Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T12:27:45.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mating of sows during lactation: Observations from a commercial unit

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

P. Rowlinson ,
H. G. Boughton  and
M. J. Bryant
P. Rowlinson
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Horticulture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 2 AT
H. G. Boughton
Affiliation:
Hawthorn Farms, Great Missenden, Buckinghamshire
M. J. Bryant
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Horticulture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, Reading RG6 2 AT
Get access

Summary

Observations were made on a commercial herd of female pigs (sows) where a managemental system was employed which enabled sows to be served during lactation. The system involved grouping between 2 and 8 sows together with their litters about 3 weeks post partum. The sows were fed ad libitum from grouping, and the piglets had ready access to creep food. After one day a male pig was introduced to the group. No exogenous hormone therapy was used.

Results from 39 batches, comprising 180 sows, suggested that sows kept under these conditions will exhibit oestrus, and conceive during lactation with a high degree of predictability. Lactational oestrus was shown by all sows and conception to first service was 84·9%. The number of days between grouping and oestrus, and parturition and oestrus, were 11·15 ±0·28 and 35·53 ±0·47 respectively. Litter size and performance did not appear to be adversely affected by the concurrent lactation and pregnancy, either at the present or subsequent parturition. The average farrowing interval of 153 days allowed a performance of 2·35 litters/sow per year, and, with 9·47 piglets weaned/litter, a productivity of 22 piglets/sow per year.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , December 1975 , pp. 233 - 241
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1975

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

REFERENCES

Allen, A. D., Lasley, J. F. and Uren, A. W. 1957. The effects of gonadotrophic injections on induction of estrus in lactating sows. J. Anim. Sci. 16: 1097–1098 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Anon. 1974. Group link brings financial bonus. Pig Fmng 22: 22–23.Google Scholar
Boughton, H. G. 1967. Mum helps herself. Pig Fmng 15: 24–25.Google Scholar
Burger, J. F. 1952. Sex physiology of pigs. Onderstepoort J. Vet. Res. (Suppl No. 2): 3–218.Google Scholar
Cole, D. J. A., Brooks, P. H. and Kay, R. M. 1972. Lactational anoestrus in the sow. Vet. Rec. 90: 681–683.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cole, H. H. and Hughes, E. H. 1946. Induction of estrus in lactating sows with equine gonadotrophin. J. Anim. Sci. 5: 25–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crighton, D. B. 1970. Induction of pregnancy during lactation in the sow. J. Reprod. Fert. 15: 457–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crighton, D. B. 1971. Lactational anoestrus and the effects on lactation of the induction of varying levels of ovarian and uterine activity. In Lactation (ed. Falconer, I. R.), p. 105. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
Crighton, D. B. and Lamming, G. E. 1969. The lactational anoestrus of the sow: the status of the anterior pituitary-ovarian system during lactation and after weaning. J. Endocr. 43: 507–509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eames, T. J. 1964. Service while suckling. Pig Fmng 12: 39.Google Scholar
Gadd, J. 1969. Ideas worth watching. Pig Fmng 17: 24–25.Google Scholar
Herrman, H. and Cole, H. H. 1956. Further studies on the induction of estrus in lactating sows with equine gonadotrophin. J. Anim. Sci. 15: 970–977.Google Scholar
Lodge, G. A., Elsley, F. W. H. and MacPherson, R. M. 1966. The effects of level of feeding of sows during pregnancy. II. Changes in body weight. Anim. Prod. 8: 499–506.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1974. Pig Feed Recording Service. Meat and Livestock Commission, Bletchley, Bucks.Google Scholar
Peters, J. B., First, M. L. and Casida, L. E. 1969. Effects of pig removal and oxytocin injections on ovarian and pituitary changes in mammillectomized post partum sows. J. Anim.Sci. 28: 537–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phelps, A. 1969. Batched sows served while suckling. Pig Fmng 17: 46–47.Google Scholar
Polge, C. 1972. Reproductive physiology in the pig with special reference to early weaning. Proc. Br. Soc. Anim. Prod. (New Series), 972: 5–18.Google Scholar
Robison, W. L. 1918. Mating sows before their litters are weaned. Ohio Monthly Bull. 3: 142–143.Google Scholar
Self, H. L. and Grummer, R. H. 1958. The rate and economy of pig gains and the reproductive behaviour in sows when litters are weaned at 10 days, 21 days or 56 days of age. J. Anim. Sci. 17: 862–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, D. M. 1961. The effect of daily separation of sows from their litters upon milk yield, creep intake and energetic efficiency. N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 4: 232–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varadin, M. and Marjanov, M. 1971. [The effect of the organisation of suckling in the occurrence of estrus and fertility in sows.] Veterinaria, Saraj. 20: 145–150.Google Scholar
Wagner, W. C. and Oxenrider, S. L. 1971. Endocrine physiology following parturition. J. Anim. Sci. 32 (Suppl.): 1–16.Google ScholarPubMed
Warnick, A. C., Casida, L. E. and Grummer, R. H. 1950. The occurrence of estrus and ovulation in post-partum sows. J. Anim. Sci. 9: 66–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar