Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T04:55:34.399Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sows with high milk production had both a high feed intake and high body mobilization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2017

A. V. Strathe ,
T. S. Bruun  and
C. F. Hansen
A. V. Strathe
Affiliation:
Department of Large Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Grønnegaardsvej 2, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
T. S. Bruun
Affiliation:
SEGES Danish Pig Research Centre, Axeltorv 3, 1609 Copenhagen, Denmark
C. F. Hansen*
Affiliation:
Department of Large Animal Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Grønnegaardsvej 2, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
*
†E-mail: cfh@sund.ku.dk
Get access

Abstract

Selection for increased litter size have generated hyper-prolific sows that nurses large litters, however limited knowledge is available regarding the connection between milk production, feed intake and body mobilization of these modern sows. The aim of the current study was to determine what characterized sows with high milk production and nursing large litters, differences between sows of different parities and effects of lactational performance on next reproductive cycle. In total 565 sows (parity 1 to 4) were studied from 7 days before farrowing until weaning. On day 2 postpartum litters were standardized to 14 piglets. Weight and back fat thickness of sows were measured at day 7 prepartum, day 2 postpartum and at weaning. Litters were weighed at day 2 and at weaning. Pearson correlation coefficients between variables were calculated and regression models were developed. The average daily feed intake (ADFI) of the sows was 6.1±1.1 kg/day, average daily gain (ADG) of the litter was 2.92±0.53 kg/day and sows weaned 13.0±1.1 piglets. First parity sows generally had a lower ADFI and milk production and a decrease in total born piglets in next litter compared with parity 2 to 4 sows, which could be explained by a relatively higher proportion of their body reserves being mobilized compared with multiparous sows. The ADG of the litter was positively related by ADFI of the sows, litter size and BW loss and increasing the ADFI with 1 kg/day throughout lactation likely increased the ADG of the litter with 220 to 440 g/day in parity 1 to 4, respectively. Increasing the ADFI by 1 kg/day reduced the BW loss with 6.6 to 13.9 kg of parity 1 to 4 sows, respectively, during lactation, whereas increasing the average milk yield with 1 kg/day raised the BW loss with 4.3 to 21.0 kg of the four parities during lactation. The number of total born piglets in the next litter was positively related to the number of piglets born in the previous litter. In conclusion, both a high feed intake and a high mobilization of body reserves was a prerequisite for a high milk production. The sows might be very close to the physical limit of what they can ingest and future research should therefore, focus on optimizing the dietary energy and nutrient concentrations of diets for lactating hyper-prolific sows and herein distinguish between primiparous and multiparous sows.

Keywords

body mobilizationfeed intakemilk productionreproductionsow
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 11 , Issue 11 , November 2017 , pp. 1913 - 1921
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

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

Auldist, DE, Morrish, L, Thompson, M and King, RH 1994. Response of sows to varying litter size. In Proceedings of the Nutrition Society of Australia, 26–28 September 1994, Newcastle, NSW, Australia, p. 175.Google Scholar
Baidoo, SK, Aherne, FX, Kirkwood, RN and Foxcroft, GR 1992. Effect of feed intake during lactation and after weaning on sow reproductive performance. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 72, 911–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clowes, EJ, Williams, IH, Baracos, VE, Pluske, JR, Cegielski, AC, Zak, LJ and Aherne, FX 1998. Feeding lactating primiparous sows to establish three divergent metabolic states: II. Effect on nitrogen partitioning and skeletal muscle composition. Journal of Animal Science 76, 1154–1164.Google Scholar
Dourmad, JY, Etienne, M and Noblet, J 1996. Reconstitution of body reserves in multiparous sows during pregnancy: effect of energy intake during pregnancy and mobilization during the previous lactation. Journal of Animal Science 74, 2211–2219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dourmad, JY, Étienne, M, Valancogne, A, Dubois, S, van Milgen, J and Noblet, J 2008. InraPorc: a model and decision support tool for the nutrition of sows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 143, 372–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eissen, JJ, Apeldoorn, EJ, Kanis, E, Verstegen, MW and de Greef, KH 2003. The importance of a high feed intake during lactation of primiparous sows nursing large litters. Journal of Animal Science 81, 594–603.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eissen, JJ, Kanis, E and Kemp, B 2000. Sow factors affecting voluntary feed intake during lactation. Livestock Production Science 64, 147–165.Google Scholar
Hansen, AV, Lauridsen, C, Sørensen, MT, Bach Knudsen, KE and Theil, PK 2012a. Effects of nutrient supply, plasma metabolites, and nutritional status of sows during transition on performance in the next lactation. Journal of Animal Science 90, 466–480.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hansen, AV, Strathe, AB, Kebreab, E, France, J and Theil, PK 2012b. Predicting milk yield and composition in lactating sows: a Bayesian approach. Journal of Animal Science 90, 2285–2298.Google Scholar
Hughes, PE, Smits, RJ and Xie, Y 2010. Relationships among gilt and sow live weight, P2 backfat depth, and culling rates. Journal of Swine Health and Production 18, 301–305.Google Scholar
Kim, SW and Easter, RA 2001. Nutrient mobilization from body tissues as influenced by litter size in lactating sows. Journal of Animal Science 79, 2179–2186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koketsu, Y, Dial, GD, Pettigrew, JE and King, VL 1996. Feed intake pattern during lactation and subsequent reproductive performance of sows. Journal of Animal Science 74, 2875–2884.Google Scholar
Koketsu, Y, Dial, GD, Pettigrew, JE and King, VL 1997. Influence of feed intake during individual weeks of lactation on reproductive performance of sows on commercial farms. Livestock Production Science 49, 217–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Cozler, Y, David, C, Beaumal, V, Johansen, S and Dourmad, JY 1998. Effect of feeding level during rearing on performance of large white gilts. Part 2: effect on metabolite profiles during gestation and lactation, and on glucose tolerance. Reproduction Nutrition and Development 38, 377–390.Google Scholar
Lucia, T Jr, Dial, GD and Marsh, WE 2000. Lifetime reproductive performance in female pigs having distinct reasons for removal. Livestock Production Science 63, 213–222.Google Scholar
Mosnier, E, Etienne, M, Ramaekers, P and Père, MC 2010. The metabolic status during the peri partum period affects the voluntary feed intake and the metabolism of the lactating multiparous sow. Livestock Science 127, 127–136.Google Scholar
Pluske, JR, Williams, IH, Zak, LJ, Clowes, EJ, Cegielski, AC and Aherne, FX 1998. Feeding lactating primiparous sows to establish three divergent metabolic states: III. Milk production and pig growth. Journal of Animal Science 76, 1165–1171.Google Scholar
Quesnel, H, Meunier-Salaün, M-C, Hamard, A, Guillemet, R, Etienne, M, Farmer, C, Dourmad, J-Y and Père, M-C 2009. Dietary fiber for pregnant sows: influence on sow physiology and performance during lactation. Journal of Animal Science 87, 532–543.Google Scholar
Schenkel, AC, Bernardi, ML, Bortolozzo, FP and Wentz, I 2010. Body reserve mobilization during lactation in first parity sows and its effect on second litter size. Livestock Science 132, 165–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strathe, AV, Bruun, TS, Zerrahn, J-E, Tauson, A-H and Hansen, CF 2016. The effect of increasing the dietary valine-to-lysine ratio on sow metabolism, milk production, and litter growth. Journal of Animal Science 94, 155–164.Google Scholar
Strathe, AV, Strathe, AB, Theil, PK, Hansen, CF and Kebreab, E 2015. Determination of protein and amino acid requirements of lactating sows using a population-based factorial approach. Animal 9, 1319–1328.Google Scholar
Trottier, NL and Easter, RA 1995. Dietary and plasma branched-chain amino acids in relation to tryptophan: effect on voluntary feed intake and lactation metabolism in the primiparous sow. Journal of Animal Science 73, 1086–1092.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vadmand, CN, Krogh, U, Hansen, CF and Theil, PK 2015. Impact of sow and litter characteristics on colostrum yield, time for onset of lactation, and milk yield of sows. Journal of Animal Science 93, 2488–2500.Google Scholar
van den Brand, H, Heetkamp, MJ, Soede, NM, Schrama, JW and Kemp, B 2000. Energy balance of lactating primiparous sows as affected by feeding level and dietary energy source. Journal of Animal Science 78, 1520–1528.Google Scholar
Zak, LJ, Cosgrove, JR, Aherne, FX and Foxcroft, GR 1997. Pattern of feed intake and associated metabolic and endocrine changes differentially affect postweaning fertility in primiparous lactating sows. Journal of Animal Science 75, 208–216.Google Scholar
Zak, LJ, Williams, IH, Foxcroft, GR, Pluske, JR, Cegielski, AC, Clowes, EJ and Aherne, FX 1998. Feeding lactating primiparous sows to establish three divergent metabolic states: I. Associated endocrine changes and postweaning reproductive performance. Journal of Animal Science 76, 1145–1153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed