Cargando…

High-performing farms exploit reproductive potential of high and low prolific sows better than low-performing farms

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to examine the impact of farm effects and sow potential on various aspects of sow performance. We examined the interaction between sow prolificacy groups categorized at parity 1 and farm productivity groups for reproductive performance across parities, and lifetime perf...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tani, Satomi, Piñeiro, Carlos, Koketsu, Yuzo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6047137/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30026960
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-018-0091-8
_version_ 1783339905236074496
author Tani, Satomi
Piñeiro, Carlos
Koketsu, Yuzo
author_facet Tani, Satomi
Piñeiro, Carlos
Koketsu, Yuzo
author_sort Tani, Satomi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Our objective was to examine the impact of farm effects and sow potential on various aspects of sow performance. We examined the interaction between sow prolificacy groups categorized at parity 1 and farm productivity groups for reproductive performance across parities, and lifetime performance. Data included 419,290 service records of 85,096 sows, on 98 Spanish farms, from first-service as gilts to removal, that were served between 2008 and 2013. Farms were categorized into three productivity groups based on the upper and lower 25th percentiles of the farm means of annualized lifetime piglets weaned per sow over the 6 years: high-performing (HP), intermediate-performing (IP), and low-performing (LP) farms. Also, parity 1 sows were categorized into three groups based on the upper and lower 10th percentiles of piglets born alive (PBA) as follows: 15 piglets or more (H-prolific), 8 to 14 piglets, and 7 piglets or fewer (L-prolific). The farm groups represent farm effects, whereas the sow groups represent sow potential. Linear mixed effects models were performed with factorial arrangements and repeated measures. RESULTS: Mean parity at removal (4.8 ± 0.01) was not associated with three farm productivity groups (P = 0.43). However, HP farms had 7.7% higher farrowing rates than LP farms (P <  0.05). As a result, H-prolific and L-prolific sows on HP farms had 29.7 and 30.7 fewer non-productive days during lifetime than the respective sows on LP farms (P <  0.05). Furthermore, the H-prolific and L-prolific sows on HP farms had 4.9 and 6.2 more annualized piglets weaned than respective H-prolific and L-prolific sows on LP farms (P <  0.05), which was achieved by giving birth to 0.8–1.0 and 1.4–1.7 more PBA per litter, respectively, than on HP farms during parities 2–6 (P <  0.05). During the first parity, HP farms had 18.8% H-prolific sows compared to 6.2% on LP farms. CONCLUSION: Farm effects substantially affected lifetime performance of sows. Higher lifetime productivity of sows on HP farms was achieved by higher farrowing rate, fewer non-productive days, more PBA and more piglets weaned per sow, regardless of prolific category of the sows.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6047137
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60471372018-07-19 High-performing farms exploit reproductive potential of high and low prolific sows better than low-performing farms Tani, Satomi Piñeiro, Carlos Koketsu, Yuzo Porcine Health Manag Research BACKGROUND: Our objective was to examine the impact of farm effects and sow potential on various aspects of sow performance. We examined the interaction between sow prolificacy groups categorized at parity 1 and farm productivity groups for reproductive performance across parities, and lifetime performance. Data included 419,290 service records of 85,096 sows, on 98 Spanish farms, from first-service as gilts to removal, that were served between 2008 and 2013. Farms were categorized into three productivity groups based on the upper and lower 25th percentiles of the farm means of annualized lifetime piglets weaned per sow over the 6 years: high-performing (HP), intermediate-performing (IP), and low-performing (LP) farms. Also, parity 1 sows were categorized into three groups based on the upper and lower 10th percentiles of piglets born alive (PBA) as follows: 15 piglets or more (H-prolific), 8 to 14 piglets, and 7 piglets or fewer (L-prolific). The farm groups represent farm effects, whereas the sow groups represent sow potential. Linear mixed effects models were performed with factorial arrangements and repeated measures. RESULTS: Mean parity at removal (4.8 ± 0.01) was not associated with three farm productivity groups (P = 0.43). However, HP farms had 7.7% higher farrowing rates than LP farms (P <  0.05). As a result, H-prolific and L-prolific sows on HP farms had 29.7 and 30.7 fewer non-productive days during lifetime than the respective sows on LP farms (P <  0.05). Furthermore, the H-prolific and L-prolific sows on HP farms had 4.9 and 6.2 more annualized piglets weaned than respective H-prolific and L-prolific sows on LP farms (P <  0.05), which was achieved by giving birth to 0.8–1.0 and 1.4–1.7 more PBA per litter, respectively, than on HP farms during parities 2–6 (P <  0.05). During the first parity, HP farms had 18.8% H-prolific sows compared to 6.2% on LP farms. CONCLUSION: Farm effects substantially affected lifetime performance of sows. Higher lifetime productivity of sows on HP farms was achieved by higher farrowing rate, fewer non-productive days, more PBA and more piglets weaned per sow, regardless of prolific category of the sows. BioMed Central 2018-07-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6047137/ /pubmed/30026960 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-018-0091-8 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Tani, Satomi
Piñeiro, Carlos
Koketsu, Yuzo
High-performing farms exploit reproductive potential of high and low prolific sows better than low-performing farms
title High-performing farms exploit reproductive potential of high and low prolific sows better than low-performing farms
title_full High-performing farms exploit reproductive potential of high and low prolific sows better than low-performing farms
title_fullStr High-performing farms exploit reproductive potential of high and low prolific sows better than low-performing farms
title_full_unstemmed High-performing farms exploit reproductive potential of high and low prolific sows better than low-performing farms
title_short High-performing farms exploit reproductive potential of high and low prolific sows better than low-performing farms
title_sort high-performing farms exploit reproductive potential of high and low prolific sows better than low-performing farms
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6047137/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30026960
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40813-018-0091-8
work_keys_str_mv AT tanisatomi highperformingfarmsexploitreproductivepotentialofhighandlowprolificsowsbetterthanlowperformingfarms
AT pineirocarlos highperformingfarmsexploitreproductivepotentialofhighandlowprolificsowsbetterthanlowperformingfarms
AT koketsuyuzo highperformingfarmsexploitreproductivepotentialofhighandlowprolificsowsbetterthanlowperformingfarms