Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:26:52.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Estimation of genetic and environmental risk factors associated with pre-weaning mortality in piglets using generalized linear mixed models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

R. Roehe
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Breeding and Husbandry, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Olshausenstrasse 40, 24118 Kiel, Germany
E. Kalm
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Breeding and Husbandry, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Olshausenstrasse 40, 24118 Kiel, Germany
Get access

Abstract

Risk factors and variance components of pre-weaning mortality were estimated using generalized linear mixed models. Data were from 12 727 piglets born alive from 1338 litters recorded at the pig breeding farm of the University of Kiel from 1989 to 1994. Deviances due to risk factors were estimated by generalized linear model and their odds-ratios by generalized linear mixed model both with binomial errors and a logistic link. Variance components of sire, dam and litter were estimated using a logit or probit link function as well as a linear model for which estimates were transformed to the underlying continuous scale. Highest increase in deviance, indicating the risk factor, which accounts for the greatest amount of unexplained variation of pre-weaning mortality was obtained after exclusion of individual birth weight (1206) from the model, followed by year-season (217), parity-farrowing age or interval (58), genotype of piglets (56), sex (39), total number of piglets born (18) and gestation length (16). Substitution of individual birth weight successively by average piglet birth weight per litter, litter birth weight and standard deviation of birth weight within litter resulted in models with substantially lower explained variation of pre-weaning mortality. Odds of pre-weaning mortality was 1·5 times higher for males than for females and 2·0 times higher in piglets from German Landrace dams than from Large White dams. Odds increased to the fifth parity by 2·2 times the odds of the first parity or increased for the age group of dams between 850 and 949 days by 2·3 times the odds of the age group with less than 350 days. When the continuous risk factors of individual birth weight, average piglet birth weight and litter birth weight decreased or standard deviation of birth weight within litter increased by one standard deviation from the mean, the odds ratios increased by 6·0, 1·6, 0·8 and 0·4, respectively. Piglets with individual birth weights of 1·8, 1·5, 1·2 and 1·0 kg showed a rapid increase in odds ratios of pre-weaning mortality of 1·4, 2·7, 7·0 and 16·1, respectively, relative to piglets with 2·1 kg. Estimates of direct heritability for pre-weaning mortality on the linear observed, transformed underlying, logit and probit scale were 0·02, 0·06, 0·07 and 0·07, respectively. Low estimates of heritability for pre-weaning mortality, even on the underlying continuous scale, suggested low potential for improvement by selection. Therefore, selection for individual birth weight phenotypically closely associated with pre-weaning mortality was recommended to improve survival of piglets during the nursing period.

Type
Breeding and genetics
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2000

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

Arendonk, J.A.M.van, Rosmeulen, C.van, Janss, L.L.G. and Knol, E.F. 1996. Estimation of direct and maternal genetic (co)variances for survival within litters of piglets. Livestock Production Science 46:163171.Google Scholar
Barkhouse, K.L., Van Vleck, L.D. and Cundiff, L.V. 1998. Effect of ignoring random sire and dam effects on estimates and standard errors of breed comparisons. Journal of Animal Science 76: 22792286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bereskin, B., Shelby, C.E. and Cox, D. F. 1973. Some factors affecting pig survival. Journal of Animal Science 36: 821827.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bidanel, J.P., Caritez, J. C. and Legault}C., 1989. Estimation of crossbreeding parameters between Large White and Meishan porcine breeds. I. Reproductive performance. Genetics, Selection, Evolution 21: 507526.Google Scholar
Collett, D. 1991. Modelling binary data. Chapman and Hall, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crump, R.E., Haley, C.S., Thompson, R. and Mercer, J. 1997. Individual animal model estimates of genetic parameters for reproduction traits of Landrace pigs performance tested in a commercial nucleus herd. Animal Science 65: 285290.Google Scholar
Elliot, J.I. and Lodge, G.A. 1977. Body composition and glycogen reserves in the neonatal pig during the first 96 hours postpartum. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 57: 141150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engel, B. and Buist, W. 1996. Analysis of a generalized linear mixed model: a case study and simulation results. Biometrica! Journal 38: 6180.Google Scholar
English, P.R. and Morrison, V. 1984. Causes and prevention of piglet mortality. Pig News and Information 5: 369376.Google Scholar
Fahmy, M. H., Holtmann, W.B., Maclntyre, T.M. and Moxley, J. E. 1978. Evaluation of piglet mortality in 28 two-breed crosses among eight breeds of pig. Animal Production 26: 277285.Google Scholar
Falkenberg, H., Ritter, E., Hammer, H., Stienhans, H. and Bretschneider, A. 1988. Einbeziehung von Wurfgrößenund Wurfmassemerkmalen bei Geburt in die Leistungsbewertung von Ebervätern. Archiv für Tierzucht 31: 151161.Google Scholar
Fraser, D. 1984. The role of behavior in swine production: a review of research. Applied Animai Ethology 11: 317339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilmour, A. R., Cullis, B. R., Welham, S. J. and Thompson, R. 1998. ASREML. NSW Agriculture, occasional publication.Google Scholar
Haley, C.S., Avalos, E. and Smith, C. 1988. Selection for litter size in the pig. Animal Breeding Abstracts 56: 317332.Google Scholar
Hermesch, S., Luxford, B.G. and Graser, H.U. 1998. Genetic relationships of growth and lean meat with meat quality and reproduction traits in Australian pigs. Proceedings of the sixth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, vol. 23, pp. 511514.Google Scholar
Herpin, P., Le Dividich, J. and Amarai, N. 1993. Effect of selection for lean tissue growth on body composition and physiological state of the pig at birth. Journal of Animal Science 71: 26452653.Google Scholar
Hoy, S., Lutter, C., Wähner, M. and Puppe, B. 1994. Zum Einfluß der Geburtsmasse auf die frühe postnatale Vitalität von Ferkeln. Deutsche Tierärztliche Wochenschrift 101: 393396.Google Scholar
Johansson, K., Kennedy, B.W. and Quinton, M. 1993. Prediction of breeding values and dominance effects from mixed models with approximation of the dominance relationship matrix. Livestock Production Science 34: 213223.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, D., Hofer, A., Bidanel, J.P. and Kiinzi, N. 1999. Genetic parameters for individual birth and weaning weight and for litter size of Large White pigs. Proceedings of the 50th annual meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, Zürich, paper G2. 9.Google Scholar
Kerr, J.C. and Cameron, N. D. 1995. Reproductive performance of pigs selected for components of efficient lean growth. Animal Science 60: 281290.Google Scholar
King, R.H., Mullan, B.P., Dunshea, F.R. and Dove, H. 1997. The influence of piglet body weight on milk production of sows. Livestock Production Science 47:169174.Google Scholar
Kisner, V., Möllers, B., Brandt, H. and Glodek, P. 1995. Die Analyse von Sauenaufzuchtleistungen in der Versuchsstation Relliehausen zur Entwicklung von Kriterien der Wurfqualität. 1. Mitteilung: der Einfluß der fixen Effekte der Rassenkombination, der Wurfnummer und die Verteilung der Geburtsgewichte. Archiv für Tierzucht 38: 7386.Google Scholar
Klemcke, H.G., Lunstra, D.D., Brown-Borg, H. M., Borg, K.E. and Christenson, R.K. 1993. Association between low birth weight and increased adrenocortical function in neonatal pigs. Journal of Animal Science 71:10101018.Google Scholar
Le Cozier, Y., Dagorn, J., Lindberg, J. E., Aumaître, A. and Dourmad, J. Y. 1998. Effect of age at first farrowing and herd management on long-term productivity of sows. Livestock Production Science 53:135142.Google Scholar
Lee, G. J. and Haley, C. S. 1995. Comparative farrowing to weaning performance in Meishan and Large White pigs and their crosses. Animal Science 60: 269280.Google Scholar
Lende, T. van der and Jager, D. de. 1991. Death risk and preweaning growth rate of piglets in relation to the within-litter weight distribution at birth. Livestock Production Science 28: 7384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuirk, B.J. 1989. The estimation of genetic parameters for all-or-none and categorical traits. In Evolution and animal breeding (ed. Hill, W. G. and Mackay, T.F.C.), pp. 175180. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Meuwissen, T. H. E., Engel, B.. and Werf, J.H.J.van der, 1995. Maximizing selection efficiency for categorical traits. Journal of Animal Science 73: 19331939.Google Scholar
Passillé, A. M. B. de, Rushen, J., Foxcroft, G. R., Aherne, F. X. and Schaefer, A. 1993. Performance of young pigs: relationships with periparturient progesterone, prolactin, and insulin of sows. Journal of Animal Science 71: 179184.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. and Lerner, I. M. 1949. The heritability of all-or-none traits: viability of poultry. Genetics 34: 395411.Google Scholar
Roehe, R. 1999. Genetic determination of individual birth weight and its association to sow productivity traits using Bayesian analyses. Journal of Animal Science 77: 330343.Google Scholar
Roehe, R. and Kennedy, B. W. 1993. Effect of selection for maternal and direct genetic effects on genetic improvement of litter size in swine. Journal of Animal Science 71: 28912904.Google Scholar
Rydhmer, L. 1992. Relations between piglet weights and survival. In Neonatal survival and growt. (ed. Varley, M.A., Williams, P.E.V. and Lawrence, T.L.J.), British Society of Animal Production occasional publication no. 15, pp. 183184.Google Scholar
Rydhmer, L., Johansson, K., Stern, S. and Eliasson-Selling, L. 1992. A genetic study of pubertal age, litter traits, weight loss during lactation and relations to growth and leanness in gilts. Acta Agriculturæ Scandinavica 42: 211219.Google Scholar
Schukken, Y.H., Buurman, J., Huirne, R.B.M., Willemse, A.H., Vernooy, J. C. M., Broek, J. van den and Verheijden, J. H. M. 1994. Evaluation of optimal age at first conception in gilts from data collected in commercial swine herds. Journal of Animal Science 72: 13871392.Google Scholar
Stanton, H.C. and Carroll, J.K. 1974. Potential mechanisms responsible for prenatal and perinatal mortality or low viability of swine. Journal of Animal Science 38: 10371044.Google Scholar
Steen, H. A. M. van der and Groot, P. N.de. 1992. Direct and maternal breed effects on growth and milk intake of piglets: Meishan versus Dutch breeds. Livestock Production Science 30: 361373.Google Scholar
Sterning, M., Rydhmer, L. and Eliasson-Selling, L. 1998. Relationships between age at puberty and interval from weaning to estrus and between estrus signs at puberty and after the first weaning in pigs. Journal of Animal Science 76: 353359.Google Scholar
Ten Napel, J., Meuwissen, T. H. E., Johnson, R. K. and Brascamp, E. W. 1998. Genetics of the interval from weaning to estrus in first-litter sows: correlated responses. Journal of Animal Science 76: 937947.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tholen, E., Bunter, K. L., Hermesch, S. and Graser, H. U. 1996. The genetic foundation of fitness and reproduction traits in Australian pig populations. 2. Relationships between weaning to conception interval, farrowing interval, stayability, and other common reproduction and production traits. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 47: 12751290.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. 1990. Generalized linear models and applications to animal breeding. In Advances in statistical methods for genetic improvement of livestock (ed. Gianola, D. and Hammond, K.), pp. 312328. Springer-Verlag, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varley, M. A. 1992. Neonatal survival: an overview. In Neonatal survival and growth (ed. Varley, M.A., Williams, P.E.V. and Lawrence, T. L. J.), British Society of Animal Production, occasional publication no. 15, pp. 17.Google Scholar
Vries, A.G.de. 1989. A model to estimate economic values of traits in pig breeding. Livestock Production Science 21: 4966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zaleski, H. M. and Hacker, R. R. 1993. Variables related to the progress of parturition and probability of stillbirth in swine. Canadian Veterinary Journal 34:109113.Google Scholar