Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T06:21:20.143Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of virginiamycin on sow and litter performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

S. C. Kyriakis ,
V. Vassilopoulos ,
I. Demade ,
W. Kissels ,
Z. Polizopoulou  and
C. K. Milner
S. C. Kyriakis
Affiliation:
Clinic of Medicine, University of Thessaloniki 54006, Greece
V. Vassilopoulos
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Thessaloniki 54006, Greece
I. Demade
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary-Animal Science Research, Smithkline Beecham, 287 Avenue Louise, 1050 Brussels, Belgium
W. Kissels
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary-Animal Science Research, Smithkline Beecham, 287 Avenue Louise, 1050 Brussels, Belgium
Z. Polizopoulou
Affiliation:
Clinic of Medicine, University of Thessaloniki 54006, Greece
C. K. Milner
Affiliation:
Smithkline Beecham Animal Health, Walton Oaks, Dorking Road, Tadworth, Surrey KT20 7NT
Get access

Abstract

The present paper discusses the results of a trial study, which was carried out to demonstrate the potential beneficial effects of virginiamycin (VM) on sow and litter performance. VM was added to the sow food at the levels of 0, 20 and 40 mg/kg, for a period of two breeding cycles, covering pregnancy and lactation. VM supplementation of the sow food improved sow performance by: (i) decreasing sow weight loss from farrowing to weaning (first period: 8·78 v. 3·54 v. 2·88 kg, P < 0·05; second period: 8·98 v. 3·93 v. 2·32 kg, P < 0·05), (ii) decreasing the duration of the reproductive cycle (first period: 154·5 v. 152·2 v. 151·2 days, P < 0·05; second period: 153·8 v. 151·5 v. 250·6 days, P < 0·05) and (in) increasing milk fat content (second period: 63·7 v. 81·3 v. 83·3 g/kg, P<0·05). Litter performance was also improved in terms of: (i) litter size at weaning (first period: 8·16 v. 8·88 v. 9·18, P < 0·05; second period: 8·98 v. 9·30 v. 9·76, P < 0·05), (ii) body weight at weaning (first period: 5·78 v. 6·29 v. 6·56 kg, P < 0·05; second period: 5·88 v. 6·38 v. 6·60 kg, P < 0·05), (Hi) average daily gain (first period: 172 v. 189 v. 197 g, P < 0·05; second period: 178 v. 292 v. 198 g, P < 0·05) and (iv) food conversion ratio (first period: 0·356 v. 0·331 v. 0·324, P < 0·05; second period: 0·363 v. 0·334 v. 0·325, P < 0·05). These beneficial effects of VM were more pronounced at the higher of the two inclusion levels.

Keywords

performancepigletssowsvirginiamycin
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 55 , Issue 3 , December 1992 , pp. 431 - 436
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1992

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

Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1990. Official methods of analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 15th ed. Arlington, Virginia.Google Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H., MacPherson, R. M. and McDonald, I. 1968. The influence of intake of dietary energy in pregnancy and lactation upon sow productivity. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 71: 215–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H., Bannerman, M., Bathurst, E. V. J., Bracewell, A. G., Cunningham, J. M. M., Dodsworth, T. L., Dodds, P. A., Forbes, T. J. and Laird, R. 1969. The effect of level of feed intake in pregnancy and in lactation upon the productivity of sows. Animal Production 11: 225–241.Google Scholar
English, P., Smith, W., McLean, A. 1984. The sow: improving her efficiency, pp. 83–97. Farming Press Ltd, Ipswich.Google Scholar
Frohlich, A., Kvarnfors, E., Mansson, I. and Simonsson, A. 1974. Antibiotic additives in sows' diets. Effects on production and intestinal flora. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 24: 273–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haydon, K. D. and Hale, O. M. 1988. Effect of lasalocid on reproductive performance and subsequent lactation in the sow. Journal of Animal Science 66: 1877–1884.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hedde, R. D. 1981. Intestinal fermentation in the pig and how it is influenced by age and virginiamycin. Growth promotion mode-of-action symposium proceedings, Kansas City, Missouri, Smith Kline Animal Health Products.Google Scholar
Henderickx, H. K., Vervaecke, I. J., Decuypere, J. A. and Dierick, N. A. 1981. Mode of action of growth promotion drugs. Growth promotion mode-of-action symposium proceedings, Kansas City, Missouri, Smith Kline Animal Health Products.Google Scholar
Hsu, F. S., Chen, H. W., Wung, S. C., Luchsinger, J. H. and Fang, W. S. 1980. Effects of lincomycin on reproductive performance of sows. Journal of the Chinese Society of Veterinary Science 6: 71–76.Google Scholar
Ilori, J. O. 1984. The effect of different proportions of protein and antibiotic in the diet on reproductive performance of indigenous pigs in Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 102: 227–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kadamanova, L. D. 1984. [Increased litter size and litter weight from sows given bacitracin]. Sbornik Nauchnykn Trudov Byelorusskoi Sel'skokhozyaistvennoi Akademii no. 118, pp. 28–32.Google Scholar
King, R. H. and Williams, I. H. 1984. The effect of nutrition on the reproductive performance of first-litter sows. 1. Feeding level durin g lactation, and between weaning and mating. Animal Production 38: 241–247.Google Scholar
Kyriakis, S. C., Polizopoulou, Z., Tsaltas, C., Mouzouras, S., Demade, I. and Vassilopoulos, V. 1988. The effect of virginiamycin on the performance of sows and their litters. Preliminary report. Proceedings of the tenth International Pig Veterinary Society congress, Brazil, p. 378 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Mayrose, V. B., Speer, V. C., McCall, J. T. and Hays, V. W. 1962. Effect of an antibiotic and protein source on swine reproduction. Journal of Animal Science 21: 1005 (abstr.).Google Scholar
MacPherson, R. M., Elsley, F. W. H. and Smart, R. I. 1969. The influence of dietary protein intake during lactation on the reproductive performance of sows. Animal Production 11: 443–451.Google Scholar
Nelssen, J. L., Lewis, A. J., Peo, E. R. and Crenshaw, J. D. 1985. Effect of dietary energy intake during lactation on performance of primiparous sows and their litters. Journal of Animal Science 61: 1164–1171.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1982. User's guide: statistics. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Sauvant, D. 1984. L'alimentation energetique des animaux domestique. L'alimentation azotee des animaux domestiques. I.N.A., Paris-Grignon.Google Scholar