Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:03:58.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors associated with average pig weight at weaning on farms using early weaning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

Y. Koketsu  and
G. D. Dial
Y. Koketsu
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical and Population Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, St Paul 55108, USA
G. D. Dial
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical and Population Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota, St Paul 55108, USA
Get access

Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of various factors on average pig weight at weaning on farms using early weaning. Farms were selected based on average weaning age and whether they recorded lactation food intake and litter weights at weaning. The database contained 9834 litter weights and 8903 food intake records. Average pig weight at weaning, litter size at weaning, weaning age, and average daily food intake during lactation (ADFl) were 4·9 (s.d. 1·0) kg, 9·3 (s.d. 1·6) pigs, 16·8 (s.d. 2·8) days, and 4·9 (s.d. 1·1) kg, respectively. Litter size, weaning age, parity, farrowing season, and ADFl groups influenced average pig weight at weaning (P < 0·01). Three two-way interactions between parity and season, weaning age and farrowing season, and weaning age and ADFl groups were found fP < 0·01). Average pig weights for litter sizes between six and 10 were higher than those between litter sizes one and four, and 11 and 22. Parity 1 sows produced lighter pig weights than any other parity group during any other season (P < 0·01). Average weights of weaned pigs farrowed during the summer in all parities groups were lighter (P < 0·01) than those during the autumn. Pig weights for weaning ages between 22 and 21 days during the summer tended to be lighter than those during the autumn. Pigs weaned between days 16 and 22 of age in the high ADFI group (>5·6 kg) were heavier (P < 0·01) than those in the low ADFl (> 4·2 kg) group.

Keywords

early weaningpigletssowsweaning weight
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 66 , Issue 1 , February 1998 , pp. 247 - 253
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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

Aherne, F. X., Danielsen, V. and Nielsen, H. E. 1982. The effects of creep feeding on pre- and post-weaning pig performance Ada Agriculturae Scandinavica 32: 155–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, J. D., Britt, J. H. and Kraeling, R. R. 1986. Effects of restriction of energy during lactation on body condition, energy metabolism, endocrine changes and reproductive performance of primiparous sows Journal of Animal Science 63: 1915–1925.Google Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1980. Official methods of analysis, 13th edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
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: 153–170.Google Scholar
Dagorn, J. and Aumaitre, A. 1979. Sow culling: reasons for and effect on productivity. Livestock Production Science 6: 167–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dial, G. D., Marsh, W. E., Poison, D. D. and Vaillancourt, J.-P. 1992a. Reproductive failure: differential diagnosis. In Diseases of swine, 7th edition, (ed. Leman, A. L., Straw, B. E., Mengeling, W. L., D'Allaire, S. and Taylor, D. J.). Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa.Google Scholar
Dial, G. D., Wiseman, B. S., Davies, P. R., Marsh, W. E., Molitor, T. W., Morrison, R. B. and Thawley, D. G. 1992b. Strategies employed in the United States for improving the health of swine. Pig Neivs and Information 13: 111–123.Google Scholar
Dritz, S. S., Owen, K. Q., Nelssen, J. L., Goodband, R. D. and Tokach, M. D. 1996. Influence of weaning age and nursery diet complexity on growth performance and carcass characteristics and composition of high-health status pigs from weaning to 109 kilograms Journal ofAnimal Science 74: 2975–2984.Google ScholarPubMed
Elsley, F. W. H., Bannerman, M., Bathurst, E. V. J., Bracewell, A. G., Cunningham, J. M. N., 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
Koketsu, Y. and Dial, G. D. 1996. A profile of commercial farms in the U.S.A. using early weaning systems. International Pig Veterinary Society Congress 14: 475 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Koketsu, Y., Dial, G. D. and King, V. L. 1997. Returns to service after mating and removal of sows for reproductive reasons from commercial swine farms Theriogenology 47: 1347–1363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koketsu, Y., Dial, G. D., Pettigrew, J. E., Marsh, W. E. and King, V. L. 1996. Characterization of feed intake patterns during lactation in commercial swine herds Journal of Animal Science 74: 1202–1210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lorschy, M. L., Giles, L. R., Smith, C. R., Gooden, J. M. and Black, J. L. 1993. Food intake, heat production and milk yield of lactating sows exposed to high temperature. In Manipulating pig production IV (ed. Batterham, E. S.). Australasian Pig Science Association, Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
Mahan, D. C. and Lepine, A. J. 1991. Effect of pig weaning weight and associated nursery feeding programs on subsequent performance to 105 kilogram body weight. Journal of Animal Science 69: 1370–1378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, W. E., Lier, P. van and Dial, G. D. 1992. A profile of swine production in North America. 1. PigCHAMP breeding herd data analysis for 1990. International Pig Veterinary Society Congress 12: 512 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Morgan, C. A. and Whittemore, C. T. 1982. Energy evaluation of feeds and compounded diets for pigs. A review. Animal Feed Science and Technology 7: 387–400.Google Scholar
Mullan, B. P. and Williams, I. H. 1988. The effect of body reserves at farrowing o n the reproductive performance of first-litter sows Animal Production 46: 494–495 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Nelssen, J. L., Lewis, A. J., Peo, E. R. Jr 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.Google Scholar
Pajor, E. A., Fraser, D. and Kramer, D. L. 1991. Consumption of solid food by suckling pigs: individual variation and relation to weight gain Applied Animal Behaviour Science 32: 139–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reese, D. E., Peo, Jr E. R. and Lewis, A. J. 1984. Relationship of lactation energy intake and occurrence of postweaning estrus to body backfat composition in sows. Journal of Animal Science 58: 1236–1244.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1988. SAS/STAT user's guide. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute, Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D. and Torrie, J. H. 1980. Principles and procedures of statistics: a biometrical approach. McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., New York.Google Scholar
Toner, M. S., King, R. H., Dunshea, F. R., Dove, H. and Atwood, C. S. 1996. The effect of exogenous somatotropin on lactation performance of first-litter sows Journal of Animal Science 74: 167–172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Soest, P. J. and McQueen, R. W. 1973. The chemistry and estimation of fiber Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 32: 123–130.Google Scholar
Yang, H., Eastham, P. R., Philips, P. and Whittemore, C. T. 1989. Reproductive performance, body weight and bod y condition of breeding sows with differing body fatness at parturition, differing nutrition during lactation, and differing litter size Animal Production 48: 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yen, H. F., Isler, G. A., Harvey, W. R. and Irvin, K. M. 1987. Factors affecting reproductive performance in swine. Journal of Animal Science 64: 1340–1348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar