5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Behavior and Performance of Suckling Piglets Provided Three Supplemental Heat Sources

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Simple Summary

          To reduce the carbon footprint in swine production, researchers used heated mats powered by solar-energy to replace heat lamps in farrowing barns. This study evaluated electric-heated mat (EM), water-heated mat (WM), and infrared heat lamp (HL) systems as supplemental heat for piglets from birth to weaning. Data were collected from 42 litters of piglets in three trials, with 14 litters in each treatment group. Postural behaviors were video-recorded and performance data were collected from birth to weaning. Results indicate that piglets spent a similar amount of time on EM as under HL. Growth performance of piglets was comparable among the three heat sources. Taking into consideration cost and ease of installation, electricity use, and durability of the three supplemental heat sources, EM appears to be a better choice to provide supplemental heat to suckling piglets compared to HL and WM.

          Abstract

          This study compared water-heated mats (WM) and electric-heated mats (EM) with heat lamps (HL) as supplemental heat sources for suckling piglets. Forty-two litters were studied in 3 trials. In all trials, behavior of piglets was video-recorded on day 1, 3, 7, 14, and 21 postpartum. Videos were scan-sampled to register postures (lying and standing) and locations (on or away from mat) to assess piglet use of heat sources. Litter size and weight at birth and weaning, and pre-weaning mortality were recorded. Data were analyzed using Glimmix Procedures of SAS. Piglets spent more time on WM than under HL (67.5% vs. 51.0%, p = 0.002). No difference in piglet performance between WM and HL was observed, except mortality tended to be higher in WM (22.9% vs. 8.9%; p = 0.06). Piglet performance and use of the heat source were comparable for HL and EM. When comparing WM with EM, piglets provided WM spent more time on the mat compared to those provided EM (21.8% vs. 17.1%; p = 0.02). No difference in pre-weaning mortality, litter weight, and individual daily gain was observed between WM and EM group. These results suggest EM and HL were comparable to maintain performance and postural behaviors of piglets.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Impact of piglet birth weight, birth order, and litter size on subsequent growth performance, carcass quality, muscle composition, and eating quality of pork.

          The objective of this study was to investigate the relationships among birth weight, birth order, or litter size on growth performance, carcass quality, and eating quality of the ultimate pork product. Data were collected from 98 pig litters and, with the addition of recording birth weight and birth order, farrowing and piglet management were according to normal barn practices. In the nursery and during growout, the pigs received the normal feeding program for the barn and, with the addition of individual tattooing, were marketed as per standard procedure. From 24 litters, selected because they had at least 12 pigs born alive and represented a range of birth weights, 4 piglets were chosen (for a total of 96 piglets) and sent to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada-Lacombe Research Centre (Lacombe, Alberta, Canada) when they reached 120 kg for extensive meat quality and sensory analysis. Individual BW was measured at birth, on the day of weaning, 5 wk after weaning, at nursery exit, at first pull, and at the time of marketing. Litter sizes were divided into 3 categories: small (3 to 10 piglets), medium (11 to 13 piglets), and large (14 to 19 piglets). There were 4 birth-weight quartiles: 0.80 to 1.20, 1.25 to 1.45, 1.50 to 1.70, and 1.75 to 2.50 kg. Increased litter size resulted in reduced mean birth weight (P 0.05) when slaughtered at the same endpoint. Lighter birth-weight pigs had reduced BW at weaning, 5 and 7 wk postweaning, and at first pull and had increased days to market (P 0.05). In conclusion, increased litter size resulted in decreased mean birth weight but no change in days to market. Lighter birth-weight pigs took longer to reach market. Despite some differences in histological properties, birth weight had limited effects on carcass composition or final eating quality of the pork when slaughtered at the same BW and large litter size resulted in more pigs weaned and marketed compared with the smaller litters. We concluded that based on the conditions of this study, other than increased days to market, there is no reason based on pig performance or pork quality to slow down the goal of the pork industry to increase sow productivity as a means to increase efficiency.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Non-infectious causes of pre-weaning mortality in piglets

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Influence of high ambient temperatures on performance of multiparous lactating sows.

              Multiparous Large White sows (n = 63) were used to investigate the effects of five ambient temperatures (18, 22, 25, 27, and 29 degrees C) and two dietary protein contents on their lactation performance. At each temperature treatment, ambient temperature was maintained constant over the 21-d lactation period. Dietary protein content was either 14 or 17% with essential amino acids levels calculated not to be limiting. The animals had ad libitum access to feed between the seventh and the 19th day of lactation. Diet composition did not influence lactation performance. Over the 21-d lactation, feed intake decreased from 5.67 to 3.08 kg/d between 18 and 29 degrees C. Between d 7 and 19, the corresponding values were 7.16 and 3.48 kg/d, respectively. This decrease was curvilinear; an equation to predict voluntary feed intake (VFI) from temperature (T, degrees C) and body weight (BW, kg) is proposed: VFI = -49,052 + 1,213 T - 31.5 T2 + 330 BW - .61 BW2 (residual standard deviation: 1,018). Skin temperature increased regularly with increased ambient temperature (34.6 to 37.4 degrees C between 18 and 29 degrees C), whereas udder temperature reached a plateau at 25 degrees C (38.3 degrees C). The gradient of temperature between skin and rectum was minimal (2 degrees C ) at 27 degrees C and remained constant at 29 degrees C. This constancy coincides with the marked reduction of feed intake. The respiratory rate increased from 26 to 124 breaths/min between 18 and 29 degrees C, and this indicates that the evaporative critical temperature was below 22 degrees C. The BW loss increased from 23 to 35 kg between 18 and 29 degrees C, but its estimated chemical composition remained constant. Pig growth rate was almost constant between 18 and 25 degrees C (241 g/d) and was reduced above 25 degrees C (212 and 189 g/d at 27 and 29 degrees C, respectively). In conclusion, temperatures above 25 degrees C seem to be critical for lactating sows in order to maintain their performance.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Animals (Basel)
                Animals (Basel)
                animals
                Animals : an Open Access Journal from MDPI
                MDPI
                2076-2615
                07 July 2020
                July 2020
                : 10
                : 7
                : 1155
                Affiliations
                West Central Research and Outreach Center, University of Minnesota, Morris, MN 56267, USA; zhu00560@ 123456morris.umn.edu (Y.Z.); yuzhili@ 123456umn.edu (Y.L.); reesem@ 123456umn.edu (M.R.); buch0123@ 123456morris.umn.edu (E.B.); tall0007@ 123456umn.edu (J.T.)
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: johnstlj@ 123456umn.edu ; Tel.: +1-320-589-1711
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4164-1835
                Article
                animals-10-01155
                10.3390/ani10071155
                7401536
                32645987
                37271685-55bc-465f-9ab9-fefca8e1353d
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 12 June 2020
                : 04 July 2020
                Categories
                Article

                behavior,performance,piglets,heat source
                behavior, performance, piglets, heat source

                Comments

                Comment on this article