Literature DB >> 20418451

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

A D Beaulieu1, J L Aalhus, N H Williams, J F Patience.   

Abstract

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), but had no effect on within litter variability or carcass quality (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). Birth weight had limited effects on carcass quality, weight of primal cuts, objective quality, and overall palatability of the meat at the same slaughter weight (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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20418451     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2009-2222

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


  45 in total

1.  Limited and excess protein intake of pregnant gilts differently affects body composition and cellularity of skeletal muscle and subcutaneous adipose tissue of newborn and weanling piglets.

Authors:  Charlotte Rehfeldt; Louis Lefaucheur; Jana Block; Bernd Stabenow; Ralf Pfuhl; Winfried Otten; Cornelia C Metges; Claudia Kalbe
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2011-05-11       Impact factor: 5.614

2.  Effects of increased energy and amino acid intake in late gestation on reproductive performance, milk composition, metabolic, and redox status of sows1.

Authors:  Lianqiang Che; Liang Hu; Ceng Wu; Qin Xu; Qiang Zhou; Xie Peng; Zengfeng Fang; Yan Lin; Shenyu Xu; Bin Feng; Jian Li; Jiayong Tang; Reinan Zhang; Hua Li; Peter Kappel Theil
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  What is good for small piglets might not be good for big piglets: The consequences of cross-fostering and creep feed provision on performance to slaughter.

Authors:  A M S Huting; K Almond; I Wellock; I Kyriazakis
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Poorer lifetime growth performance of gilt progeny compared with sow progeny is largely due to weight differences at birth and reduced growth in the preweaning period, and is not improved by progeny segregation after weaning.

Authors:  J R Craig; C L Collins; K L Bunter; J J Cottrell; F R Dunshea; J R Pluske
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Effect of l-carnitine supplementation and sugar beet pulp inclusion in gilt gestation diets on gilt live weight, lactation feed intake, and offspring growth from birth to slaughter1.

Authors:  Hazel B Rooney; Keelin O'Driscoll; John V O'Doherty; Peadar G Lawlor
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-10-03       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  Response to a selection index including environmental costs and risk preferences of producers.

Authors:  Beshir M Ali; John W M Bastiaansen; Yann de Mey; Alfons G J M Oude Lansink
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  Impact of milk and nutrient intake of piglets and sow milk composition on piglet growth and body composition at weaning.

Authors:  Camilla Kaae Hojgaard; Thomas Sønderby Bruun; Peter Kappel Theil
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-03-01       Impact factor: 3.159

8.  Microbial insight into dietary protein source affects intestinal function of pigs with intrauterine growth retardation.

Authors:  Lianqiang Che; Liang Hu; Qiang Zhou; Xie Peng; Yang Liu; Yuheng Luo; Zhengfeng Fang; Yan Lin; Shengyu Xu; Bin Feng; Jian Li; Jiayong Tang
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2019-01-30       Impact factor: 5.614

9.  Estimation of direct and maternal genetic parameters for individual birth weight, weaning weight, and probe weight in Yorkshire and Landrace pigs.

Authors:  Kristen Alves; Flavio S Schenkel; Luiz F Brito; Andy Robinson
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-06-29       Impact factor: 3.159

10.  The impact of dietary supplementation of arginine during gestation in a commercial swine herd: II. Offspring performance.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Hines; Matthew R Romoser; Zoë E Kiefer; Aileen F Keating; Lance H Baumgard; Jarad Niemi; Benjamin Haberl; Noel H Williams; Brian J Kerr; Kevin J Touchette; Jason W Ross
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 3.159

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.