{"id":6925,"date":"2025-05-27T12:58:00","date_gmt":"2025-05-27T10:58:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.axiom-genetics.com\/maternity-freedom-feedback-from-breeders-using-axiom-genetics\/"},"modified":"2026-04-17T12:22:36","modified_gmt":"2026-04-17T10:22:36","slug":"maternity-freedom-feedback-from-breeders-using-axiom-genetics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.axiom-genetics.com\/en\/maternity-freedom-feedback-from-breeders-using-axiom-genetics\/","title":{"rendered":"Maternity freedom: feedback from breeders using AXIOM genetics"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

A reality on the ground in the face of animal welfare challenges<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n

Faced with changing societal expectations in terms of animal welfare and increasing regulatory pressure, pig farms are rethinking their practices. The free-range maternity unit (Figure 1) is gradually establishing itself as a credible alternative to traditional restraint, reconciling animal welfare, technical performance and working comfort. <\/p>\n\n

\"Figure
Figure 1: Photo of a Venus sow and litter in a free-range farrowing pen<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n

To gain a better understanding of the real conditions under which these systems are implemented, AXIOM conducted a survey of 25 French breeders who use its genetics. Through their feedback, this article takes stock of practices, feelings, benefits and adjustments needed to make this transition a success. <\/p>\n\n

A survey close to the farm<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n
<\/div>\n\n
\n
\n
\"Distribution
Figure 2: Distribution of female genetic types used in the sample (other = AXA; M6; Large White)<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

For this study, 25 farrow-to-finish breeders were surveyed (Figure 2). All of them use AXIOM genetics, both male and female. On average, their farms have 289 sows and 52 free-range farrowing pens (installed between 2017 and 2023). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Semi-directive interviews, lasting one to two hours, addressed three main themes: the layout of the room and hutches, maternity management and the breeders’ feelings. In addition, an evaluation of satisfaction, adapted from the work of Nicolas Villain (2018)4 , was carried out on different criteria using a score ranging from 0 to 3: 0 = very dissatisfied; 1 = dissatisfied; 2 = satisfied; 3 = very satisfied. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, to enrich the feedback from the field, five engineering and equipment experts were interviewed via semi-directive interviews, based on open-ended questions. Their views were intended to provide a comprehensive and complementary perspective on the subject. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n

<\/div>\n\n

Designing a maternity unit: key elements and feedback<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n

Zoom in on the boxes<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n

Table 1: Types of opening in maternity facilities: surface area and average satisfaction<\/em><\/p>\n\n

Opening type<\/strong><\/td>of sample<\/strong><\/td>Area<\/strong><\/td>% of surface area allocated to sows<\/strong><\/td>Satisfaction* rating<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Hinged side panel<\/strong>\"\"<\/strong><\/td>12%<\/strong><\/td>6,41 m\u00b2<\/strong><\/td>73 %<\/strong><\/td>3\/3<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Butterfly<\/strong>\"\"<\/strong><\/td>24%<\/strong><\/td>6,68 m\u00b2<\/strong><\/td>60 %<\/strong><\/td>2,8\/3<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
In V<\/strong>\"\"<\/strong><\/td>64 %<\/strong><\/td>6,83 m\u00b2<\/strong><\/td>63 %<\/strong><\/td>2,5\/3<\/strong><\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n

* (0 = very dissatisfied; 1 = dissatisfied; 2 = satisfied; 3 = very satisfied)<\/p>\n\n

The hinged side opening, although poorly represented, is the best rated thanks to its optimal use of space. Nonetheless, it limits safe access for the breeder. The butterfly system, on the other hand, provides a large secure area and facilitates entry into the pen, but at the expense of space for the sow. The V-shaped opening, on the other hand, is described as easy to use, but has less optimized space due to the triangular spaces, which are of little use. <\/p>\n\n

There are as yet no standards in France for the size of the pens. However, experts recommend a total surface area enabling the sow to turn around easily, i.e. 2.40 to 2.70 m long by 2.40 m wide. This is very close to the standards set in neighboring European Union countries. <\/p>\n\n

To date, no minimum surface area has been set for the piglet comfort zone. However, this space must allow piglets to move around in it until weaning. Whether in the form of a kennel or a nest, experts recommend a surface area of around 0.8 to 1 m\u00b2, depending on the prolificity level of the sows. <\/p>\n\n

Room layout: accessibility and working comfort<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n

The layout of the farrowing room plays a key role in the successful transition to free-range farrowing. In fact, breeders are unanimous: easy access to the sow and trough is essential, especially at farrowing time. <\/p>\n\n