0.9 m²/kid (T2). These findings suggest that providing adequate space allowance can improve behavioural welfare and reduce coccidial burden in intensively reared Sirohi goat kids, highlighting the importance of appropriate housing management in intensive production systems.

PMID:
42536263
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 31 Jul 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 9
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement