Influence of postpartum feeding method on performance of the lactating sow

Moser, R. L.; Cornelius, S. G.; Pettigrew, J. E.; Hanke, Hans; Heeg, T. R.; Miller, Kenneth P.

doi:10.1016/0301-6226(87)90029-7

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Measures of LFI in late lactation had a significant effect on LW21 in purebred and F1 sows. Metrics for purebred sows in early and mid-lactation (ARCPB1, ADIPB1, ADIPB2, VARPB1, and VARPB2) did not affect LW21 (P 40.05), which coincides with results from Moser et al (1987). Metrics measured later in lactation (ARCPB2, ARCPB3, ARCTP, ADIPB3, ADFIP, VARPB3, and VARTP) in purebred sows had a significant effect on LW21.…”

Section: Effect Of Lfi Metrics On Lw21supporting

confidence: 72%

“…In contrast, Aherne (2001) reported feed intake in the last 3 weeks of lactation was not affected by LFI in the first week. Moser et al (1987) reported sows fed a restricted diet in the first week of lactation were able to reestablish similar levels of feed intake in late lactation when compared to sows fed ad libitum diets throughout lactation.…”

Section: Effect Of Lfi Metrics On Subsequent Intakementioning

confidence: 87%

“…Results were similar to the present study in which ARC in early lactation affected ADFI more than ARC in late lactation. Sows which increased feed intake more quickly in day 1-6 of lactation had higher ADFI than sows with a slower rate of change in early lactation (Moser et al, 1987). Similarly, Neil et al (1996) reported that sows which had rapid increase in intake during early lactation had higher ADFI due to a constant average rate of change in intake during late lactation.…”

Section: Effect Of Lfi Metrics On Adfimentioning

confidence: 95%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Lactation feed intake in purebred and F1 sows and its relationship with reproductive performance

Yoder

Schwab²,

Fix³

et al. 2012

Livestock Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Effect Of Lfi Metrics On Lw21supporting

confidence: 72%

Section: Effect Of Lfi Metrics On Subsequent Intakementioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Effect Of Lfi Metrics On Adfimentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lactation feed intake in purebred and F1 sows and its relationship with reproductive performance

Yoder

Schwab²,

Fix³

et al. 2012

Livestock Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…As previously reported (Mullan and Williams, 1988), restricted feeding throughout lactation resulted in lower litter weight gain, most clearly during late lactation. Others (Stahly et al, 1979;Moser et al, 1987) also have reported that feed restriction of sows during wk 1 of lactation has no clear effect on litter growth. Litter weight gain is the consequence of a sow's milk production, and sows use their body tissue reserves to maintain milk production, but it seems that body reserves alone are not sufficient to sustain milk production because low energy intake during late lactation decreased milk production in this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of imposed feed intake patterns during lactation on reproductive performance and on circulating levels of glucose, insulin, and luteinizing hormone in primiparous sows.

Koketsu

Dial

Pettigrew

et al. 1996

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thirty-six primiparous sows were assigned to one of five treatments designed to mimic the lactation feed intake patterns observed in a previous study of commercial farms: high energy intake (HHH) or low energy intake during each week of a 3-wk lactation (LLL), or reduced intake during wk 1 (LHH), wk 2 (HLH) or wk 3 of lactation (HHL). The metabolizable energy intake of sows was either 16.5 (H) or 6.5 (L) Mcal/d. Diets were equal in lysine, providing 45 g/d. The HHH sows had a shorter (P < .05) weaning-to-estrus interval (9 +/- 3.2 d) than the sows in the LLL (23 +/- 3.5 d), HLH (22 +/- 3.5 d), and HHL (18 +/- 3.2 d) groups. The LH pulse frequencies of HHH (d 14: 1.5 pulses/8 h; d 21: 2.1 pulses/8 h) were greater (P < .05) than those of LLL (.2 pulses/8 h) and HLH (.5 pulses/8 h) on d 14 and those of LLL (0 pulses/8 h) and HHL (.9 pulses/8 h) on d 21 of lactation. No differences (P > .1) in mean serum concentrations of LH were observed among treatment groups either on d 21 of lactation or on d 1 postweaning. When fed a low-energy diet, sows had lower (P < .05) concentrations of serum insulin and plasma glucose than did sows fed a high-energy diet. Our results indicate that energy intake during lactation influences circulating insulin and glucose levels and LH pulse frequency and amplitude during midlactation and during the postweaning period.

show abstract

“…Stepped feeding strategies before and after farrowing are common in Europe to reduce the post-partum hypogalactia syndrome [4], and because high feeding levels during late gestation have been previously described as risk factors for peri-partum hypophagia [5]. However, restricted feeding during the peri-partum may also reduce the overall feed intake during the lactaction period [6] and may increase the weaning to oestrus interval [7]. In this trade-off, a negative energy balance during the last days of pregnancy may improve the milk yield during the first week of lactation [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Ad Libitum Feeding during the Peri-Partum Improve the Sow Feed Intake and Performances?

Martí

Latorre

Álvarez-Rodríguez

2019

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study hypothesized that the ad libitum feeding of sows during the peri-partum may increase the neonatal survival of the piglets and the post-partum recovery of the sow. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effects of two peri-partum feeding strategies (ad libitum and stepped from day 110 of gestation to day 5 post-partum) on the feed intake, the reproductive performance of sows, as well as the survival of their piglets. A total of 90 Landrace x Large-White dams sired by Duroc were used. The sows were randomly assigned to feeding treatments by balancing body condition and parity between groups. The feed intake of the sows in the peri-partum was lower in the stepped than in the ad libitum strategy. The increase of the feeding level in the ad libitum sows was not counterbalanced by higher number of weaned piglets or shorter weaned to oestrus interval.

show abstract

Influence of postpartum feeding method on performance of the lactating sow

Cited by 18 publications

References 7 publications

Lactation feed intake in purebred and F1 sows and its relationship with reproductive performance

Lactation feed intake in purebred and F1 sows and its relationship with reproductive performance

Influence of imposed feed intake patterns during lactation on reproductive performance and on circulating levels of glucose, insulin, and luteinizing hormone in primiparous sows.

Does Ad Libitum Feeding during the Peri-Partum Improve the Sow Feed Intake and Performances?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About