Effects of different gestation housing types on reproductive performance of sows

This study evaluated the effects of different gestation housing types on reproductive performance of sows. A total of 60 sows (218 ± 24 kg body weight) with mixed parity were used. During gestation, 28 sows were housed in groups with electronic sow feeders (space allowance = 1.26 m²/sow) and 32 sows were housed in individual stalls (space allowance = 1.20 m²/sow). Sows from both housing types were moved to farrowing crates on day 109 of gestation and stayed until weaning (18 days post‐farrowing). Typical corn‐soybean meal diets were provided to sows during gestation and lactation. Measurements were reproductive performance of sows at farrowing as well as performance of sows and their litter during lactation. Similar total numbers of piglets born at farrowing were observed for sows gestated in both housing types. However, group‐housed gestation sows had more mummies (0.321 vs. 0.064; P < 0.05) and stillbirths (0.893 vs. 0.469; P = 0.073) at farrowing than individual‐housed gestation sows. Consequently, individual‐housing type had higher percentage of piglets born alive (95.5 vs. 90.4%; P < 0.05) than the group‐housing type. Therefore, improved reproductive performance of sows from individual gestating housing was confirmed in this study.     

REVIEWS: Compilation of the Scientific Literature Comparing Housing Systems for Gestating Sows and Gilts Using Measures of Physiology,Behavior, Performance,and Health

The objective of this review was two-fold. First, a series of meta-analyses (analyses of treatment effects across studies) were performed on available data from scientific literature to determine whether sow behavior, performance, or physiology differed for sows in group pens or individual stalls. Second, research publications in areas of performance and health, physiology, and behavior of pregnant gilts and sows in studies that directly compared gestation sow housing systems were summarized. Common systems were stalls, tethers, and various types of group housing systems. Results of meta-analyses showed that the average levels of productivity, oral-nasal-facial behaviors (ONF), and blood cortisol were statistically similar for sows in group pens and stalls. For the review, in some studies, circulating cortisol concentrations were greater among gestating females kept in tethers compared with other systems; however, overall cortisol was not altered by housing system. Immune parameters were largely not influenced by housing system. Housing system did not alter heart rate. Gestation housing system may influence sow behavior including stereotypic ONF, postural locomotory, feeding behaviors, or social behaviors. Overall, total ONF behaviors were comparable between gestation sow housing systems. However, tethered and stalled sows exhibited more stereotypic ONF compared with sows in group or outdoor systems. Compared with group housing, individually confining sows during gestation resulted in postural and movement restrictions. Stall size and design can impact postural adjustments and inter-stall aggression of individually housed sows. Inconsistent performance and health results were found among sow housing studies. Sows in stalls consistently had equal or greater reproductive performance compared with sows in other systems. Farrowing rate for sows in individual stalls was equal to or superior to sows in other systems. Farrowing rate was clearly superior among sows in stalls compared with group systems, where dynamic social groups were employed. However, tethered sows may have reduced litter size and increased piglet birth weight. Sows in group housing systems, particularly electronic sow feeder (ESF) systems, had injury scores greater than sows in either stalls or tethers. Gestation housing system (individual vs group) may impact sow welfare in the farrowing area (using stalls or pens). In conclusion, although individual studies found significant housing system effects, subjected to the overall evidence from adequately designed studies meta-analyses revealed that gestation stalls (non-tethered) or well-managed pens generally (but not in all cases) produced similar states of welfare for pregnant gilts or sows in terms of physiology, behavior, performance, and health.     

Comparison of injuries in sows housed in gestation stalls versus group pens with electronic sow feeders

OBJECTIVE: To compare the location and severity of injuries in pregnant sows housed in individual gestation stalls with that in pregnant sows housed in dynamic groups in pens with electronic sow feeders. DESIGN: Prospective study. ANIMALS: 100 pregnant sows of parity 1 to 3 and various body weights. PROCEDURE: Fifty sows each were randomly allotted to gestation stalls or group pens with electronic sow feeders. Injuries were scored on the basis of location, number, and depth of wounds. Injury scores for sows in both housing systems were compared during a period of 90 days. The influence of factors such as duration of stay in the housing system, parity, and body weight on sow injuries was also examined. RESULTS: Injury scores were higher in group pens with electronic sow feeders. As body weight increased, injury scores decreased for sows housed in group pens with electronic sow feeders and increased for sows housed in gestation stalls. There was a significant negative association between second parity and total injury scores. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Modifications in housing system design and management procedures are needed to reduce injuries in pregnant sows.     

Performance of finishing pigs in hoop structures and confinement during winter and summer

Performance of finishing pigs in hoop structures or confinement during winter and summer was evaluated in Iowa. Hoops are large, tent-like shelters with cornstalks or straw for bedding. During summer and winter seasons for 3 yr (1998 to 2001), six trials were conducted using three hoop barns (designed for 150 pigs per pen, one pen per hoop) or a mechanically ventilated confinement barn with slatted floors (designed for 22 pigs per pen, six pens in the barn). A total of 3,518 pigs started the trials. Summer trials were June through October, and winter trials were December through April. Target stocking density was 1.11 m2/pig in hoops and 0.74 m2/pig in confinement. Identical corn-based diets were fed ad libitum from 16 to 118 kg for 127 d. Pigs were scanned before harvest for backfat and loin muscle area. When seasons were merged (season x housing interaction, P > or = 0.05), hoop-fed pigs had more backfat (21.8 +/- 0.3 vs 20.8 +/- 0.2 mm; P < 0.001), smaller loin muscle area (41.3 +/- 0.3 vs 43.0 +/- 0.2 cm2; P < 0.001), less lean percentage (51.1 +/- 0.2 vs 52.1 +/- 0.1%; P < 0.001), and less yield (74.9 vs 75.8 +/- 0.1%; P < 0.001) than confinement-fed pigs. When season x housing type interactions were observed (P < 0.004), summer hoop-fed pigs had greater ADG (834 +/- 5 vs 802 +/- 3 g/d; P < 0.001), required fewer days to 113 kg (174.9 +/- 0.9 vs 178.5 +/- 0.6 d; P < 0.01), had similar ADFI (2.40 +/- 0.03 vs 2.35 +/- 0.02 kg/d, as-fed basis) and gain:feed (G:F; 348 +/- 4 vs 342 +/- 3 g/kg) compared with confinement-fed pigs. Lean gain/day and efficiency of lean gain did not differ between housing systems. During winter, hoop-fed pigs had similar ADG (794 +/- 5 vs 801 +/- 3 g/ d), required more days to 113 kg (176.7 +/- 0.9 vs 172.9 +/- 0.6 d; P < 0.01), had greater ADFI (2.54 +/- 0.03 vs 2.35 +/- 0.02; P < 0.001), less G:F (313 +/- 4 vs 341 +/- 3; P < 0.001), less lean gain/day (312 +/- 2 vs 322 +/- 1 g/d; P < 0.01), and less efficiency of lean gain (130 +/- 2 vs 144 +/- 1 g lean gain/kg feed; P < 0.01) than confinement-fed pigs. Percentage of mortalities and culls did not differ between housing systems. During summer, there was a trend for fewer light pigs at marketing (< 100 kg) from hoops (0.8 vs 1.7%; P = 0.10). During winter, there were more light pigs at marketing from hoops (3.9 vs 1.3%; P = 0.01) than from confinement. Bedding use in hoops was 92 and 122 kg/pig for summer and winter, respectively. Performance of finishing pigs in bedded hoop structures depends in part on thermal environment.     

Survey among Belgian pig producers about the introduction of group housing systems for gestating sows

There is a global move from individual to group housing of gestating sows. In the European Union, individual gestating stalls will be banned by 2013. Just like in other industrialized regions, these stalls have been the standard housing system for intensively kept sows from the 1960s onward in the Flemish region of Belgium. Because the socioeconomic consequences for the pig industry may be far-reaching and because farmer attitude may influence the realization of the hoped-for improvement in animal welfare in practice, we conducted a survey from 2003 until 2009 among representative samples of Flemish pig producers every 2 yr. The share of farms with group housing increased from 10.5% in 2003 to 29.8% in 2007, but then dropped to 24.6% in 2009. It appears that after 2005 users of old group housing systems in particular stopped farming. Because sow herd size increased more on farms with vs. without group housing and because the proportion of the herd that was group-housed also tended to increase between 2003 to 2009, the change to group housing took place faster when expressed at the level of the sow (from 9.1% in 2003 to 34.1% in 2009) instead of farm. The percentage of farmers planning to convert to group housing within 2 yr was 4.1% in 2003, and 6 to 7% thereafter. These were typically young farmers (P = 0.006) with a large sow herd (P < 0.001) and with a likely successor (P = 0.03). Free access stalls were the most common group housing system (31% of farms, 37% of sows). Their popularity is expected to increase further at the expense of electronic feeding stations, ad libitum feeding, and stalls/troughs with manual feed delivery. User satisfaction was generally high but depended on whether or not all gestating sows were kept in group (P < 0.001), the provisioning of environmental enrichment (P = 0.057), and the age (P = 0.012) and type (P = 0.016) of system. The main criteria for choosing a certain group housing system were the investment costs and sow health and welfare. The importance of economic reasons (P = 0.007) and type of labor (P = 0.043) decreased with the age of the system. In 2003 and 2005 the main reason for not having converted to group housing was that farmers would stop keeping sows by 2013. In 2007 and 2009 the reasons mainly concerned uncertainty about the future and maximally delaying the conversion. Belgium is one of the European Union countries where the pig industry is expected to undergo drastic changes during the few years remaining before the ban on individual housing.     

The performance of gilts in a new group housing system: endocrinological and immunological functions.

The effect of a new group housing system on performance (132 gilts and litters) and endocrinological (35 gilts) and immunological functions (28 gilts) was studied. Animals were randomly assigned to a conventional system (control), involving greater than 2 mo in individual stalls, or to the Hurnik-Morris (H-M) housing system, involving continuous housing in small groups, for breeding-gestating swine. The gilts were reared throughout gestation in their respective housing systems and moved 3 to 5 d prefarrowing to a common farrowing facility. Various production data were collected, including sow weight and backfat measurements, number of pigs born, number born alive, number weaned, litter birth weight, and litter weaning weight. An adrenal function test using dexamethasone pretreatment and ACTH1-24 challenge was imposed on gilts 5 d prebreeding and once between d 81 to 87 of gestation. Plasma progesterone was measured at the same time. Immune function was measured by serum antibody response to hen egg white lysozyme (HEWL) and delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) to tuberculin. Gilts reared in the H-M housing system exhibited a number of pigs weaned per litter and litter weaning weights comparable to the number and weights in the control system (7.3 +/- .33 vs 6.9 +/- .38, P = .421 and 56.9 +/- 2.42 kg vs 51.3 +/- 2.76 kg, P = .132, respectively). Prefarrowing and weaning backfat measurements were significantly reduced in group-housed gilts (15.8 +/- .45 mm vs 17.8 +/- .55 mm, P = .005 and 14.6 +/- .4 mm vs 16.2 +/- .42 mm, P = .008, respectively).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

The addition of ground wheat straw as a fiber source in the gestation diet of sows and the effect on sow and litter performance for three successive parities

A regional experiment was conducted at 8 experiment stations, with a total of 320 sows initially, to evaluate the efficacy of adding 13.35% ground wheat straw to a corn-soybean meal gestation diet for 3 successive gestation-lactation (reproductive) cycles compared with sows fed a control diet without straw. A total of 708 litters were farrowed over 3 reproductive cycles. The basal gestation diet intake averaged 1.95 kg daily for both treatments, plus 0.30 kg of straw daily for sows fed the diet containing ground wheat straw (total intake of 2.25 kg/d). During lactation, all sows on both gestation treatments were fed ad libitum the standard lactation diet used at each station. Response criteria were sow farrowing and rebreeding percentages, culling factors and culling rate, weaning-to-estrus interval, sow BW and backfat measurements at several time points, and litter size and total litter weight at birth and weaning. Averaged over 3 reproductive cycles, sows fed the diet containing wheat straw farrowed and weaned 0.51 more pigs per litter (P 相似文献   

Effects of tryptophan supplementation on aggression among group-housed gestating sows

The objective of this study was to determine the effects of dietary Trp supplementation on mixing-induced aggression and the associated stress, and on reproductive performance in gestating sows. After weaning, sows were mixed in pens with electronic sow feeders on concrete-slatted floors. Each pen housed 21 ± 2.8 sows, with approximately 2.7 ± 0.43 m(2)/sow of floor space allowance. Multiparous sows (n = 168) from 8 breeding groups were used, with 4 groups assigned to a control diet and 4 groups assigned to a high-Trp diet. Control sows received corn- and soybean meal-based diets throughout gestation (0.15% Trp) and lactation (0.21% Trp). Three days before and after mixing, sows assigned to the high-Trp treatment received approximately 2.3 times the dietary Trp (0.35% in the gestation diet and 0.48% in the lactation diet) fed to control sows. Six focal sows (2 sows from each of parity 1, 2, and 3 or greater) in each pen were designated and videotaped for 72 h after mixing to determine the type and number of aggressive interactions among sows. Before and 48 h after mixing, saliva samples were collected from focal sows, and scratches were assessed on all sows. Data were analyzed using the FREQ and GLIMMIX procedures (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC). Aggression among sows was intense during the initial 6 h and decreased between 6 and 72 h after mixing. The initial aggression caused scratches and increased cortisol concentrations (P < 0.05). Mature sows tended to fight for longer periods (112 vs. 52 s/h per sow, SE = 23.8; P < 0.10) but had fewer scratches caused by aggression (injury score = 4.3 vs. 6.5, SE = 1.13; P < 0.01) than parity-1 sows. Supplementation of dietary Trp reduced the total duration of head-to-head knocking (P < 0.05) but did not affect other aggressive behaviors. There was no difference between dietary treatments in injury scores or saliva cortisol concentrations. Sows in the high-Trp treatment had more total piglets born (12.5 vs. 10.5 pigs/litter, SE = 0.55; P < 0.05) and more stillborn piglets (1.5 vs. 0.8 pigs/litter, SE = 0.20; P < 0.05), but had no significant change (P = 0.12) in piglets born alive (10.8 vs. 9.7 pigs/litter, SE = 0.42) compared with control sows. The results indicate that the initial aggression after mixing caused more injuries in young sows than in mature sows. Supplementation of dietary Trp at 2.3 times the control amount for a short period did not effectively reduce aggression and the associated stress in sows at mixing.     

Evaluation of well-being, productivity, and longevity of pregnant sows housed in groups in pens with an electronic sow feeder or separately in gestation stalls

OBJECTIVE: To compare well-being, performance, and longevity of gestating sows housed in stalls or in pens with an electronic sow feeder (ESF). ANIMALS: 382 pregnant sows of parities 1 through 6. PROCEDURE: Sows were housed in separate stalls (n = 176) or group pens (206) with an ESF. Well-being of sows was assessed at various time points in terms of injuries, salivary cortisol concentration, and behavior in a novel arena or to a novel object. Farrowing performance and longevity of sows were also assessed. RESULTS: Total injury scores (TIS) of sows in pens were significantly higher at initial introduction and mixing. In stall-housed sows, TIS was significantly higher during late gestation. The TIS and cortisol concentration were significantly lower in stall-housed sows, compared with values for sows in pens. As parity increased, the likelihood of higher median TIS decreased significantly in pen-housed sows and increased significantly in stall-housed sows. The TIS of sows in pens was negatively correlated with body weight and backfat thickness, whereas these correlations were positive in stall-housed sows. Farrowing performance and results for novel arena or objects did not differ. Proportion of sows removed was significantly higher for pens than for stalls; lameness was the major reason for removal for both systems. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Stalls impose space restrictions for larger sows, resulting in injuries during late gestation. Interventions are needed to minimize aggression during initial introduction and mixing and at the ESF in pens to reduce severe injuries or lameness of gestating sows.     

Effects of a novel carbohydrate and protein source on sow performance during lactation

Ninety-one primiparous and multiparous sows and their pigs were used to evaluate the effects of a novel carbohydrate- and protein-based feed ingredient (Nutri-Pal, NP) on sow and litter performance during lactation. Nutri-Pal is a feed supplement for sows that consists of a blend of milk chocolate, brewer's yeast, whey products, and glucooligosaccharides. The dietary treatments consisted of a corn-soybean meal control and a corn-soybean meal plus 5% NP fed from d 110 of gestation to weaning. The diets were formulated to be equal in total Lys and ME. Sows were allotted to treatment based on parity, body weight, and the date of d 110 of gestation. There were 46 and 45 sows per treatment over four farrowing groups. Litters were standardized to 10 pigs and weighed within 1 d of farrowing, and all sows weaned at least 8 pigs at an average age of 21 d. Sows were weighed on d 110 of gestation, d 1 postfarrowing, and at weaning. Sows were fed three times daily during lactation. Sows were checked twice daily after weaning for signs of estrus. The weaning weight of sows fed NP was increased (P < 0.10) compared with those fed the control diet. Sows fed the control diet tended (P = 0.11) to lose more weight per day from d 110 of gestation to weaning than the sows fed NP. Otherwise, sow response variables (sow weight on d 110 of gestation and d 1 postfarrowing, d 110 of gestation to d 1 postfarrowing and lactation weight change per day, d 110 of gestation to d 1 postfarrowing, lactation, and total feed intake, days to estrus, pigs born alive or dead, and litter and average pig birth weight) were not affected (P > 0.10) by diet. There were no effects (P > 0.10) of diet on litter performance response variables (pigs weaned, litter and average pig weaning weight and gain, and survival percent). The NP feed ingredient had minor effects on sow productivity, but it did not affect litter productivity indices.     

Comparison of steer behavior when housed in a deep-bedded hoop barn versus an open feedlot with shelter

The use of hoop barns as an alternative housing system for beef cattle has not been widely researched. The objectives of this study were to determine the main effects of behavior of steers 1) over winter and summer, 2) when housed in either a hoop barn or a conventional feedlot, and 3) interactions between season and housing system. A total of 960 crossbred Bos taurus steers were used [August 2006 to April 2008 (2 winter and 2 summer trials)]. Steers were housed in either 1 deep-bedded hoop barn (n = 12 pens; 4.65 m(2)/steer) or 1 open feedlot with shelter (n = 12 pens; 14.7 m(2)/steer). Steers were ear tagged, implanted, and weighed (414 ± 36 kg) on arrival and allotted to treatments that were balanced for source, BW, and hide color. Behavioral data (3 postures and 2 behaviors) were collected using a 10-min live scan. The experimental unit for behavior was a pen of steers. Behavioral data were arcsine transformed to achieve a normal distribution. There were no (P > 0.05) differences for time spent at bunk or waterer for steers between housing treatments. Steers housed in an open feedlot with shelter spent less time lying and more time standing and walking (P < 0.05) compared with steers housed in a hoop barn. There were no (P = 0.32) differences between seasons for standing. Steers spent more time at the bunk (P < 0.0001) and waterer (P < 0.0001) in the summer compared with the winter. In the winter, steers engaged in more lying (P = 0.0002) and walking (P < 0.0001). Overall, steers stood less (P = 0.006) and spent more time lying (P = 0.024) when housed in a hoop barn than in the open feedlot with shelter regardless of season. Steers housed in the open feedlot with shelter walked more (P < 0.0001) than steers housed in the hoop barn and walked more (P < 0.0001) in winter than in summer months (6 vs. 3%). There were no (P > 0.05) differences in time spent at bunk and waterer between housing systems within season, but time spent at the waterer and bunk decreased (P < 0.05) for both housing systems during the winter. In conclusion, housing 40 steers per pen in a cornstalk-bedded hoop barn at 4.65 m(2)/steer does not result in adverse behavioral alterations and can be considered as a housing alternative for finishing steers in the Midwestern United States when compared with steers fed in an open feedlot with shelter provided.     

Factors influencing farmers' responses to welfare legislation: A case study of gestation sow housing in Flanders (Belgium)

In the light of the EU ban on individual confinement of gestating sows which will have to be fully implemented by 2013, a survey was conducted among a representative sample of Flemish pig producers. The questionnaire was sent by post to 250 farmers in 2003 and 352 farmers in 2005 of which 219 and 296, respectively, provided valid responses via telephone. The percentage of respondents housing (some of) their sows in group was 10.5% in 2003 and 16.2% in 2005. These farmers were more likely to have a successor than farmers housing their sows individually. The most common group housing systems were free access stalls (24%) followed by electronic feeding stations (21%), ad libitum feeding (20%), feeding stalls/troughs (18%), and drop/trickle feeding systems (13%). Interval (4%) and electronic feed dispensers (0%) were very rare in Flanders. The main criteria for having chosen a particular group housing system related to sow health and welfare, investment costs and amount of labour. The relative importance of economic reasons has increased over time. Users were generally rather satisfied with their group housing system. Farmers using group housing for all their sows were more satisfied than farmers using both group and individual housing. Users of ad libitum feeding systems (and feeding stalls/troughs) were more satisfied than users of electronic feeding stations. A minority of respondents was planning to change to group housing within two years time (4.1% in 2003 and 7.4% in 2005). These tended to be young farmers with a large sow herd and 58% reported to opt for free access stalls. The main reason why the remaining respondents were not planning to change to group housing yet is that they will stop farming activities before 2013. This reason was particularly important for older small-scale farmers without a successor. In contrast, the lack of financial resources and security was particularly important for young farmers of a large sow herd with a likely successor. An increasing group of farmers (often without a successor) reported to delay changing to group housing because they consider individual housing more profitable. These results show that, in Flanders, the conversion to group housing is taking place slowly, that the reasons for not converting yet vary according to the farmers' age, the likelihood of a successor and herd size, and that there are differences between operational group housing systems concerning herd size, age of the system, sow management and user satisfaction.     

Space allowance for dry, pregnant sows in pens: body condition, skin lesions, and performance

Different floor space allowances for dry, pregnant sows in pens were evaluated to determine the impacts of space on sow performance, productivity, and body lesions during 2 consecutive farrowings. Treatment groups of 5 sows/pen were assigned to 1.4, 2.3, or 3.3 m(2) of floor space/sow or of 5 sows in individual stalls (1.34 m(2)). The experiment consisted of 6 replications (blocks 1 to 6), and within each block measurements were recorded for 2 consecutive pregnancies and farrowings. A total of 152 sows were measured at 1 farrowing, and 65 of those sows were measured at the successive farrowing (n = 217 records). Performance traits were BCS, BW, backfat (BF), days until rebred, and proportion culled. Litter traits were number of piglets born alive, male:female ratio, and proportions of stillborn, mummified, or dead piglets after birth. Litter performance measures were mean piglet BW and gain and litter BW. Lesion scores were assessed for several body regions. There were treatment and parity effects and interactions for several traits. An interaction of space treatment and parity occurred for sow mean BW, d-110 BW, BF, litter size, and litter and piglet BW and gain, with most effects in parity 2, 3, and 4 sows. Space affected sow mean (P < 0.001) and d-110 BW (P < 0.05) and mean BF and adjusted BF (P < 0.001); sows in pens at 相似文献   

Effect of feather meal as a source of valine for lactating sows

An experiment was conducted to evaluate feather meal as a source of Val in lactating sow diets. Sows (five farrowing groups; mean parity = 2.34) were allotted to one of two dietary treatments on the basis of ancestry, parity, and weight and date of d 110 of gestation. The treatment diets included 1) corn-soybean meal lactation diet (n = 40) or 2) corn-soybean meal lactation diet with 2.5% feather meal (n = 39). The diets were formulated on an equal Lys basis. All litters were adjusted to 10 pigs within 24 h after farrowing, and all sows weaned at least nine pigs. Sows were bled at 110 d of gestation and at weaning, and serum urea N was determined. Backfat thickness was determined ultrasonically at 110 d of gestation and at weaning. Serum urea N and backfat thickness at d 110 of gestation were used as covariates for serum urea N and backfat thickness at weaning, respectively. The litter response criteria (weaning weight, litter weight gain, and percentage survival) were not affected (P > .10) by feather meal. The sow response criteria (weaning weight, weight loss per day, weaning backfat thickness, change in backfat thickness, ADFI, and days to estrus) were not affected (P > .10) by feather meal. Sows fed feather meal had increased (P < .01) serum urea N and tended (P = .15) to have decreased sow weaning weight. Following the initial analysis of the data, the data set was split into two groups: 1) sows with litters gaining less than 2.17 kg/d (n = 19 and 20 for control and feather meal diets, respectively) and 2) sows with litters gaining more than 2.17 kg/d (n = 21 and 19 for control and feather meal diets, respectively). These two groups were analyzed separately. In sows with litters gaining less than 2.17 kg/d, the litter and sow criteria were not affected (P > .10) by treatment. In sows with litters gaining more than 2.17 kg/d, sow weaning weight was decreased (P < .04) and sow weight loss (P < .02) and serum urea N (P < .01) were increased in sows fed feather meal. Feather meal (as a source of Val) did not improve litter weight gain, but it increased serum urea N.     

Social rank of pregnant sows affects their body weight gain and behavior and performance of the offspring

Previous studies on group housing of pregnant sows have mainly focused on reproduction, but we hypothesized that the social rank of pregnant sows housed in groups could also affect birth weight, growth, and behavior of their offspring. Therefore, in the present study, pregnant gilts and sows were housed in 15 different groups (n = 7 to 14 animals per group) from 4 d after AI until 1 wk before the expected farrowing date. All groups were fed by an electronically controlled sow feeding system that registered, on a 24-h basis, the time of first visit, number of feeding and non-feeding visits, and number of times succeeding another sow within 2 s. Only in the first 6 groups (n = 57 animals), agonistic interactions were observed continuously. The percentage of agonistic interactions won was highly correlated (r(s) = 0.90, P < 0.001) with the percentage of displacement success (DS) at the feeding station, which was calculated as: [the number of times succeeding another sow within 2 s/(the number of times succeeded by another sow within 2 s + the number of times succeeding another sow within 2 s)] x 100. This allowed us to classify all sows (n = 166) according to their DS: high-social ranking (HSR) sows had a DS >50% (n = 62) and low-social ranking (LSR) sows a DS <50% (n = 104). Body weights before AI did not differ between HSR and LSR sows, but HSR sows gained more BW during gestation, and lost more BW and back-fat during lactation (P < 0.001). Maternal salivary cortisol concentrations at 2, 7, and 13 wk after AI did not differ between HSR and LSR sows, nor did gestation length, litter size, or percentage of live born piglets. During a novel object (NO) test at 3 wk of age, HSR offspring moved and vocalized more than LSR offspring (P < 0.05). In addition, the latency time to touch the NO was shorter in HSR offspring (P < 0.05), and HSR males spent more time near the NO than LSR males (P < 0.01). At weaning, HSR offspring weighed more than LSR offspring (P < 0.05), and at slaughter HSR offspring had more lean meat than LSR offspring (P < 0.05). Results indicate that the social rank of the sow during gestation affects her own BW gain and loss as well as the growth and behavior of her offspring. Pig breeders that apply group housing for pregnant sows should pay attention to reducing competition around the feeding area, which may reduce aggression among the sows and minimize differences between HSR and LSR sows.     

Behavior and performance of lactating sows and piglets reared indoors or outdoors.

Two hundred eighty-seven lactating Newsham sows and their litters were used to determine the effects of intensive indoor (n = 147) and intensive outdoor (n = 140) production systems on sow and litter productivity and behavior. All sows were of contemporary age and fed a completely balanced sorghum-based diet. Behavior data were collected by live observation on 40 sows and litters (20 indoor and 20 outdoor) using a 5-min scan sample over a 4-h period in the afternoon (1400 to 1800). The durations of lying (90.0 vs 72.1 +/- 2.76% of time observed) and drinking (4.42 vs 1.41 +/- 0.6% of time observed) were higher (P < 0.01) among indoor than among outdoor lactating sows. Nursing interval and feeding and sitting behaviors were not different (P > 0.05) between production systems. Piglets spent more (P < 0.05) time walking (10.1 vs 5.2 +/- 1.72% of time observed) and engaged in play activity (5.0 vs 1.7 +/- 1.26% of time observed) when housed outdoors than indoors. Outdoor piglets had more (P < 0.05) nursing behaviors directed toward the sow (27.5 vs 20.3 +/- 2.02% of time observed) but time spent in contact with the sow did not differ between environments (38.8 vs 39.2 +/- 2.78% of time observed). Treatments did not influence (P > 0.05) any of the sow or piglet production parameters. In conclusion, outdoor-kept Newsham sows and their piglets showed a richer behavioral repertoire, but the diverse environments did not influence production parameters.     

Effects of salinomycin on sow weight change during lactation and on sow reproductive performance

Forty-five gravid cross-bred sows (mean parity 3.3 +/- .3) were randomly allotted to two dietary treatments: corn-soybean mean (CS) or CS plus 60 mg salinomycin per kilogram of diet (CSS). Sows were fed their respective diets through two successive parities with dietary treatment initiated at 100 d postcoitum and continued until weaning of the second successive litter. Therefore, sows fed CSS received salinomycin for 14 d before the first parturition and for approximately 153 d before the second parturition. Daily feed intake was restricted to 2 kg.hd-1.d-1 during gestation and to 3 kg.hd-1.d-1 from weaning to breeding. All sows. had ad libitum access to feed during lactation. Sows were weighed 7 d prior to parturition, at weaning and at breeding. Weaning-to-estrus interval and farrowing interval were recorded for all sows. Litters were weighed at birth and weaning. There were no differences (P greater than .05) between dietary treatments in sow weights before parturition, at weaning or at breeding for either first or second farrowing. The CSS-fed sows lost more weight from weaning to breeding after the first (P less than .03) and second (P less than .05) lactation periods than CS-fed sows. The CSS-fed sows tended to gain more (P = .06) weight during lactation than CS-fed sows. There were no differences (P greater than .05) between treatments in lactation feed intake, weaning-to-estrus interval, farrowing interval, litter size born or weaned, litter weights at birth or at weaning, or in sow culling rate.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Farrowing hut design and sow genotype (Camborough-15 vs 25% Meishan) effects on outdoor sow and litter productivity

Performance measures were evaluated for 125 outdoor sows and litters of two crossbred genotypes (Camborough-15 and 25% Meishan) and in two farrowing hut designs (American-style and English-style hut). Contemporary breeding groups of second-parity sows were evaluated in an intensive, outdoor research unit. Sow genotype and hut designs were arranged factorially. Seven complete blocks were evaluated over a 21-wk period. No interactions between environment and genotype were identified for sow and litter productivity. Litters farrowing in the English-style huts weaned 1.5 more (P < .05) piglets per sow (because of a lower preweaning mortality, P = .05) than did litters in the American-style huts. The 25% Meishan weaned 1.7 more (P < .01) pigs per sow than Camborough-15, because of a greater number of piglets born alive. The effects of hut style and genotype were additive and 25% Meishan sows in English-style huts weaned an average (+/- SEM) of 11.1 +/- .83 piglets per sow. The English-style arc hut design may improve outdoor pig production and increase competitiveness of the intensive, outdoor system. The 25% Meishan genotype has potential for increased pigs weaned per litter that must be considered in light of other features of this genotype such as body composition.     

Effect of nipple drinker water flow rate and season on performance of lactating swine.

A cooperative study involving six experiment stations and 236 crossbred litters was conducted to determine the effect of nominal nipple drinker water flows of 700 mL/min and 70 mL/min (actual = 701 and 76 mL/min, respectively) during winter (November through February; 124 litters) and summer (June through August; 112 litters) seasons on performance of lactating sows and their litters. Within a season, sows were paired according to expected farrowing date and assigned at random to crates. Water flow rate treatments were assigned at random to sows within pairs. Sows were housed in farrowing crates from d 109 of gestation until either d 21 (two stations) or d 28 of lactation (four stations). Within 24 h after farrowing, litters were adjusted to contain 8 to 12 piglets. Sow feed intake (SFI) and litter weight (LW) were recorded weekly. Sow weights were recorded at d 109 of gestation, d 0, and d 21 of lactation. Sows lactating beyond 21 d were also weighed on d 28. Analysis of covariance was applied to sow weight change, average daily SFI, and LW data where litter size after crossfostering was the covariate. Average ambient temperature 30 cm above the floor at 0830 and 1600 was 24.6 +/- 0.15 degrees C and 29.4 +/- 0.14 degrees C, respectively, during summer and 20.7 +/-0.13 degrees C and 21.8 +/- 0.11 degrees C during winter trials. Restricted drinker water flow rate decreased SFI (P < 0.01; 4.59 vs. 3.94 kg/d, respectively, for 700 and 70 mL/min) and increased BW loss (P < 0.01; 0.56 vs 0.89 kg/d, respectively for 700 and 70 mL/min) but did not affect litter size (P > 0.87) or LW (P > 0.89) during the first 21 d of lactation. During d 22 to 28, the 70 mL/min flow decreased SFI (P < 0.01; 5.02 vs. 4.47 kg/d respectively, for 700 and 70 mL/min). Over the 21-d lactation period, the 70 mL/min treatment depressed (P < 0.01) SFI more during the winter (5.12 vs. 4.24 kg/d for 700 and 70 mL/ min, respectively) than during the summer (4.05 vs 3.65 kg/d for 700 and 70 mL/min, respectively). Season affected SFI (P < 0.01; 4.68 vs. 3.85 kg/d, respectively, for winter and summer), sow weight loss (P < 0.001; 0.46 vs 0.83 kg/d, respectively, for winter and summer), and LW at 21 d (P < 0.05; 52.8 vs. 49.6 kg, respectively, for winter and summer) but not (P > 0.96) the number of pigs per litter. Results of this study suggest that ample access to drinking water and controlling ambient temperature during summer months are essential for sow and litter performance.