Reproduction performances and conditions of group-housed non ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

- How does group housing vary in practice? - From weaning until four weeks after mating, individual feeding procedures are preferred, however, systems with group feeding procedures in the entire non-lactating period do also exist (Sørensen & Thorup, 2003; pers. comm. Hansen, 2004, own observations). Group dynamic/group size A group of non-lactating sows may either be stable or dynamic. In stable groups, once the group is established no new sows are moved into the group. In dynamics groups, new sows are constantly moved into and out of the group e.g. up till once a week (Svendsen et al., 1990). Group sizes may vary from 2 (Deininger, 1998) to 150 (Nielsen et al., 2000) sows per group. In the service unit the groups are often stable with group sizes equal to or less (if division into smaller groups take place at weaning) than the size of the farrowing batch. Mixing of unfamiliar sows Frequently, sows are individually housed in the lactating unit why sows usually are mixed with unfamiliar sows when moved from the lactation unit to the service unit (Edwards, 1992; Deininger, 1998). In some herds the service and pregnancy units are integrated. In these systems sows stay in the same pen from weaning to shortly before farrowing. In many herds, however, sows are relocated at least once more when moved from the mating to the pregnancy section. This may happen in from a few hours to three-four weeks (own observations) after insemination. Stocking rate Stocking rates from less than 2 m 2 (Mortensen & Ruby, 1990; Deininger, 1998) to more than 4 m 2 per sow (Svendsen et al., 1990) or even 5 m 2 per sow (Deininger, 1998) are practised. Often, the stocking rate in the service unit is less compared to the stocking rate in the pregnancy unit (pers comm., Hansen 2004) because it is believed that a high stocking rate in this period may influence reproduction negatively. Floor type Systems exists with large ‘open’ floor plan with deep straw bedding, however, the floor may also be divided into a lying/activity and a dunging area (Olsson et al., 1991). The dunging area may consist of slatted or concrete floor. The lying/activity area may consist of concrete with or without small amounts of straw provided, straw bedding or deep straw bedding (Deininger, 1998). It is common to use some amount of straw in the service unit because it is believed to minimize the risk of leg injuries caused by fighting and mounting during oestrus (Hansen & Kongsted, 2002). Depending upon the system in use, the amount of straw provided may vary from zero (own observations) to 1.000 kg per sow per year (Svendsen et al., 1990). The lying/activity area may be divided into smaller or larger ‘nests’ by means of ‘pen dividers’ as shown in picture 3. 17
- How does group housing vary in practice? - Figure 3. Electronic Sow Feeding with small (left) or large ‘nests’ (photos: L.U. Hansen). How are the different layout related factors combined? Group feeding is usually combined with small group sizes e.g. six to 20 sows per group (own observations) and stable groups. In opposite, ESF and fitmix are often equal to dynamic groups and large group sizes e.g. from 50 to 150 sows per group (Nielsen et al., 2000). The feeding procedures FAFS and IFS are frequently combined with stable groups with group sizes that vary from 6 to 50 sows per group; however, it may also be combined with larger dynamic groups (Nielsen et al., 2000). Each of the above mentioned feeding procedures may be combined with each of the above mentioned floor types. Concluding remarks Group housing of non-lactating sows in practice is not a well-defined system but varies in a number of ways in respect to housing conditions. This variation may influence the possibilities of the sows to cope in the system and further affect which management options that can be taken in order to obtain a good reproduction performance. References Brouns, F., Edwards, S.A., 1992. Future prospects for housing of non-lactating sows. Pig News and Information 13, 47-50. Deininger, E. 1998. Beeinflussung der aggressiven Auseinandersetzungen beim gruppieren von abgesetzten sauen durch das haltungssystem und durch andere massnahmen. Veterinär-medizinischen Fakultet der Universität Zürich. 120pp. Edwards, S.A., 1992. Scientific perspectives on loose housing systems for dry sows. Pig Veterinary Journal 28, 40-51. Fisker, B.N., 1994. Løsgående gruppefodrede søer. Meddelelse 278, Landsudvalget for Svin, Den rullende Afprøvning., 10pp. 18
Page 1 and 2: Reproduction performances and condi
Page 4: Contents Summary………………
Page 7 and 8: Paper II - Summary - A review of 15
Page 10 and 11: - Sammendrag - SAMMENDRAG Antallet
Page 12: - Sammendrag - søgt. Positive korr
Page 15 and 16: - Background and aim - systems and
Page 18: - Outline of this thesis - OUTLINE
Page 21: - How does group housing vary in pr
Page 26 and 27: - Paper I - Effect of energy intake
Page 28 and 29: - Paper I - 1. Introduction The num
Page 30 and 31: - Paper I - Therefore, the aim of t
Page 32 and 33: Refer ence Table 1. Effect of energ
Page 34 and 35: - Paper I - Therefore, low energy s
Page 36 and 37: Table 2. Effect of energy intake in
Page 38 and 39: - Paper I - However, this does not
Page 40 and 41: Table 3. Effect of energy intake in
Page 42 and 43: - Paper I - Feeding sows 16, 27 or
Page 44 and 45: - Paper I - gonadotrophins (LH, FSH
Page 46 and 47: - Paper I - the first four weeks af
Page 48 and 49: - Paper I - Cosgrove, J.R., Foxcrof
Page 50 and 51: - Paper I - Matschke, G.H., 1964. T
Page 52: - Paper I - Tribble, L.F., Orr, D.E
Page 55 and 56: - Paper III - Indicators of feed in
Page 57 and 58: - Paper III - 1. Introduction The n
Page 59 and 60: Table 1. Applied feeding and housin
Page 61 and 62: - Paper III - performed. The sow ha
Page 63 and 64: - Paper III - proximately three wee
Page 65 and 66: - Paper III - Table 3. Overall mean
Page 67 and 68: Table 5. Correlations between all c
Page 69 and 70: Back fat W, mm Back fat gain, AM-F,
Page 71 and 72: - Paper III - from three weeks afte
Page 73 and 74:
- Paper III - Number of skin lesion
Page 75 and 76:
- Paper III - In herds practising g
Page 77 and 78:
- Paper III - Previous work have fo
Page 79 and 80:
References - Paper III - Andersen,
Page 81 and 82:
- Paper III - Kongsted, A.G. 2004a.
Page 83 and 84:
- Paper IV - Relation between repro
Page 85 and 86:
- Paper IV - 1. Introduction Group
Page 87 and 88:
- Paper IV - ing compared to number
Page 89 and 90:
- Paper IV - mixed model using the
Page 91 and 92:
Table 2. Estimates and standard err
Page 93 and 94:
- Paper IV - cial effect on high ra
Page 95 and 96:
References - Paper IV - Aherne, F.X
Page 97 and 98:
- Paper IV - Olsson, A.-C., Svendse
Page 99 and 100:
- General discussion - GENERAL DISC
Page 101 and 102:
- General discussion - However, an
Page 103 and 104:
References - General discussion - A
Page 105 and 106:
- Conclusions - 6. CONCLUSIONS Two
Page 107 and 108:
- Appendix 1 - APPENDIX 1 LITTER SI
Page 109 and 110:
- Appendix 1 - they are mature i.e.
Page 111 and 112:
- Appendix 1 - Soon after ovulation
Page 113 and 114:
- Appendix 1 - Crombie, P.L., 1970.
Page 115:
- Appendix 1 - Scott, M.A., 2000. A
show all

Reproduction performances and conditions of group-housed non ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?