| Literature DB >> 26623369 |
J Kouamo1, W F Tassemo Tankou1, A P Zoli1, G S Bah2, A C Ngo Ongla3.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the reproductive and growth performances of pig breeds in Douala, Cameroon. The reproductive performance of gilts and multiparous sows (38 per group) from 8 selected farms were monitored and controlled. Thereafter, piglets were controlled from birth to weaning age. The age at first service (AFS), fertility index (FI), fecundity, age at first farrowing (AFF), weight at first farrowing (WtFF) and litter size (LS) of gilts were 179.97 ± 25.40 days; 1.76 ± 0.77; 100 ± 0.00; 350.47 ± 40.58 days; 107.26 ± 31.85 kg and 7.18 ± 1.93 piglets, respectively. In sows, the FI, fecundity, LS and farrowing interval (FarI) were 1.13 ± 0.34; 100 ± 0.00; 9.03 ± 2.14 piglets and 179.63 ± 25.14 days, respectively. FI and LS were better in sows compared to gilts (P = 0.000). The sex ratio was 0.63. Local breed animals reared in semi-modern farms and fed mixed feed showed the lowest WtFF. In piglets, the average birth weight (kg), the average weaning weight (kg), age at weaning (days) and survival rate (%) until weaning were 1.32 ± 0.20, 10.60 ± 1.41, 56.86 ± 8.24 and 48.43, respectively. These results indicated that reproductive performance is strongly influenced by breed, feed and farm type.Entities:
Keywords: Douala; Feed; Fertility; Growth; Pig breed
Year: 2015 PMID: 26623369 PMCID: PMC4629558
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Open Vet J ISSN: 2218-6050
Structure of the research population.
| Breed | Gilts | Sows | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Large-white | 19 | 20 | 39 |
| Duroc | 4 | 8 | 12 |
| Landrace | 13 | 8 | 21 |
| Local | 2 | 2 | 4 |
| Total | 38 | 38 | 76 |
Overall reproductive performance of gilts and sows (Means ± SEM).
| Parameters | Gilts | Sows | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| AFS (days) | 179.97 ± 25.40 | ||
| FI | 1.76±0.77[ | 1.13±0.34[ | 0.000 |
| Fecundity (%) | 100.00±0.00 | 100.00±0.00 | |
| AFF (days) | 350.47±40.58 | ||
| WtFF (Kg) | 107.26±31.85 | ||
| LS (piglets) | 7.18±1.93[ | 9.03±2.14[ | 0.000 |
| FarI (days) | 179.63±25.14 |
Means within the same row with different indices are significantly different at P<0.05.
Effect of breed, type of farm and feed on reproductive performance in gilts.
| Parameters | AFS (days) | FI | Fecundity (%) | AFF (days) | WtFF (Kg) | LS (piglets) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breed | ||||||
| Large-white (n= 19) | 183.68±5.13[ | 1.67±0.29[ | 100.00±0.00 | 342.05±8.94[ | 96.47±6.23[ | 7.28±0.41[ |
| Duroc (n= 4) | 184.50±13.13[ | 3.00±0.00[ | 100.00±0.00 | 365.75±7.75[ | 108.25±7.56[ | 6.50±1.26[ |
| Landrace (n= 13) | 177.75±8.54[ | 1.70±0.17[ | 100.00±0.00 | 354.54±13.60[ | 128.46±8.75b | 7.46±0.58[ |
| Local (n= 2) | 149.00±10.00[ | 2.00±0.00[ | 100.00±0.00 | 373.50±15.50[ | 70.00±20.00[ | 6.00±1.00[ |
| | 0.32 | 0.43 | 0.56 | 0.01 | 0.69 | |
| Type of farms | ||||||
| Semi-modern (n= 18) | 189.76±6.24[ | 1.44±0.24[ | 100.00±0.00 | 342.83±8.73[ | 91.33±3.42[ | 6.33±0.36[ |
| Modern (n= 19) | 169.16±4.61[ | 1.91±0.21[ | 100.00±0.00 | 355.68±10.05[ | 121.16±8.58[ | 7.89±0.46[ |
| | 0.01 | 0.10 | 0.41 | 0.01 | 0.03 | |
| Feed | ||||||
| Mixed (n= 19) | 191.39±6.10[ | 1.60±0.27[ | 100.00±0.00 | 345.26±8.61[ | 93.37±3.82[ | 6.47±0.37[ |
| Complete (n= 19) | 169.16±4.61[ | 1.91±0.21[ | 100.00±0.00 | 355.68±10.05[ | 121.16±8.58[ | 7.89±0.46[ |
| | 0.01 | 0.37 | 0.44 | 0.00 | 0.02 | |
Means within the same column with different indices are significantly different at P<0.05. n=number.
Effect of breed, type of farm and feed on reproductive performance in sows.
| Parameters | FI | Fecundity (%) | LS | FarI (days) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breed | ||||||
| Large-white (n= 20) | 1.15±0.08[ | 100.00±0.00 | 9.55±0.31[ | 184.63±4.85[ | ||
| Duroc (n= 8) | 1.12±0.12[ | 100.00±0.00 | 6.86±0.96[ | 166.37±8.81[ | ||
| Landrace (n= 8) | 1.12±0.12[ | 100.00±0.00 | 10.13±0.67[ | 172.37± 10.23[ | ||
| Local (n= 2) | 1.00±0.00[ | 100.00±0.00 | 7.00±2.00[ | 202.67± 14.38[ | ||
| | 0.95 | 0.00 | 0.10 | |||
| Type of farms | ||||||
| Semi-modern (n= 21) | 1.14±0.08[ | 100.00±0.00 | 9.00±0.53[ | 171.75±4.11[ | ||
| Modern (n= 15) | 1.13±0.09[ | 100.00±0.00 | 8.93±0.51[ | 186.47±7.80[ | ||
| | 0.86 | 0.81 | 0.19 | |||
| Feed | ||||||
| Mixed (n= 23) | 1.13±0.07[ | 100.00±0.00 | 9.09±0.49[ | 173.18±4.01[ | ||
| Complete (n= 15) | 1.13±0.09[ | 100.00±0.00 | 8.93±0.51[ | 186.47±7.80[ | ||
| | 0.98 | 0.83 | 0.11 | |||
Means within the same column with different indices are significantly different at P < 0.05. n= number.
Effect of breed, type of farm and feed on growth performance in piglets.
| Parameters | BWt (kg) | WWt (kg) | AW (days) | Mortality rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breed | ||||
| Large-white (n= 145) | 1.35±0.02[ | 10.76±0.92[ | 57.34±0.69[ | 46.96[ |
| Duroc (n= 46) | 1.37±0.03[ | 11.01±0.21[ | 58.30±0.97[ | 18.53[ |
| Landrace (n= 91) | 1.26±0.01[ | 10.43±0.17[ | 56.12±0.91[ | 30.03[ |
| Local (n= 12) | 1.18±0.03[ | 8.52±0.18[ | 51.25±2.23[ | 4.47[ |
| | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.041 | 0.000 |
| Type of farms | ||||
| Semi-modern (n= 162) | 1.27±0.01[ | 10.22±0.10[ | 55.47±0.77[ | 51.76[ |
| Modern (n= 118) | 1.38±0.02[ | 11.15±0.14[ | 60.07±0.21[ | 37.70[ |
| | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Feed | ||||
| Mixed (n= 175) | 1.27±0.01[ | 10.24±0.09[ | 54.80±0.75[ | 60.70[ |
| Complete (n= 119) | 1.38±0.02[ | 11.15±0.14[ | 60.07±0.21[ | 39.30[ |
| | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Means within the same column with different indices are significantly different at P<0.05. n=number.