Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T02:42:56.795Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of the influence of maternal and piglet breed differences on behaviour and production of Meishan synthetic and European White breeds during lactation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

A. G. Sinclair ,
S. A. Edwards ,
S. Hoste  and
A. McCartney
A. G. Sinclair
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA
S. A. Edwards
Affiliation:
Pig Improvement Company, Fyfield Wick, Abington 0X13 5NA
S. Hoste
Affiliation:
Pig Improvement Company, Fyfield Wick, Abington 0X13 5NA
A. McCartney
Affiliation:
Pig Improvement Company, Fyfield Wick, Abington 0X13 5NA
Get access

Abstract

Meishan synthetic sows and gilts have been shown to produce higher litter weights at weaning than White breed type sows and gilts. To investigate the factors contributing to this, 64 multiparous sows were used in a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial experiment to assess the influence of maternal breed type (0·50 Meishan synthetic (M) or purebred European Landrace and Large White (W)), litter size (eight (L) or 12 (H) piglets) and breed of piglet (0·25 Meishan hybrid (m) or white hybrid (w)) on sow and litter production and behaviour over a 28-day lactation. All litters were formed by cross-fostering to standardized litter rearing size 24 h after farrowing. Sows were given food twice daily to appetite. When there were no treatment interactions, main effects are presented. M sows were lighter (M = 215, W = 241 (s.e. 3·61) kg, P < 0·001) and fatter (M = 31·5, W = 21·7 (s.e. 0·72) mm, P < 0·001) at farrowing than W and had higher maternal weight loss (M = 24·7, W = 5·9 (s.e. 0·85) kg, P < 0·001) and higher back fat loss (M = 5·6, W = 2·0 (s.e. 0.28) mm, P < 0·001) in lactation. High litter size resulted in higher maternal weight loss (L = 7·4, H = 13·2 (s.e. 0·85) kg, P < 0·001) and fat loss (L = 2·9, H = 4·7 (s.e. 0·28) mm, P < 0·002) than low litter size. Litter growth rate was higher for M than for W (M = 27·0, W = 14·5 (s.e. 0·42) kg/week, P < 0·002) and for high litter size than for low litter size (L = 24·3, H = 17·3 (s.e. 0·42 kg/week, P < 0·001). The m piglets had lower litter growth rates than w piglets (m = 15·1, w – 16·5 (s.e. 0·42) kg/week, P < 0·001). There were no breed differences in the length of suckling periods but M had shorter suckling intervals than W (M = 38·1, W = 48·7 (s.e. 1·08) min, P < 0·001). It is concluded that the higher litter weights produced by M sows are due solely to maternal effects and not litter size or piglet genotype.

Keywords

breedslactationmaternal behaviourpigs
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 66 , Issue 2 , April 1998 , pp. 423 - 430
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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

Algers, B. 1993. Nursing in pigs: communicating needs and distributing resources Journal of Animal Science 71: 2826–2831.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elsley, F. W. H. 1971. Nutrition and lactation in the sow. In Lactation (ed. Faulkner, I. R.), pp. 393–411. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
Fraser, D. 1980. A review of the behavioural mechanism of milk ejection of the domestic pig Applied Animal Ethology 6: 247–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gotz, M. 1991. Changes in nursing and suckling behaviour of sows and their piglets in farrowing crates Applied Animal Behaviour Science 31:271–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haley, C. S., d‘Agaro, E. and Ellis, M. 1992. Genetic components of growth and ultrasonic fat depth traits in Meishan and Large White pigs and their reciprocal crosses. Animal Production 54:105–115.Google Scholar
Haley, C. S., Lee, G. J. and Ritchie, M. 1995. Comparative reproductive performance in Meishan and Large White pigs and their crosses Animal Science 60: 259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herpin, P., Le Dividich, J. and Ameral, 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: 2645–2653.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jensen, P. 1988. Maternal behaviour and mother-young interactions during lactation in free-ranging domestic pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 20: 297–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P. and Recen, B. 1989. When to wean—observations from free-ranging domestic pigs Applied Animal Behaviour Science 23: 49–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P., Stangel, G. and Algers, B. 1991. Nursing and suckling behaviour of semi-naturally kept pigs during the first 10 days post-partum. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 31:195–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, C. H. and Wilde, C. J. 1993. Mammary changes during pregnancy and lactation Livestock Production Science 35: 3–10.CrossRefGoogle 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: 269–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1991. The feeding stuffs regulations 1991. Statutory instrument no. 2840, p. 76. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
O'Grady, J. F., Lynch, P. B. and Kearny, P. A. 1985. Voluntary feed intake by lactating sows Livestock Production Science 12: 355–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Passille, A. M. B. de and Robert, S. 1989. Behaviour of lactating sows; influence of stage of lactation and husbandry practices at weaning Applied Animal Behaviour Science 23: 315–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poole, D. A. 1982. The effects of milking cows three times daily Animal Production 34:197–201.Google Scholar
Sinclair, A. G., Edwards, S. A., Hoste, S., McCartney, A. and Fowler, V. R. 1996. Partitioning of dietary protein during lactation in the Meishan synthetic and European White breeds of pig Animal Science 62:355–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spinka, M., Illmann, G. and Stetkova, Z. 1995. The influence of interval duration between nursings on piglet milk intake, weight gain and udder massage. Proceedings of the 29th international congress of the International Society Applied Ethology (ed. Rutter, S. M., Rushan, J., Randle, H. D. and Eddison, J. C.), p. 139.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 30:361–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verstegen, M. W. A., Mesu, J., Kempen, G. J. M.van, and Geerse, C. 1985. Energy balances of lactating sows in relation to feeding level and stage of lactation Journal of Animal Science 60:731–740.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilde, C. J., Henderson, A. J., Knight, C. H., Blatchford, D. R., Faulkner, A. and Vernon, R. C. 1987. Effects of long-term thrice-daily milking on mammary enzyme activity, cell population and milk yield in the goat. Journal of Animal Science 64: 533.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, H., Eastham, P. R., Phillips, P. and Whittemore, C. T. 1989. Reproductive performance, body weight and body condition of breeding sows with differing body fatness at parturition, differing nutrition during lactation and differing litter size Animal Production 48:181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar