Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T21:19:41.660Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sow and piglet factors determining variation of colostrum intake between and within litters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 February 2017

I. Declerck ,
S. Sarrazin ,
J. Dewulf  and
D. Maes
I. Declerck*
Affiliation:
Department of Reproduction, Obstetrics and Herd Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
S. Sarrazin
Affiliation:
Department of Reproduction, Obstetrics and Herd Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
J. Dewulf
Affiliation:
Department of Reproduction, Obstetrics and Herd Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
D. Maes
Affiliation:
Department of Reproduction, Obstetrics and Herd Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, B-9820 Merelbeke, Belgium
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Colostrum intake has a short- and long-term beneficial impact on piglet performance and mortality. Sows’ colostrum production and piglets’ colostrum intake are limited and highly variable. The present study investigated sow and piglet factors explaining the variation of colostrum intake between and within litters. The CV for colostrum intake and birth weight (BWb) of all piglets within a litter was calculated to evaluate the variation of colostrum intake and BWb within a litter (colostrum and litter BWb heterogeneity, respectively). A total of 1937 live-born piglets from 135 litters from 10 commercial herds were included. Colostrum intake per piglet averaged 371±144 g and was affected by breed (P=0.02). It was lower when oxytocin was administered to the sow during parturition (P=0.001) and with increased litter size (P<0.001). It was higher when the interval between birth and first suckling decreased (tFS, P<0.001). Colostrum intake was positively influenced by BWb (P<0.001) and this association was more pronounced in piglets from Topigs (P=0.03) and Hypor (P=0.03) sows compared with piglets from Danbred sow breeds. The positive relationship between colostrum intake and BWb was more pronounced when tFS lasted longer (P=0.009). Heterogeneity in colostrum intake averaged 31±11%, it increased when oxytocin was applied during farrowing (P=0.004) and when stillbirth occurred (P=0.006). Colostrum heterogeneity was positively associated with litter size (P<0.001) and litter BWb heterogeneity (P=0.01). The positive relationship between colostrum and litter BWb heterogeneity was more pronounced when oxytocin was applied during farrowing (P=0.04). The present study demonstrated that oxytocin should be used cautiously in sows during farrowing. Farrowing and colostrum management should prevent or counteract the adverse influences of stillbirth, large and heterogeneous litters on colostrum intake and colostrum heterogeneity. The study also confirmed the expected association between BWb and colostrum intake and indicated that the impact of BWb on colostrum intake was different among breeds (Hypor v. Danbred) and dependent on piglets’ latency to first suckling. Hence, colostrum management should focus on low birth weight piglets, especially in some breeds, and low colostrum intake in low birth weight piglets can be counteracted by shortening the tFS.

Keywords

colostrumheterogeneityintakepigletsvariation
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 11 , Issue 8 , August 2017 , pp. 1336 - 1343
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

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

Alonso-Spilsbury, M, Mota-Rojas, D, Martinez-Burnes, J, Arch, E, Lopez, A, Ramirez-Necoechea, R, Olmos, A and Trujillo, ME 2004. Use of oxytocin in penned sows and its effect on fetal intra-partum asphyxia. Animal Reproduction Science 84, 157–167.Google Scholar
Andersen, IL, Naevdal, E and Bøe, KE 2011. Maternal investment, sibling competition, and offspring survival with increasing litter size and parity in pigs. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 65, 1159–1167.Google Scholar
Baxter, EM, Jarvis, S, D’Eath, RB, Ross, DW, Robson, SK, Farish, M, Nevvison, IM, Lawrence, AB and Edwards, SA 2008. Investigating the behavioural and physiological indicators of neonatal survival in pigs. Theriogenology 6, 773–783.Google Scholar
Decaluwé, R, Janssens, GPJ, Englebienne, M and Maes, D 2014a. Effectiveness of different farrowing induction protocols in sows using alphaprostol on day 114 of gestation. Veterinary Record 174, 381–386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Decaluwé, R, Maes, D, Wuyts, B, Cools, A, Piepers, S and Janssens, GPJ 2014b. Piglets’ colostrum intake associates with daily weight gain and survival until weaning. Livestock Science 162, 185–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, I, Dewulf, J, Decaluwé, R and Maes, D 2016a. Effect of energy supplementation to neonatal (very) low birth weight piglets on mortality, weaning weight, daily weight gain and colostrum intake. Livestock Science 183, 48–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, I, Dewulf, J, Piepers, S, Decaluwé, R and Maes, D 2015. Sow and litter factors influencing colostrum yield and nutritional composition. Journal of Animal Science 93, 1309–1317.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Declerck, I, Dewulf, J, Sarrazin, S and Maes, D 2016b. Long-term effects of colostrum intake in piglet mortality and performance. Journal of Animal Science 94, 1–11.Google Scholar
Devillers, N, Farmer, C, Le Dividich, J and Prunier, A 2007. Variability of colostrum yield and colostrum intake in pigs. Animal 1, 1033–1041.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devillers, N, Le Dividich, J and Prunier, A 2011. Influence of colostrum intake on piglet survival and immunity. Animal 5, 1605–1612.Google Scholar
Devillers, N, van Milgen, J, Prunier, A and Le Dividich, J 2004. Estimation of colostrum intake in the neonatal pig. Animal Science 78, 305–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farmer, C and Quesnel, H 2009. Nutritional, hormonal and environmental effects on colostrum in sows. Journal of Animal Science 87, 56–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foisnet, A, Farmer, C, David, C and Quesnel, H 2010. Relationships between colostrum production by primiparous sows and sow physiology around parturition. Journal of Animal Science 88, 1672–1683.Google Scholar
Herpin, P, Le Dividich, J, Hulin, JC, Fillaut, M, De Marco, F and Bertin, F 1996. Effects of the level of asphyxia during delivery on viability at birth and early postnatal vitality of newborn pigs. Journal of Animal Science 74, 2067–2075.Google Scholar
Herpin P, Louveau I, Damon M and Le Dividich 2005. Environmental and hormonal regulation of energy metabolism in early development of the pig. In Biology of metabolism in growing animals (ed. Burrin DG and Mersmann H), pp. 345–374. Elsevier, New York.Google Scholar
Kent, JC, Kennaugh, LM and Hartmann, PE 2003. Intramammary pressure in the lactating sow in response to oxytocin and during natural milk ejections throughout lactation. Journal of Dairy Research 70, 131–138.Google Scholar
Le Dividich, J, Rooke, JA and Herpin, P 2005. Nutritional and immunological importance of colostrum for the new-born pig. Journal of Agricultural Science 143, 469–485.Google Scholar
Milligan, BN, Fraser, D and Kramer, DL 2001. Birth weight variation in the domestic pig: effects on offspring survival, weight gain and suckling behavior. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 73, 179–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mota-Rojas, D, Martinez-Burnes, J, Trujillo, ME, Lopez, A, Rosales, AM, Ramirez, R, Orozco, H, Merino, A and Alonso-Spilsbury, M 2005. Uterine and fetal asphyxia monitoring in parturient sows treated with oxytocin. Animal Reproduction Science 86, 131–141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muns, R, Manteca, X and Gasa, J 2015. Effects of different management techniques to enhance colostrum intake on piglets’ growth and mortality. Animal Welfare 24, 185–192.Google Scholar
Muns, R, Nuntapaitoon, M and Tummaruk, P 2016. Non-infectious causes of pre-weaning mortality in piglets. Livestock Science 184, 46–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ocepek, M, Andersen-Ranberg, I, Edwards, SA and Andersen, IL 2016. Udder characteristics of importance for teat use in purebred and crossbred pigs. Journal of Animal Science 94, 780–788.Google Scholar
Pedersen, LJ, Berg, P, Jørgensen, G and Andersen, IL 2011. Neonatal piglet traits of importance for survival in crates and indoor pens. Journal of Animal Science 89, 1207–1218.Google Scholar
Peltoniemi, O, Björkman, S, Oliviero, C and Soede, N 2016. Positive effect of oxytocin on placenta expulsion. Proceedings of the 24th International Pig Veterinary Society Congress, Dublin, p. 116.Google Scholar
Quesnel, H 2011. Colostrum production by sows: variability of colostrum yield and immunoglobulin G concentrations. Animal 5, 1546–1553.Google Scholar
Quesnel, H, Farmer, C and Devillers, N 2012. Colostrum intake: influence on piglet performance and factors of variation. Livestock Science 146, 105–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quiniou, N, Dagorn, J and Gaudré, D 2002. Variation of piglets’ birth weight and consequences on subsequent performance. Livestock Production Science 78, 63–70.Google Scholar
Rooke, JA and Bland, IM 2002. The acquisition of passive immunity in the newborn piglet. Livestock Production Science 78, 13–23.Google Scholar
Theil, PK, Flummer, C, Hurley, WL, Kristensen, NB, Labouriau, RL and Sorensen, MT 2014. Mechanistic model to predict colostrum intake based on deuterium oxide dilution technique data and impact of gestation and prefarrowing diets on piglet intake and sow yield of colostrum. Journal of Animal Science 92, 5507–5519.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tuchscherer, M, Puppe, B, Tuchscherer, A and Tiemann, U 2000. Early identification of neonates at risk: traits of newborn piglets with respect to survival. Theriogenology 54, 371–388.Google Scholar
Valros, A, Rundgren, M, Spinka, M, Saloniemi, H, Hulten, F, Uvnäs-Moberg, K, Tomanek, M, Krejci, P and Algers, B 2004. Oxytocin, prolactin and somatostatin in lactating sows: associations with mobilisations of body resources and maternal behaviour. Livestock Production Science 85, 3–13.Google Scholar
Vasdal, G and Larsen, IL 2012. A note on teat accessibility and sow parity – consequences for newborn piglets. Livestock Science 146, 91–94.Google Scholar
Vasdal, G, Østensen, I, Melišová, M and Bozděchová, B 2011. Management routines at the time of farrowing-effects on teat success and postnatal piglet mortality from loose housed sows. Livestock Science 136, 225–231.Google Scholar
Xu, RJ, Wang, F and Zhang, SH 2000. Postnatal adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract in neonatal pigs: a possible role of milk-borne growth factors. Livestock Production Science 66, 95–107.Google Scholar