Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T09:34:52.964Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of diurnally fluctuating high ambient temperatures on performance and feeding behaviour of multiparous lactating sows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

N. Quiniou*
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 35690 Saint-Gilles, France
D. Renaudeau
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 35690 Saint-Gilles, France
S. Dubois
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 35690 Saint-Gilles, France
*
On leave from Institut Technique du Porc, BP 3, 35651 Le Rheu, France.
Get access

Abstract

Forty-two multiparous Large White sows were used to investigate the effect of diurnally fluctuating temperature (T) on lactation performance and feeding behaviour. The animals were allocated to one of the four thermic treatments: constant T at 25°C (25C) and 29°C (29C) or equal-mean diurnal cyclic T varying from 21 to 29°C (25V) and from 25 to 33°C (29V). Photoperiod was fixed to 14 h of light. The sows were given food ad libitum between the 7th and the 19th day post partům. Lactation performance was measured for all sows whereas the feeding behaviour was recorded only on 28 sows. The ad libitum food intake was comparable at 25C and 25V (6•31 kg/day) as were milk production and body reserves mobilization. In contrast, food intake at 29V was higher than at 29C (4•53 v. 3•48 kg/day) with no difference in milk production between the two treatments. The increased daily food intake at 29V resulted from higher intakes over the coolest periods of the day and especially during the dark period. Neither meal size nor daily number of meals were significantly affected by T. Feeding behaviour was mainly diurnal but with differences between treatments: 0•90 of total food intake at 29C v. 0•78 at the other three T It appears that the effects of diurnally fluctuating T on lactation performance of sows depend on the mean level of T

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Black, J. L., Mullan, B. P., Lorschy, M. L. and Giles, L. R. 1993. Lactation in the sow during heat stress. Livestock Production Science 35: 153170.Google Scholar
Feddes, J. J. R. and DeShazer, J. A. 1988. Energetic responses of growing pigs to high cyclic and constant temperatures. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 31: 12031210.Google Scholar
Prunier, A., Messias de Bragança, M. and Le Dividich, J. 1997. Influence of high ambient temperature on performance of reproductive sows. Livestock Production Science 52: 123133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quiniou, N. and Noblet, J. 1999. Influence of high ambient temperatures on performance of multiparous lactating sows. Journal of Animal Science 77: 21242134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quiniou, N., Noblet, J. and Dubois, S. 2000a. Feeding behaviour of group-housed growing pigs is affected by ambient temperature and body weight. Livestock Production Science 63: 245253.Google Scholar
Quiniou, N., Renaudeau, D., Dubois, S. and Noblet, J. 2000b. Influence of high ambient temperatures on food intake and feeding behaviour of multiparous lactating sows. Animal Science 70: 471479.Google Scholar
Schoenherr, W. D., Stahy, T. S. and Cromwell, G. L. 1989. The effects of dietary fat or fibre addition on yield and composition of milk from sows housed in warm or hot environment. Journal of Animal Science 67: 482495.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1990. SAS/STAT® user’s guide: statistics, release 6•07. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Xin, H. and DeShazer, J. A. 1991. Swine responses to constant and modified diurnal cyclic temperatures. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers 34: 25332540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar