Piglet uniformity and mortality in large organic litters: Effects of parity and pre-mating diet composition

Wientjes, J.G.M.; Soede, N.M.; Peet–Schwering, C.M.C. van der; Brand, H. van den; Kemp, B.

doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2011.11.018

Cited by 45 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Quesnel et al () used two decimal places for the standard deviation and none for the coefficient of variation. On the other hand, Wientjes, Soede, and Van Der Peet‐Schwering () expressed the standard deviation in grams and used whole numbers, which seems to be more appropriate. The lack of standardization of the results of those parameters makes difficult to dos observations of the influence of the treatments on the weight variability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variability of piglet birth weights: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Moreira

Palencia

Moita

et al. 2019

Animal Physiology Nutrition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of the study was to evaluate the effects of litter size and supplementation of functional amino acids on the piglet birth weight variability through of a systematic review and meta‐analysis. PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Science Direct, Scopus and SciELO are the main used databases and were searched in January 2019 by using the following keywords and their combinations: within‐litter birth, weight variability, piglets, litter size, sow, amino acids, gestation, uniformity, CV and/or SD. Of the 64 pre‐selected articles, only articles presenting the coefficients of variation and/or standard deviations according to the litter size and different levels of amino acid supplementation in the sow diets during gestation were selected. The average birth weights of total and live piglets were 43% lower in litters from sows with high prolificacy than those from sows with low prolificacy. The weight variability was affected by high prolificacy sows, with increases of 4.04% and 4.54% in the coefficients of variation of total and born alive piglets respectively (p = .074; p = .009). The standard deviation increased by 180 g in born alive piglets to high prolificacy sows. The coefficients of variation of total and live piglets born from high prolificacy sows showed an increase of 4.04% and 4.54% respectively (p = .07; p < .05). There was a tendency for reduced weight variability with amino acids supplementation when considering the standard deviation of total born (p = .072). However, reproductive performance was not significantly influenced (p > .05). In conclusion, the average litter weight and the number of piglets born influence weight variability. Amino acids supplementation may reduce the birth weight variability between piglets. However, this effect depends on the amino acid used, the levels of supplementation and on other factors not completely addressed in this study. Thus, more research is necessary to fully elucidate this topic.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variability of piglet birth weights: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Moreira

Palencia

Moita

et al. 2019

Animal Physiology Nutrition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An opposite view held by Pettigrew et al (1986) is that the apparent increase in piglet birth weight standard deviation associated with increased litter size was far from enough to explain the impacts of parity on litter uniformity. Moreover, variation in birth weight is greater in older parity sows after correction for the total number of piglets born and excluding the effects of litter size (Wientjes et al, 2012). It has been postulated that the decrease in litter uniformity in older parity sows may result from deterioration in quality of follicles/oocytes with aging as reported for women (Broekmans et al, 2009), suggesting that litter uniformity in birth weight can also be affected solely by parity.…”

Section: Breed Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Within-litter variation in birth weight is also affected by parity, with older sows with greater parity often having less uniform litters as well as a higher proportion of low-birth-weight piglets (Damgaard et al, 2003;Quesnel et al, 2008;Wientjes et al, 2012). Pettigrew et al (1986) also reported that birth weights of piglets from primiparous sows were more uniform.…”

Section: Breed Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Within-litter variation in birth weight: impact of nutritional status in the sow

Yuan

Zhu

Shi

et al. 2015

J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accompanying the beneficial improvement in litter size from genetic selection for high-prolificacy sows, within-litter variation in birth weight has increased with detrimental effects on post-natal growth and survival due to an increase in the proportion of piglets with low birth-weight. Causes of within-litter variation in birth weight include breed characteristics that affect uterine space, ovulation rate, degree of maturation of oocytes, duration of time required for ovulation, interval between ovulation and fertilization, uterine capacity for implantation and placentation, size and efficiency of placental transport of nutrients, communication between conceptus/fetus and maternal systems, as well as nutritional status and environmental influences during gestation. Because these factors contribute to within-litter variation in birth weight, nutritional status of the sow to improve fetal-placental development must focus on the following three important stages in the reproductive cycle: pre-mating or weaning to estrus, early gestation and late gestation. The goal is to increase the homogeneity of development of oocytes and conceptuses, decrease variations in conceptus development during implantation and placentation, and improve birth weights of newborn piglets. Though some progress has been made in nutritional regulation of within-litter variation in the birth weight of piglets, additional studies, with a focus on and insights into molecular mechanisms of reproductive physiology from the aspects of maternal growth and offspring development, as well as their regulation by nutrients provided to the sow, are urgently needed.

show abstract

“…Moreover, current sows had follicles of 4.0 6 0.1 mm at weaning and 27.0 6 0.6 subsequent ovulations, which may indicate that follicle development was not sufficiently suppressed in these high-prolific sows for the insulin-stimulating diets to be effective. In (organic) sows with minimal body condition loss (1.7% 6 0.7% of BW) during prolonged lactations (41 6 4 days), and thereby probably a better follicle development at weaning compared with conventionally weaned sows, as indicated by their large litters (17.4 6 0.3 total born piglets), insulin-stimulating diets during WEI neither affected litter uniformity at birth (Wientjes et al, 2012d). It is recommended to further study whether an insulin-stimulating diet during (late) lactation could improve subsequent litter uniformity, and whether its effects are additive to or interact with effects of an insulin-stimulating diet after weaning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Insulin-stimulating diets during the weaning-to-estrus interval do not improve fetal and placental development and uniformity in high-prolific multiparous sows

Wientjes

Soede

Laurenssen

et al. 2013

Animal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Piglet birth weight and litter uniformity are important for piglet survival. Insulin-stimulating sow diets before mating may improve subsequent piglet birth weights and litter uniformity, but the physiological mechanisms involved are not clear. This study evaluated effects of different levels of insulin-stimulating feed components (dextrose plus starch; fed twice daily) during the weaningto-estrus interval (WEI) on plasma insulin and IGF-1 concentrations, and on follicle development and subsequent luteal, fetal and placental development and uniformity at days 42 to 43 of pregnancy. During WEI, multiparous sows were isocalorically fed diets supplemented with 375 g/day dextrose plus 375 g/day corn starch (INS-H), with 172 g/day dextrose plus 172 g/day corn starch and 144 g/day animal fat (INS-L), or with 263 g/day animal fat (CON). Jugular vein catheters were inserted through the ear vein at 1.5 days before weaning to asses plasma insulin and IGF-1 concentrations. After estrus, all sows received a standard gestation diet until slaughter at days 42 to 43 of pregnancy. The dextrose plus starch-diets enhanced the postprandial insulin response in a dose-dependent manner (e.g. at day 2 insulin area under the curve was 4516 mU/444 min for CON, 8197 mU/444 min for INS-L and 10 894 mU/444 min for INS-H; s.e.m. 5 694; P , 0.001), but did not affect plasma IGF-1 concentrations during the first 3 days of WEI. Follicle development and subsequent luteal, fetal and placental development and uniformity were not affected by the dietary treatments, nor related to plasma insulin and IGF-1 concentrations during WEI. Pre-weaning plasma insulin and IGF-1 concentrations were negatively related to sow body condition loss during lactation, but were not related to subsequent reproduction characteristics. This study shows that dietary dextrose plus starch are effective in stimulating insulin secretion (both postprandial peak and long-term concentration), but not IGF-1 secretion during the first 3 days after weaning in multiparous sows. The extreme insulin-stimulating diets during WEI did, however, not improve follicle development, or subsequent development and uniformity of fetuses and placentas in these high-prolific sows (27.0 6 0.6 ovulations; 18.6 6 0.6 vital fetuses).

show abstract

Piglet uniformity and mortality in large organic litters: Effects of parity and pre-mating diet composition

Cited by 45 publications

References 34 publications

Variability of piglet birth weights: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Variability of piglet birth weights: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Within-litter variation in birth weight: impact of nutritional status in the sow

Insulin-stimulating diets during the weaning-to-estrus interval do not improve fetal and placental development and uniformity in high-prolific multiparous sows

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About