Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T11:12:00.441Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of different management techniques to enhance colostrum intake on piglets’ growth and mortality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

R Muns ,
X Manteca  and
J Gasa
R Muns*
Affiliation:
Servei de Nutrició i Benestar Animal, Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Facultat de Veterinària, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Bellaterra 08193, Catalonia, Spain
X Manteca
Affiliation:
Servei de Nutrició i Benestar Animal, Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Facultat de Veterinària, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Bellaterra 08193, Catalonia, Spain
J Gasa
Affiliation:
Servei de Nutrició i Benestar Animal, Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Facultat de Veterinària, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Bellaterra 08193, Catalonia, Spain
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: rmunsvila@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

An experiment was conducted to study the effect four different management techniques to enhance colostrum intake had on piglet and litter performance. Treatments were performed on piglets born weighing 1.30 kg or less (SP) within 6 h of birth: control group (CON); split-nursing of the litter for 2 h allowing only the SP piglets free access to teats (SPLIT); oral supplementation with 15 ml of sow colostrum to the SP piglets of the litter (COL); and oral supplementation with 3 ml of an energy product (Calostrene®) to the SP piglets of the litter (EN). Thirty-nine primiparous sows (Large White × Landrace) and their litters (507 piglets) and 100 multiparous sows and their litters (1,375 piglets) were used. Litters were fixed at 12 piglets. Piglets were weighed through lactation. Mortality was recorded. For primiparous sows, oral supplementation with COL enhanced SP piglets bodyweight (BW) at day 1 compared to CON, SPLIT, and EN. However, no differences on BW were observed at day 18 nor on litter total pre-weaning mortality. Nonetheless, lower SP piglets’ mortality rate was found in CON and EN compared to SPLIT and COL groups in primiparous sows. For multiparous sows, no differences among treatments were observed for SP piglets BW at day 1 or at day 18. Primiparous sows’ SP piglets had higher BW at day 1 than multiparous sows’ SP piglets. Colostrum supplementation of low birth weight piglets improved early weight gain in piglets born from primiparous sows, probably by enhancing their colostrum intake, but it did not affect piglets’ weaning BW or pre-weaning mortality.

Keywords

animal welfarecolostrum intakecolostrum supplementationmanagement routinespigsow
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , May 2015 , pp. 185 - 192
Copyright
© 2015 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Bierhals, T, Magnabosco, D, Ribeiro, RR, Perin, J, da Cruz, RA, Bernardi, ML, Wentz, I and Bortolozzo, FP 2012 Influence of pig weight classification at cross-fostering on the per-formance of the primiparous sow and the adopted litter. Livestock Science 146: 115–122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livs-ci.2012.02.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carney-Hinkle, EE, Tran, H, Bundy, JW, Moreno, R, Miller, PS and Burkey, TE 2013 Effect of dam parity on litter perfor-mance, transfer of passive immunity, and progeny microbial eco-logy. Journal of Animal Science 91: 2885–2893. http://dx.doi.org/10.2527/jas.2011-4874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casellas, J, Rauw, WM, Piedrafita, J, Sanchez, A, Arque, M and Noguera, JL 2004 Viability of Iberian x Meishan F2 newborn pigs. I. Analysis of physiological and vitality variables. Journal of Animal Science 82: 1919–1924CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christison, GI, Wenger, II and Follensbee, ME 1997 Teat see-king success of newborn piglets after drying or warming. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 77: 317–319. http://dx.doi.org/10.4141/A96-119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewey, CE, Gomes, T and Richardson, K 2008 Field trial to deter-mine the impact of providing additional care to litters on weaning weight of pigs. Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research 72: 390–395Google Scholar
Donovan, TS and Dritz, SS 2000 Effect of split nursing on variation in pig growth from birth to weaning. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 217: 79–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.2460/javma.2000.217.79CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farmer, C and Quesnel, H 2009 Nutritional, hormonal, and environmental effects on colostrum in sows. Journal of Animal Science 87: 56–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.2527/jas.2008-1203CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gomez, GG, Phillips, O and Goforth, RA 1998 Effect of immu-noglobulin source on survival, growth, and hematological and immunological variables in pigs. Journal of Animal Science 76: 1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herpin, P, Damon, M and Le Dividich, J 2002 Development of thermoregulation and neonatal survival in pigs. Livestock Production Science 78: 25–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00183-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herpin, P, Louveau, I, Damon, M and Le Dividich, J 2005 Biology of Growing Animals. Elsevier Limited: London, UKGoogle Scholar
Holyoake, PK, Dial, GD, Trigg, T and King, VL 1995 Reducing pig mortality through supervision during the perinatal period. Journal of Animal Science 73: 3543–3551CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Interpig 2012 Pig cost of production in selected countries. http://www.bpex.org.uk/downloads/303229/303443/2012%20Pig%20Cost%20of%20Production%20in%20Selected%20Countries%20report%20.pdfGoogle Scholar
Knol, EF, Ducro, BJ, van Arendonk, JAM and van der Lende, T 2002 Direct, maternal and nurse sow genetic effects on farro-wing-, pre-weaning- and total piglet survival. Livestock Production Science 73: 153–164. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(01)00248-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kranendonk, G, Van der Mheen, H, Fillerup, M and Hopster, H 2007 Social rank of pregnant sows affects their body weight gain and behavior and performance of the offspring. Journal of Animal Science 85: 420–429. http://dx.doi.org/10.2527/jas.2006-074CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le Dividich, J, Rooke, JA and Herpin, P 2005 Nutritional and immunological importance of colostrum for the new-born pig. Journal of Agricultural Science 143: 469–485. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0021859605005642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milligan, BN, Fraser, D and Kramer, DL 2001 Birth weight variation in the domestic pig: effects on offspring survival, weight gain and suckling behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 73:179–191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00136-8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milligan, BN, Dewey, CE and de Grau, AF 2002b Neonatal-piglet weight variation and its relation to pre-weaning mortality and weight gain on commercial farms. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 56: 119–127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-5877(02)00157-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milligan, BN, Fraser, D and Kramer, DL 2002a Within-litter birth weight variation in the domestic pig and its relation to pre-weaning survival, weight gain, and variation in weaning weights. Livestock Production Science 76: 181–191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00012-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muns, R, Manzanilla, EG, Sol, C, Manteca, X and Gasa, J 2013 Piglet behavior as a measure of vitality and its influence on piglet survival and growth during lactation. Journal of Animal Science 91:1838–1843. http://dx.doi.org/10.2527/jas.2012-5501CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muns, R, Ruiz de la Torre, JL, Agostini, PS, Manteca, X and Gasa, J 2010 The effect of colostrum supplementation on piglets’ body temperature recovery and lactation performance. Journal of Animal Science 88: 306–306Google Scholar
Muns, R, Silva, C, Manteca, X and Gasa, J 2014 Effect of cross-fostering and oral supplementation with colostrums on perfor-mance of newborn piglets. Journal of Animal Science 92: 1193–1199. http://dx.doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NRC 1998 Nutrient Requeriments of Swine 10th Revised Edition. National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, LJ, Berg, P, Jorgensen, G and Andersen, IL 2011 Neonatal piglet traits of importance for survival in crates and indoor pens. Journal of Animal Science 89: 1207–1218. http://dx.doi.org/10.2527/jas.2010-3248CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quesnel, H, Farmer, C and Devillers, N 2012 Colostrum inta-ke: Influence on piglet performance and factors of variation. Livestock Science 146: 105–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livs-ci.2012.03.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roehe, R and Kalm, E 2000 Estimation of genetic and envi-ronmental risk factors associated with pre-weaning mortality in piglets using generalized linear mixed models. Animal Science 70: 227–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rooke, JA and Bland, IM 2002 The acquisition of passive immu-nity in the new-born piglet. Livestock Production Science 78: 13–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00182-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svendsen, J, Westrom, BR and Olsson, AC 2005 Intestinal macromolecular transmission in newborn pigs: Implications for management of neonatal pig survival and health. Livestock Production Science 97: 183–191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livprod-sci.2005.04.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuchscherer, M, Puppe, B, Tuchscherer, A and Tiemann, U 2000 Early identification of neonates at risk: Traits of newborn piglets with respect to survival. Theriogenology 54: 371–388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0093-691X(00)00355-1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vasdal, G and Andersen, IL 2012 A note on teat accessibility and sow parity: consequences for newborn piglets. Livestock Science 146: 91–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2012.02.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasdal, G, ⊘stensen, I, Melišová, M, Bozděchová, B, Illmann, G and Andersen, IL 2011 Management routines at the time of farrowing: effects on teat success and postnatal piglet mortality from loose housed sows. Livestock Science 136: 225–231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2010.09.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, KR, Anderson, DM and Bate, LA 1996 Increasing piglet survival through an improved farrowing management protocol. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 76: 491–495. http://dx.doi.org/10.4141/cjas96-075CrossRefGoogle Scholar