The increase in litter sizes in recent years has resulted in more low birth weight (LBW) piglets, accompanied by a higher mortality. A potential intervention to overcome this is drenching bioactive substances. However, if the act of drenching provokes additional stress in LBW piglets, it might counteract the supplement’s effect and be detrimental for the piglet’s survival. To study the effect of the drenching act, piglets from 67 sows were weighed within 4 h after birth. The mean litter birth weight (MLBW) and standard deviation (SD) were calculated. LBW piglets (n = 76) were defined as weighing between (MLBW-1*SD) and (MLBW-2.5*SD). They were randomly allocated to two treatments: “sham” (conducting the act of drenching by inserting an empty 2.5 mL syringe in the mouth during 20 s, once a day, d1 till d7; n = 37) or “no treatment” (no handling; n = 39). On day 1, 3, 9, 24 and 38, piglets were weighed and scored for skin lesions. Blood samples were collected on day 9 and 38 and analyzed to determine glucose, non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA), urea, immunoglobulin G (IgG), insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) and a standard blood panel test. There was no difference between sham drenched and untreated piglets regarding any of the parameters. In conclusion, this study showed that drenching does not impose a significant risk to LBW piglets and can be applied safely during the first 7 days after birth.

No abstract

No abstract

The introduction of hyperprolific sows has resulted in more low birth weight (LBW) piglets, accompanied by higher mortality. A possible strategy to enhance the resilience and survival of LBW piglets is oral supplementation (drenching) of bioactive substances. This study evaluated the supplementation of bovine colostrum, short-chain fructo-oligosaccharides (scFOS) or quercetin that were dissolved separately in a milk replacer. The study was divided into two sub-experiments. First, the milk replacer was compared with a sham drenched group. Secondly, each dissolved compound was compared with the milk replacer. The LBW piglets, defined as weighing between (mean litter birth weight −1*SD) and (mean litter birth weight −2.5*SD), were randomly allocated to the different treatments and drenched once a day for seven days. On day 1, 3, 9, 24 and 38, piglets were weighed and scored for skin lesions. Blood samples were collected on day 9 and 38 and analyzed to determine glucose, non-esterified fatty acids, urea, immunoglobulin G, insulin-like growth factor 1, and a standard blood panel test. There was no difference between sham drenched piglets and piglets that were drenched with milk replacer regarding any of the parameters. No effect was observed between the milk replacer group and any of the bioactive compounds either, except a higher mortality within the scFOS group. In conclusion, this study showed that drenching the evaluated bioactive compounds, in the used dosages, did not improve LBW piglets’ resilience or survival and more research is required to determine the effect of scFOS on small piglets.

Background Weaning is a critical phase in the pigs’ life and gut health might be compromised. Gluconic acid was shown to be poorly absorbed but readily fermented to butyrate in the gut which in turn can improve gut function. Hence, a total of 144 weaning pigs were fed the experimental diets for 42 days. Three treatments were replicated in 8 pens with 6 piglets each: control; low dietary dose of gluconic acid, 9 g/kg; and high dietary dose of gluconic acid, 18 g/kg. After 21 days, one piglet from each pen was sampled for blood haematology and biochemistry, fore- and hindgut digesta characteristics and microbiota, and distal small intestinal histo-morphological indices and gene expression. Results Feeding gluconic acid enhanced performance in period d 0–14 post-weaning, in particular feed intake was increased (P = 0.028), though the high dose did not show benefits over the low dose. Regarding d 0–42, feed intake was elevated (P = 0.026). At d 21, piglets fed 18 g/kg gluconic acid showed a trend for lower number of total white blood cells (P = 0.060), caused by particularly lower numbers of lymphocytes as compared to control (P = 0.028). Highly reduced plasma urea was found for groups fed gluconic acid, it amounted to 2.6 and 2.6 mmol/L for the 9 and 18 g/kg level, respectively, as compared to 3.8 mmol/L in control (P = 0.003). Feeding gluconic acid promoted the relative abundance of lactic-acid-producing and acid-utilizing bacteria. In distal small intestine, Lactobacillus amylovorus increased substantially from 11.3 to 82.6% for control and gluconic acid 18 g/kg, respectively (P < 0.05). In mid-colon, the butyrate producers Faecalibacterium prausnitzii (P > 0.05) and Megasphaera elsdenii (P < 0.05) showed highest abundance in gluconic acid 18 g/kg. Consequently, in caecum and mid-colon, increased relative molar percentage of butyrate were found, e.g., 10.0, 12.9 et 14.7% in caecum for gluconic acid at 0, 9, and 18 g/kg, respectively (P = 0.046). Elevated mRNA anti-inflammatory cytokine and survival signalling levels in distal small intestinal mucosa were found by feeding gluconic acid which might be mediated by butyrate. Conclusions Gluconic acid may have potential to alleviate the postweaning growth-check in pigs by altering microbiota composition and fermentation in the gut.