Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T05:08:59.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Responses in gilt post-farrowing traits and pre-weaning piglet growth to divergent selection for components of efficient lean growth rate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. C. Kerr  and
N. D. Cameron
J. C. Kerr
Affiliation:
Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
N. D. Cameron
Affiliation:
Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9PS
Get access

Abstract

Responses in gilt live weight, backfat depth and food intake during lactation and in pre-weaning piglet growth rate were examined after seven generations of divergent selection for daily food intake (DFI), lean food conversion (LFC) or lean growth rate (LGA) on ad-libitum feeding or lean growth on restricted feeding (LGS). There were 252 Large White gilts in the study. Selection for low DFI resulted in gilts with less backfat (25·7 v. 30·7 (s.e.d. 2·21) mm) at farrowing and a substantially lowerfood intake (129 v. 146 (s.e.d. 5) kg) during lactation, but similar reductions in live weight (42 (s.e.d. 6) kg) and backfat depth (8·4 (s.e.d. 1·7) mm) than with selection for high DFI. Therefore, the lower piglet growth (167 v. 295 (s.e.d. 11) g/day) with selection for low DFI compared with selection for high DFI was primarily due to lower food intake of the gilts, as energy for milk production from food was reduced. In contrast, selection for high LFC resulted in relatively smaller changes in live weight (37 v. 48 (s.e.d. 5) kg) and backfat depth (7·6 v. 8·9 (s.e.d. 1·3) mm) than selection for low LFC, which combined with a lower food intake (132 v. 148 (s.e.d. 4) kg) during lactation, resulted in lower piglet growth (181 v. 200 (s.e.d. 11) g/day). The higher food intake of high LGA gilts (137 v. 121 (s.e.d. 4) kg) compensated for the relatively lower reductions in live weight (41 v. 46 (s.e.d. 5) kg) and backfat depth (5·5 v. 6·7 (s.e.d. 1·3) mm) during lactation compared with the low LGA line, such that piglet growth was similar (195 v. 289 (s.e.d. 11) g/day) in the two selection lines. In the high and low LGS selection lines, piglet growth was similar (195 v. 186 (s.e.d. 11) g/day) as was gilt food intake (125 v. 227 (s.e.d. 5) kg) and the changes in live weight (39 v. 41 (s.e.d. 6) kg) and backfat depth (8·1 v. 7·7 (s.e.d. 2·2) mm) during lactation. An examination of the daily energy used in litter gain and the energy available from gilt food intake and mobilization of body lipid indicated that one equation to predict the amount of body lipid mobilized during lactation was not appropriate for different genotypes. Responses in gilt food intake and the changes in live weight and backfat during lactation were selection strategy dependent. However, in general, the selection strategies which reduced gilt voluntary food intake during lactation or resulted in lower live weight and backfat depth at farrowing were detrimental to piglet growth rate.

Keywords

food intakelean growthpigsreproductionselection
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 63 , Issue 3 , December 1996 , pp. 523 - 531
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

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

Cameron, N. D. 1994. Selection for components of efficient lean growth rate in pigs. 1. Selection pressure applied and direct responses in a Large White herd. Animal Production. 59: 251–262.Google Scholar
Cameron, N. D. and Curran, M. K. 1994. Selection for components of efficient lean growth rate in pigs. 4. Genetic and phenotypic parameter estimates and correlated responses in performance test traits with ad-libitum feeding. Animal Production 59: 281–291.Google Scholar
Cameron, N. D. and Curran, M. K. 1995. Responses in carcass composition to divergent selection for components of efficient lean growth rate. Animal Science. 61: 347–359.Google Scholar
Cameron, N. D., Curran, M. K. and Kerr, J. C. 1994. Selection for components of efficient lean growth rate in pigs. 3. Responses to selection with a restricted feeding regime. Animal Production. 59: 271–279.Google Scholar
Cleveland, E. R., Johnson, R. K. and Cunningham, P. J. 1988. Correlated responses of carcass and reproduction traits to selection for rate of lean growth in swine. Journal of Animal Science. 66: 1371–1377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeNise, R. S. K., Irvin, K. M., Swiger, L. A. and Plimpton, R. F. 1983. Selection for increased leanness of Yorkshire swine. IV. Indirect responses of the carcass, breeding efficiency and preweaning litter traits. Journal of Animal Science. 56: 551–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eastham, P. R., Smith, W. C., Whittemore, C. T. and Phillips, P. 1988. Responses in lactating sows to food level. Animal Production 46: 71–77.Google Scholar
Genstat 5.3 Committee. 1993. GENSTAT 5.3 reference manual Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Hill, W. G. 1971. Design and efficiency of selection experiments for estimating genetic parameters. Biometrics. 27: 293–312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kerr, J. C. and Cameron, N. D. 1995. Reproductive performance of pigs selected for components of efficient lean growth. Animal Science. 60: 281–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, J. C. and Cameron, N. D. 1996. Genetic and phenotypic relationships between performance test and reproduction traits in Large White pigs. Animal Science. 62: 531–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKay, R. M. 1992. Effect of index selection for reduced backfat thickness and increased growth rate on sow weight changes through two parities in swine. Canadian Journal Animal Science. 72: 403–408.Google Scholar
Noblet, J., Dourmad, J. Y. and Etienne, M. 1990. Energy utilisation in pregnant and lactating sows: modelling of energy requirements. Journal ofAnimal Science. 68: 562–572.Google ScholarPubMed
Noblet, J. and Etienne, M. 1986. Effect of energy level in lactating sows on yield and composition of milk and nutrient balance of piglets. Journal of Animal Science. 63: 1888–1896.Google Scholar
Patterson, H. D. and Thompson, R. 1971. Recovery of inter-block information when block sizes are unequal. Biotnetrika. 58: 545–554.Google Scholar
Vangen, O. 1980. Studies on a two trait selection experiment in pigs. v. Correlated responses in reproductive performance. Ada Agriculturea Scandinavica. 30: 309–319.Google Scholar
Webster, A. J. F. 1977. Selection for leanness and the energetic efficiency of growth in meat animals. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 36: 53–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whittemore, C. T. 1993. The science and practice of pig production. Longman Group UK Limited.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T., Kerr, J. C. and Cameron, N. D. 1995. An approach to prediction of feed intake in growing pigs using simple body measurements. Agricultural Systems. 47: 235–244.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. and Morgan, C. A. 1990. Model components for the determination of energy and protein requirements for breeding sows: a review. Livestock Production Science. 26: 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, C. T., Smith, W. C. and Phillips, P. 1988. Fatness, live weight and performance responses of sows to food level in pregnancy. Animal Production. 47: 123–130.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. and Yang, H. 1989. Physical and chemical composition of the body of breeding sows with differing body subcutaneous fat depth at parturition, differing nutrition during lactation and differing litter size. Animal Production 48: 203–212.Google Scholar
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