Effects of Gestational Housing on Reproductive Performance and Behavior of Sows with Different Backfat Thickness
2
조회
0
다운로드
10
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The present study investigated the effects of back-fat thickness at d 107 of gestation and housing types during gestation on reproductive performance and behavior of sows. A total of 64 crossbred sows (Landrace×Yorkshire) in their 3 to 4 parities were allotted to one of four treatments (n = 16) over two consecutive parities. During each parity, sows were assigned to two gestational housing types (stall or group housing) and two level of back-fat thickness (<20 or ≥20) at d 107 of gestation. Gestating sows were transferred from gestational crates to stalls or pens (group housing) 5 weeks before farrowing. All sows were moved to farrowing crates on d 109 of gestation. At weaning, back-fat thickness changes were lesser (p<0.05) in sows having back-fat thickness <20 mm than that of sows with ≥20 mm back-fat thickness at 107 d of gestation. Group housed sows had greater (p<0.05) feed intake and shorter (p<0.05) weaning-to-estrus interval than that of sows in stalls. At weaning, back-fat thickness changes were lesser (p<0.05) in group housed sows than that of sows in stalls. The number of piglets at weaning, growth rate and average daily gain were greater (p<0.05) in group housed sows than that of sows in stalls. During gestation, walking duration was more (p<0.05) in group housed sows. Group housed sows had lesser (p<0.05) farrowing duration and greater (p<0.05) eating time than that of sows in stalls. Result obtained in present study indicated that sows with ≥20 mm back-fat thickness at 107 days had better reproductive performance. Additionally, group housing of sows during last five week of gestation improved the performance and behavior and reproductive efficiency of sows.
Abstract
The present study investigated the effects of back-fat thickness at d 107 of gestation and housing types during gestation on reproductive performance and behavior of sows. A total of 64 crossbred sows (Landrace×Yorkshire) in their 3 to 4 parities were allotted to one of four treatments (n = 16) over two consecutive parities. During each parity, sows were assigned to two gestational housing types (stall or group housing) and two level of back-fat thickness (<20 or ≥20) at d 107 of gestation. Gestating sows were transferred from gestational crates to stalls or pens (group housing) 5 weeks before farrowing. All sows were moved to farrowing crates on d 109 of gestation. At weaning, back-fat thickness changes were lesser (p<0.05) in sows having back-fat thickness <20 mm than that of sows with ≥20 mm back-fat thickness at 107 d of gestation. Group housed sows had greater (p<0.05) feed intake and shorter (p<0.05) weaning-to-estrus interval than that of sows in stalls. At weaning, back-fat thickness changes were lesser (p<0.05) in group housed sows than that of sows in stalls. The number of piglets at weaning, growth rate and average daily gain were greater (p<0.05) in group housed sows than that of sows in stalls. During gestation, walking duration was more (p<0.05) in group housed sows. Group housed sows had lesser (p<0.05) farrowing duration and greater (p<0.05) eating time than that of sows in stalls. Result obtained in present study indicated that sows with ≥20 mm back-fat thickness at 107 days had better reproductive performance. Additionally, group housing of sows during last five week of gestation improved the performance and behavior and reproductive efficiency of sows.
참고문헌 (29)
- Aherne, F., "Diseases of Swine", pp.1029~1043 (1999), Iowa State University Press
- Barbari, M., "Analysis of reproductive performance of sows in relation to housing systems", ASAE proceedings, 1st International Conference on Swine Housing, pp.188~196 (2000)
- Bates, R. O, "Sow performance when housed either in groups with electronic sow feeders or stalls", Livest. Prod. Sci, 79, pp.29~35 (2003)
- Boyle, L. A., "Reducing aggression in group housed Sows", Proceedings of the Teagasc Pig Farmers Conferences Pages, pp.10~18 (2005)
- Boyle, L. A, "Influence of housing systems during gestation on the behavior and welfare of gilts in farrowing crates", Anim. Sci, 71, pp.561~570 (2000)
- Calderon Diaz, J. A., "Effects of gestation housing system and floor type during lactation on locomotory ability; body, lim, and clow legions; and lyingdown behavior of lactating sows", J. Anim. Sci, 92, pp.1675~1683 (2014)
- Charette, R., "Body condition evaluation in sows", Livest. Prod. Sci, 46, pp.107~115 (1996)
- De Rensis, F., "Relationships between backfat depth and plasma leptin during lactation and sow reproductive performance after weaning", Anim. Reprod. Sci, 90, pp.95~100 (2005)
- Den Hartog, L. A, "Evaluation of housing systems for sows", J. Anim. Sci, 71, pp.1339~1344 (1993)
- Dourmad, J. Y, "Measuring backfat depth in sows to optimize feeding strategy", Prod Anim, 14(1), pp.41~50 (2001)
- Gunn, H, "Gestation sows housing in Ontario", Proceedings of the American Association of Swine Veterinarians, pp.61~65 (2003)
- Hemsworth, P. H., "Control of Pig Reproduction", pp.585~601 (1982), Butterworths
- Hemsworth, P. H, "Effects of group size and floor space allowance on grouped sows: Aggression, stress, skin injuries, and reproductive performance", J. Anim. Sci, 91, pp.4953~4964 (2013)
- Houde, A. A., "Relationships between backfat thickness and reproductive efficiency of sows: A two-year trial involving two commercial herds fixing backfat thickness at breeding", Can. J. Anim. Sci, 90, pp.429~436 (2010)
- Maes, D. G. D., "Back fat measurements in sows from three commercial pig herds: relationship with reproductive efficiency and correlation with visual body condition scores", Livest. Prod. Sci, 91, pp.57~67 (2004)
- Martineau, G. P., "Body building syndromes in sows (BBS) thin sow syndrome, fat sow syndrome, accordeon sow syndrome", French Swine Research Days 28, 331~338 (1996)
- McGlone, J. J, "Review: Compilation of the scientific literature comparing housing systems for gestating sows and gilts using measures of physiology, behavior, performance, and health", Prof. Anim. Sci, 20, pp.105~117 (2004)
- McKay, R. M., "Preweaning losses of piglets as a result of index selection for reduced backfat thickness and increased growth rate", Can. J. Anim. Sci, 73, pp.437~442 (1993)
- National Research Council, "Nutrient Requirements of Swine" (1998), National Academy Press
- Rhodes, R. T., "Task Force Report: A comprehensive review of housing for pregnant sows", J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc, 227, pp.1580~1590 (2005)
- Serenius, T., "National Pork Producers Council Maternal Line National Genetic Evaluation Program: A comparison of sow longevity and trait associations with sow longevity", J. Anim. Sci, 84, pp.2590~2595 (2006)
- Swine 2012, Part I: Baseline Reference of Swine Health and Management, 2012, "U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service", National Animal Health Monitoring System, ~, pp.Fort Collins, CO #663.0814 (2014)
- The welfare of intensively kept pigs. Report of the Scientific Veterinary Committee, "Von Borrell, E.", European Commiss, ~ (1997)
- R. C. Weng, "Effect of Individual, Group or ESF Housing in Pregnancy and Individual or Group Housing in Lactation on the Performance of Sows and Their Piglets", ASIAN-AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCES, 22(9), pp.1328~1333 (2009), 아세아·태평양축산학회
- R. C. Weng, "Effect of Individual, Group or ESF Housing in Pregnancy and Individual or Group Housing in Lactation on Sow Behavior", ASIAN-AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCES, 22(11), pp.1574~1580 (2009), 아세아·태평양축산학회
- Whittemore, C. T, "eproduction in primiparous sows nutrition and body condition in relation to productivity", 46th EAAP, pp.301~ (1995)
- Whittemore, C. T, "Nutrition reproduction interactions in primiparous sow: A review", Livest. Prod. Sci, 46, pp.65~83 (1996)
- Zaleski, H. M., "Variables related to the progress of parturition and probability of stillbirth in swine", Can. Vet. J, 34, pp.109~113 (1993)
- Zhao, Y., "Effect of social ranks and gestation housing systems on oxidative stress status, reproductive performance, and immune status of sows", J. Anim. Sci, 91, pp.5848~5858 (2013)