Endocrine bases of lactational anoestrus in the sow

Quesnel, Hélène; Prunier, Armelle

doi:10.1051/rnd:19950405

Cited by 73 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Weaning is known to be associated with dramatic changes in the metabolic and hormonal statuses of the sow and the present observations were consistent with such findings (for review see [11,40]). Indeed, lactation cessation by piglet removal was associated with a drop in concentrations of GH and prolactin, as previously reported [41][42][43].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Consequences of a restriction in sow dietary protein (lysine) on litter growth, sow body reserve mobilization and metabolic status were investigated. Since subsequent reproductive performance was shown to be influenced by sow metabolic status in late lactation and after weaning [10,11], physiological measurements were focused around weaning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dietary protein restriction during lactation in primiparous sows with different live weights at farrowing: I. Consequences on sow metabolic status and litter growth

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The hypothesis that the restriction of dietary protein during lactation has different impacts on sow metabolic status and milk production according to body weight was evaluated. From 5-months of age until farrowing, the gilts were fed to achieve body weights of 180 or 240 kg at farrowing. At this time, 38 sows were assigned to one of three groups: "180 kg" sows not restricted in dietary protein during lactation (180CP); "180 kg" restricted in protein (180LP), or "240 kg" sows restricted in protein (240LP). Catheters were fitted in the jugular vein of 24 sows and serial blood samples were collected 1 d before and 1 d after weaning. Amongst the protein-restricted animals, heavy sows (240LP) had a smaller appetite than light sows in early lactation, resulting in lower energy and protein intakes in the 240LP than in the 180LP sows. Body protein losses were 8, 11 and 13.5% of calculated body protein mass at farrowing in the 180CP, 180LP and 240LP sows, respectively. At the end of lactation, IGF-I concentrations were lower in the 180LP than in the sows from the other groups, probably because of the uncoupling between GH and IGF-I secretions. Low IGF-I concentrations likely promote lean tissue mobilization. Glucose and insulin profiles suggested an insulin resistance state in the 240LP sows compared with the 180LP sows, which may explain, at least in part, the lower feed intake and body reserve mobilization in these sows. Plasma pre-and post-prandial concentrations of amino acids in late lactation differed among the three treatment groups. Throughout lactation, litters from the 180LP and 240LP sows had a slower growth rate than litters from sows which were not restricted, suggesting that endogenous protein mobilization throughout lactation does not completely compensate for a low protein intake. sow / live weight / lactation / protein intake / IGF-I / insulin

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dietary protein restriction during lactation in primiparous sows with different live weights at farrowing: I. Consequences on sow metabolic status and litter growth

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On adventures out of the nest, piglets will follow their mother during foraging bouts. Sows will increase these foraging bouts as lactation progresses and the energy demands become more intense, causing sows to mobilise their body reserves (Quesnel and Prunier, 1995) and switch from an anabolic to a catabolic state (Valros et al, 2003). Milk production then peaks by the 3rd week in lactation, before gradually declining (Elsley, 1971).…”

Section: Nest Departure and Social Integrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternative farrowing systems: design criteria for farrowing systems based on the biological needs of sows and piglets

Baxter

Lawrence

Edwards

2011

Animal

114

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The construction of a suitable farrowing environment is a continuing dilemma: the piglet's needs must be matched with those of the sow and the farmer during the main phases that constitute farrowing: nest building, parturition and lactation. Difficulties exist in resolving the various conflicts of interest between and within these three parties (e.g. sow v. farmer: space needed for nest building v. space needed to maximise the amount of farrowing accommodation, or sow v. sow: ensuring the survival of the current litter v. maintaining condition for future litters). Thus, the challenge is to resolve these conflicts and design a system that maximises sow and piglet welfare while maintaining an economically efficient and sustainable enterprise. In order to successfully design a farrowing and lactation environment, it is necessary to consider the biological needs of both the sow and her litter. The natural behaviour of the sow has been well documented and very little variation exists between reports of peri-parturient behaviour observed in extensively kept domestic sows and their wild counterparts. The failure for domestication to significantly alter these behavioural patterns provides evidence that they are biologically significant and that the commercial farrowing environment should attempt to accommodate this behavioural repertoire. In addition, the behavioural needs of the piglets, as well as the physiological needs of both sows and their offspring should be considered. This article aims to review the considerable body of literature detailing the behavioural repertoire of sows and their offspring during the different phases of farrowing, and the accompanying physiological processes. The focus is on identifying biological needs of the animals involved in order to synthesise the appropriate design criteria for farrowing and lactation systems, which should optimise both welfare and animal production.

show abstract

“…Although patterns of variations of these hormones during lactation and after weaning have been already described, there is no complete description of sows submitted to a high level of nutrient deficit which influences milk production. In addition to its influence on milk production, nutrient deficit may result in inhibition of the reproductive axis [20,21,38,39]. Reducing feed intake during lactation induces an increase in the duration of the weaning-to-oestrus interval, and a decrease in conception rate and in embryonic survival during the subsequent gestation [17,24,26].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of feed restriction in primiparous lactating sows on body condition and metabolic parameters

Quesnel¹,

Pasquier²,

Mounier³

et al. 1998

Reprod. Nutr. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Endocrine bases of lactational anoestrus in the sow

Cited by 73 publications

References 85 publications

Dietary protein restriction during lactation in primiparous sows with different live weights at farrowing: I. Consequences on sow metabolic status and litter growth

Dietary protein restriction during lactation in primiparous sows with different live weights at farrowing: I. Consequences on sow metabolic status and litter growth

Alternative farrowing systems: design criteria for farrowing systems based on the biological needs of sows and piglets

Influence of feed restriction in primiparous lactating sows on body condition and metabolic parameters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About