Literature DB >> 11204720

Effects of repeated cross-fosterings on preweaning behavior and growth performance of piglets and on maternal behavior of sows.

S Robert1, G P Martineau.   

Abstract

Extensive cross-fostering is widely used in early-weaning units in order to standardize and improve body weight at weaning. However, young suckling piglets develop teat fidelity and repeated cross-fosterings could go against this behavior. This experiment was therefore conducted to compare the behavior and growth of 13 control and 14 fostered litters. Once every 3 d (from d 1 to 16 of lactation), all piglets were weighed and three piglets were switched between two fostered litters. Their unfostered littermates were called residents. Behavior was recorded for 2 h after weighing and(or) adoption and during one nursing period 24 h later. Fights were more frequent (P < 0.05) in treated than in control litters during and between nursings at all ages of adoption except d 1. Most fights occurred between resident and fostered piglets (P < 0.001), except at d 1. Fights during nursing were still more frequent in treated than in control litters 24 h after adoption (P < 0.02), except at d 1 and 16. More piglets had skin lacerations in treated than in control litters except at d 1 (P < 0.05), and scratches were more frequent in fostered than in resident piglets at d 1 (P = 0.07), 7, 13, and 16 (P < 0.01). At all ages except d 1, failed nursings and snaps at piglets were more frequent in fostered than in control litters (P < 0.05), most snaps being directed at adopted piglets (P < 0.001). In fostered litters, sows spent 15 to 30% less time lying on their sides at d 4, 7, 13, and 16 (P < 0.05). Finally, adopted piglets were 13% lighter than controls at weaning (P < 0.001), whereas residents were heavier than adopted piglets (P < 0.05) but lighter than controls (P = 0.1). These data demonstrate that cross-fostering done repeatedly during lactation is stressful for piglets and sows and does not improve body weight at weaning.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11204720     DOI: 10.2527/2001.79188x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  8 in total

1.  Welfare of pigs on farm.

Authors:  Søren Saxmose Nielsen; Julio Alvarez; Dominique Joseph Bicout; Paolo Calistri; Elisabetta Canali; Julian Ashley Drewe; Bruno Garin-Bastuji; Jose Luis Gonzales Rojas; Gortázar Schmidt; Mette Herskin; Virginie Michel; Miguel Ángel Miranda Chueca; Olaf Mosbach-Schulz; Barbara Padalino; Helen Clare Roberts; Karl Stahl; Antonio Velarde; Arvo Viltrop; Christoph Winckler; Sandra Edwards; Sonya Ivanova; Christine Leeb; Beat Wechsler; Chiara Fabris; Eliana Lima; Olaf Mosbach-Schulz; Yves Van der Stede; Marika Vitali; Hans Spoolder
Journal:  EFSA J       Date:  2022-08-25

2.  Field trial to determine the impact of providing additional care to litters on weaning weight of pigs.

Authors:  Catherine E Dewey; Tara Gomes; Karen Richardson
Journal:  Can J Vet Res       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 1.310

Review 3.  A Review of Success Factors for Piglet Fostering in Lactation.

Authors:  Jena G Alexopoulos; David S Lines; Suzanne Hallett; Kate J Plush
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 2.752

4.  Cross-Fostering Implications for Pig Mortality, Welfare and Performance.

Authors:  Julia A Calderón Díaz; Edgar García Manzanilla; Alessia Diana; Laura A Boyle
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2018-06-06

5.  Review: Early life predisposing factors for biting in pigs.

Authors:  A Prunier; X Averos; I Dimitrov; S A Edwards; E Hillmann; M Holinger; V Ilieski; R Leming; C Tallet; S P Turner; M Zupan; I Camerlink
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2019-08-22       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Animal Welfare and Economic Aspects of Using Nurse Sows in Swedish Pig Production.

Authors:  Karin Alvåsen; Helena Hansson; Ulf Emanuelson; Rebecka Westin
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2017-12-01

7.  What is the current significance of low birthweight pigs on commercial farms in Northern Ireland in terms of impaired growth and mortality?

Authors:  Samuel J Hawe; Nigel Scollan; Alan Gordon; Elizabeth Magowan
Journal:  Transl Anim Sci       Date:  2020-07-31

8.  Sexual dimorphism in ritualized agonistic behaviour, fighting ability and contest costs of Sus scrofa.

Authors:  Irene Camerlink; Marianne Farish; Gareth Arnott; Simon P Turner
Journal:  Front Zool       Date:  2022-03-12       Impact factor: 3.172

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.