Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

  • 제29권1호
  • /
  • Pages.142-148
  • /
  • 2016
  • /
  • 1011-2367(pISSN)
  • /
  • 1976-5517(eISSN)
아세아태평양축산학회 (Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of Gestational Housing on Reproductive Performance and Behavior of Sows with Different Backfat Thickness

  • Kim, K.H. (Department of Animal Resources Science, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Hosseindoust, A. (Department of Animal Resources Science, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Ingale, S.L. (Department of Animal Resources Science, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Lee, S.H. (Department of Animal Resources Science, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Noh, H.S. (Department of Animal Resources Science, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Choi, Y.H. (Department of Animal Resources Science, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Jeon, S.M. (Department of Animal Resources Science, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University) ;
  • Kim, Y.H. (Department of Animal Resources Development, Swine Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Chae, B.J. (Department of Animal Resources Science, College of Animal Life Sciences, Kangwon National University)
  • 투고 : 2014.12.30
  • 심사 : 2015.09.01
  • 발행 : 2016.01.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

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 ($Landrace{\times}Yorkshire$) 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 ${\geq}20$) 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 ${\geq}20mm$ 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 ${\geq}20mm$ 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.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Aherne, F., G. Foxcroft, and J. E. Pettigrew. 1999. Nutrition of the sow. In: Diseases of Swine. 8th edn (Eds. B. E. Straw, S. D'Allaire, W. L. Mengeling, and D. J. Taylor). Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA, USA. pp. 1029-1043.
  2. Barbari, M. 2000. Analysis of reproductive performance of sows in relation to housing systems. In: ASAE proceedings, 1st International Conference on Swine Housing. Des Moines, IA, USA. pp. 188-196.
  3. Bates, R. O., D. B. Edwards, and R. L. Korthals. 2003. Sow performance when housed either in groups with electronic sow feeders or stalls. Livest. Prod. Sci. 79:29-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00119-7
  4. Boyle, L. A. 2005. Reducing aggression in group housed Sows. In: Proceedings of the Teagasc Pig Farmers Conferences Pages, Teagasc Oakpark, Carlow, Ireland. pp. 10-18.
  5. Boyle, L. A., F. C. Leonard, P. B. Lynch, and P. Brophy. 2000. Influence of housing systems during gestation on the behavior and welfare of gilts in farrowing crates. Anim. Sci. 71:561-570. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1357729800055302
  6. Calderon Diaz, J. A., A. G. Fahey, and L. A. Boyel. 2014. Effects of gestation housing system and floor type during lactation on locomotory ability; body, lim, and clow legions; and lying-down behavior of lactating sows. J. Anim. Sci. 92:1675-1683. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6279
  7. Charette, R., M. Bigras-Poulin, and G. Martineau. 1996. Body condition evaluation in sows. Livest. Prod. Sci. 46:107-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-6226(96)00022-X
  8. De Rensis, F., M. Gherpelli, P. Superchi, and R. N. Kirkwood. 2005. Relationships between backfat depth and plasma leptin during lactation and sow reproductive performance after weaning. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 90:95-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2005.01.017
  9. Den Hartog, L. A., G. B. C. Backus, and H. M. Vermeer. 1993. Evaluation of housing systems for sows. J. Anim. Sci. 71:1339-1344. https://doi.org/10.2527/1993.7151339x
  10. Dourmad, J. Y., M. E'tienne, and J. Noblet. 2001. Measuring backfat depth in sows to optimize feeding strategy. Prod Anim, 14(1), 41-50. INRA Prod. Anim. 14:41-50.
  11. Gunn, H. and R. Friendship. 2003. Gestation sows housing in Ontario. In: Proceedings of the American Association of Swine Veterinarians, Orlando, USA. pp. 61-65.
  12. Hemsworth, P. H. 1982. Social environment and reproduction. In: Control of Pig Reproduction (Eds. D. J. A. Cole and G. R. Foxcroft), Butterworths, London, UK. pp. 585-601.
  13. Hemsworth, P. H., M. Rice, J. Nash, K. Giri, K. L. Butler, A. J. Tilbrook, and R. S. Morrison. 2013. Effects of group size and floor space allowance on grouped sows: Aggression, stress, skin injuries, and reproductive performance. J. Anim. Sci. 91:4953-4964. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2012-5807
  14. Houde, A. A., S. Me'thot, B. D. Murphy, V. Bordignon, and M. F. Pali. 2010. 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. 90:429-436. https://doi.org/10.4141/CJAS09115
  15. Maes, D. G. D., G. P. J. Janssens, P. Delputte, A. Lammertyn, and A. de Kruif. 2004. Back fat measurements in sows from three commercial pig herds: relationship with reproductive efficiency and correlation with visual body condition scores. Livest. Prod. Sci. 91:57-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livprodsci.2004.06.015
  16. Martineau, G. P. and C. Klopfenstein. 1996. Body building syndromes in sows (BBS) thin sow syndrome, fat sow syndrome, accordeon sow syndrome. French Swine Research Days, January 30 to February 1, 1996. Paris, France. 28:331-338.
  17. McGlone, J. J., E. H. von Borrell, J. Deen, A. K. Johnson, D. G. Levis, M. Meunier-Salaun, J. Morrow, D. Reeves, J. L. Salak-Johnson, and P. L. Sundberg. 2004. 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. 20:105-117.
  18. McKay, R. M. 1993. Preweaning losses of piglets as a result of index selection for reduced backfat thickness and increased growth rate. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 73:437-442. https://doi.org/10.4141/cjas93-046
  19. National Research Council. 1998. Nutrient Requirements of Swine, 10th edn. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.
  20. Rhodes, R. T., M. C. Appleby, K. Chinn, L. Douglas, L. D. Firkins, K. A. Houpt, C. Irwin, J. J. McGlone, P. Sundberg, L. Tokach, and R. W. Wills. 2005. Task Force Report: A comprehensive review of housing for pregnant sows. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 227:1580-1590. https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.2005.227.1580
  21. Serenius, T., K. J. Stalder, T. J. Baas, J. W. Mabry, R. N. Goodwin, R. K. Johnson, O. W. Robinson, M. Tokach, and R. K. Miller. 2006. National Pork Producers Council Maternal Line National Genetic Evaluation Program: A comparison of sow longevity and trait associations with sow longevity. J. Anim. Sci. 84:2590-2595. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2005-499
  22. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. 2014. Swine 2012, Part I: Baseline Reference of Swine Health and Management, 2012. National Animal Health Monitoring System. Fort Collins, CO #663.0814.
  23. Von Borrell, E., D. M. Broom, D. Scermely, A. A. Dijkhuizen, S. Hylkema, S. A. Edwards, P. Jensen, F. Madec, and C. Stamataris. 1997. The welfare of intensively kept pigs. Report of the Scientific Veterinary Committee, European Commission, December 24, 1997. B3.
  24. Weng, R. C., S. A. Edwards, and L. C. Hsia. 2009a. 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 Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 22:1328-1333. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2009.80249
  25. Weng, R. C., S. A. Edwards, and L. C. Hsia. 2009b. Effect of individual, group or ESF housing in pregnancy and individual or group housing in lactation on sow behavior. Asian Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 22:1574-1580. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2009.80254
  26. Whittemore, C. T., J. Y. Dourmad, and M. Ettiene. 1995. Reproduction in primiparous sows nutrition and body condition in relation to productivity. 46th EAAP, Praha Czech Republic, 301.
  27. Whittemore, C. T. 1996. Nutrition reproduction interactions in primiparous sow: A review. Livest. Prod. Sci. 46:65-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-6226(96)00019-X
  28. Zaleski, H. M. and R. R. Hacker. 1993. Variables related to the progress of parturition and probability of stillbirth in swine. Can. Vet. J. 34:109-113.
  29. Zhao, Y., W. L. Flowers, A. Saraiva, K. J. Yeum, and S. W. Kim. 2013. Effect of social ranks and gestation housing systems on oxidative stress status, reproductive performance, and immune status of sows. J. Anim. Sci. 91:5848-5858. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2013-6388

피인용 문헌

  1. Effects of dietary energy levels and β-mannanase supplementation in a high mannan-based diet during lactation on reproductive performance, apparent total tract digestibility and milk composition in multiparous sows pp.1828-051X, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2017.1345663
  2. An overview of hourly rhythm of demand-feeding pattern by a controlled feeding system on productive performance of lactating sows during summer pp.1828-051X, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2018.1438214
  3. Effects of loose farrowing facilities on reproductive performance in primiparous sows vol.62, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2020.62.2.218
  4. 모돈 사료 내 Portulaca oleracea L.의 첨가가 번식성적, 혈액성상, 면역반응 및 분 중 미생물에 미치는 영향 vol.21, pp.7, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5762/kais.2020.21.7.277
  5. Improving behavior characteristics and stress indices of gestating sows housed with group housing facility vol.62, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2020.62.6.875
  6. Effects of Dietary Monoglyceride and Diglyceride Supplementation on the Performance, Milk Composition, and Immune Status of Sows During Late Gestation and Lactation vol.8, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.714068
  7. Coping with large litters: management effects on welfare and nursing capacity of the sow vol.63, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2021.e46
  8. Effect of farrowing pen size on pre-weaning performance of piglets vol.5, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txab123
  9. A deep learning-based approach for feeding behavior recognition of weanling pigs vol.63, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2021.e127