Sow Longevity
Genetic Differences
Rodney Goodwin, National Pork Board
Improving the average herd life of breeding females reduces genetic
costs and gilt development costs. And, there’s the added advantage that sows
tend to wean heavier pigs than gilts and have acquired immunity to specific
herd diseases. Therefore, sows that remain productive through more parities can
increase herd output while reducing cost of production.
Fertility and prolificacy serve as the productivity
yardsticks by which sow herd output is measured. Swine breeders have made great efforts to improve prolificacy
traits such as number of pigs born and litter weaning weights. Both traits are
easily measured by breeders and the commercial producers using their genetic
lines. Low heritabilities for these prolificacy traits and joint selection for
lean growth to ever heavier market pig weights have kept genetic improvement of
prolificacy traits at a relatively slow but constant rate.
Fertility traits, such as age to puberty and farrowing rate,
have been given less attention by breeders because of the great difficulty in
getting reliable data. Records of '0' or no performance are important when
evaluating fertility. Commercial producers ignore such records routinely.
Comparisons of fertility traits depend on all records whereas many sow
recordkeeping programs only account for prolificacy traits. In other words,
they only track sows that mate and/or farrow. However, fertility traits greatly
influence the reproductive efficiency of the sow herd.
How can you predict which sows will stay in your herd and
which will not? The checkoff funded Maternal Line National Genetic Evaluation
Program (MLP) Results gives us some clues. The goal of the MLP was to evaluate
the six genetic lines through four parities. An important design requirement of
the MLP was that no gilt or sow could be culled for poor reproductive
performance (small litters, poor milker, etc). The only way that a female could
leave the program was death, injury or failure to conceive within fifty days of
weaning.
Genetic lines of females in the MLP were American Diamond
Swine Genetics, Danbred USA, Monsanto Choice Genetics (two lines), National
Swine Registry (Yorkshire*Landrace F1 crossbred), and Newsham Hybrids. Each
line was represented by about 600 females. There were 3600 gilts delivered to
the program at 10-20 days of age and grown in wean-finish barns.
The 3,283 gilts entered the MLP reproduction tests at about
165 days of age. Gilts were placed in two new, 1,600-sow
breeding-gestation-farrowing facilities. No gilts were culled for poor growth
or backfat. Only gilts that died, were injured, had an abnormality (hernia,
etc), or were rejected by herd veterinarian and manager as 'stunted' were
excluded from the reproduction tests.
The 3283 gilts entering the sow facilities were checked for
heat (estrus) daily and serviced on their second or later heat period. All
matings were done by artificial insemination using fresh semen from one
unrelated sire line. Matings started when gilts reached 210 days of age and
were on their second or later estrus. Gilts that were not successfully mated by
300 days of age or had failed to conceive after three mating periods were
slaughtered.
Sows were given 50 days after weaning to conceive. No gilt
or sow was culled due to poor litter size or low litter weight.
The amount of daily gestation feed given each sow was determined
by her weight and desired weight gain before farrowing. All sows were fed three
times daily during lactation with the goal of maximum intake. Daily lactation
feed disappearance for each sow was recorded. Average weaning age was 15.4
days.
The sow loss rate of the Monsanto GPK347 line was different
from the other five genetic lines. The sow loss rates of the other five lines
are pooled and shown in Table 1.
Table 1. MLP sow loss rates by age of breeding females.
|
* 150-330 days old, % |
331-450 days old, % |
451-570 days old, % |
571-690 days old, % |
691-810 days old, % |
** Sold after fourth parity, % |
Genetic Line |
|
18 |
11.7 |
8 |
6.4 |
5.3 |
50.6 |
Avg 5 lines |
|
6.1 |
8.8 |
4.9 |
5.7 |
4.6 |
69.9 |
Monsanto
GPK347 |
* Includes culling
of gilts not expressing estrus by 310 days of age.
** All sows were sold after weaning their fourth parity
litter.
Results of Table 1 show that the greatest barriers to sow longevity
are gilt and post first parity sow loss due to fertility. The major component of sow loss prior to 450
days of age is reproductive failure. Gilts that are never serviced or fail to
conceive make the difference between the GPK347 and other lines prior to 330
days of age. Many producers fail to account for the cost of days on feed and
facility space occupied by these gilts. The NPPC Financial and Production
Standards require entering all gilts into the sow herd when delivered or
selected. Litters and/or pigs per sow year ratios will be reduced to their true
value with these Standards, sometimes more than a producer or his banker would
like. Failure to rebreed is the major component of sow loss between 331-450
days of age.
MLP records were grouped according to how long a sow
remained in the herd (longevity group) and then further divided into parity
groups. Only sows of the five lines that farrowed at least one litter are
included in Table 2. The Monsanto GPK347 females had different performance indicators
for many traits and are not included in Table 2. The first four columns show
the performance of parity 1 females. The first column is parity 1 performance
of females that were lost from the herd after first parity (longevity 1). The
second column is the parity 1 performance of females that were lost from the
herd after two parities (longevity 2). The other columns follow this pattern
until the last column shows the parity 4 performance of females that completed
the MLP with four parities (longevity 4). This table allows us to search for
performance indicators at the end of each parity that might predict sow loss.
Table 2. Litter Parity by Herd Longevity Group performance
in the MLP, average of five lines.
|
Parity by Life |
P1-L1 |
P1-L2 |
P1-L3 |
P1-L4 |
P2-L2 |
P2-L3 |
P2-L4 |
P3-L3 |
P3-L4 |
P4-L4 |
|
Sows* |
318 |
203 |
261 |
1042 |
187 |
257 |
1029 |
243 |
1032 |
994 |
|
Age at first heat, days |
228 |
227 |
226 |
220 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Age at first farrow, days |
376 |
378 |
378 |
365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sow wt, lbs |
466 |
469 |
458 |
452 |
510 |
509 |
503 |
517 |
518 |
524 |
|
Wt loss, lbs |
63 |
54 |
53 |
55 |
46 |
49 |
51 |
42 |
39 |
44 |
|
Sow BF, in |
.85 |
.86 |
.82 |
.84 |
.81 |
.77 |
.78 |
.71 |
.75 |
.70 |
|
BF loss, in |
.09 |
.09 |
.08 |
.08 |
.06 |
.06 |
.04 |
.05 |
.05 |
.02 |
|
Pigs born |
10.4 |
10.4 |
10.4 |
11.1 |
10.0 |
10.9 |
10.6 |
10.8 |
11.3 |
10.9 |
|
Pigs born alive |
9.4 |
9.6 |
9.6 |
10.2 |
9.2 |
9.9 |
9.8 |
9.6 |
10.3 |
9.8 |
|
Pigs nursed |
10.1 |
10.2 |
10.0 |
10.2 |
9.9 |
10.2 |
10.0 |
9.9 |
10.4 |
10.0 |
|
Pigs weaned |
9.2 |
9.1 |
9.1 |
9.2 |
9.0 |
9.2 |
9.2 |
9.1 |
9.3 |
9.1 |
|
Weaned wt, lbs |
105 |
110 |
111 |
108 |
113 |
117 |
121 |
110 |
114 |
112 |
|
Day 1-7 lactation feed, lbs |
45 |
54 |
55 |
53 |
69 |
76 |
73 |
82 |
84 |
85 |
|
Day 8-14 lactation feed, lbs |
76 |
82 |
85 |
82 |
91 |
99 |
96 |
105 |
112 |
109 |
* Number of sows with complete 14 day daily feed intake
records.
The number of sows with complete daily lactation feed disappearance
records is slightly different within herd longevity groups due to occasional
missing records.
Age at first was the age of first detected estrus, observed
by sow managers. Table 2 shows that the gilts that showed heat younger stayed
in the herd longer. Sows that finished four parities (P1-L4) were a week
younger than other sows when showing first heat. The Monsanto GPK347 gilts were
12 days younger than the other lines.
Age at first farrowing. The P1-L4 sows were 10-13 days
younger when they farrowed their first litter. The Monsanto GPK347 gilts were
12-17 days younger at first farrowing.
All gilts were fed about five lbs daily during gestation.
The sow weight at first parity shows the longer lived sows were actually
slightly smaller at first parity. All sows grew larger as they got older. The
individual sow gestation feeding program was designed to maximize the growth
and reproductive performance of each sow.
Sows that were lost after first parity (P1-L1) had the
greatest lactation body weight loss, 63 lbs.
Sow backfat thickness, measured at the last rib, was not
different for any herd longevity group. The lactation backfat loss for each
herd longevity group was also the same within each parity. Even though the sows
grew heavier during each gestation period they did not completely replaced
their lactation backfat loss. The sows had their greatest backfat thickness at
first parity farrowing.
Total pigs born and number of pigs born alive were different
only for the Parity 1 herd longevity groups. Sows that weaned four litters
(P1-L4) had more P1 pigs and live pigs born than the other three longevity
groups.
Each female was given an equal chance to raise a litter.
Within 24 hours of farrowing all litters were cross-fostered to about 10 pigs
per sow. The number nursed reflects this practice. The number of pigs farrowed
did not affect the number of pigs allowed to nurse.
The number of pigs weaned and litter weaning weights are not
different for the herd longevity groups.
The first week lactation feed disappearance records show a
lower feed intake, at least 1 lb per day, by parity one sows that did not
complete parity two(P1-L1), at least a pound of feed per day. The second week
feed lactation records also show a lower feed intake for P1-L1. These P1-L1
sows were weaning just as many pigs as the other parity one sows.
What can we conclude from Table 2? It is very difficult to
predict sow longevity from performance data, there are very few real
differences among sow longevity groups shown in Table 2. The strongest signals
are age at first farrowing, lactation feed disappearance and sow weight loss
during lactation. Problems in those areas could prevent a sow from expressing
post-weaning estrus, resulting in a sow culled for reproductive failure.
The MLP results of the Monsanto GPK347 line females confound
some of the observations just made from the other five lines’ performance.
These females were smaller, lost more weight during lactation, ate less feed
during lactation, yet farrowed more pigs and bred back more readily after
weaning. About 70% of Monsanto GPK347 line females survived through four
parities versus 50% of the other five lines. Nearly all of the longevity
difference was due to fertility differences prior to 450 days of age.
The NPB Maternal Line National Genetic Evaluation Program
(MLP) reported the performance of six genetic lines through four parities.
However, NPB continued to measure sow performance on the MLP lines after the
official test was completed. Data is now compiled and evaluated through their
sixth parities (see Tables 3 and 4).
Use of 'cohort' analysis gives a more complete picture of
sow performance. More precisely, a cohort is defined in the National Pork
Producers Council’s (NPPC) Production and Financial Standards as “a group of
animals that shares a common event within a defined period of time.”
The advantage of cohort comparisons is it allows us to
target groups of gilts as they enter the sow herd and follow them through
multiple parities. This approach requires close accounting of all gilts entered
into the herd. In the end, longevity is a reflection of a sow’s fertility
traits.
The 25 female cohorts shown
in Table 5 are formed by line-age-facility subclass at 165 days of age, as
reported previously through four parities. Large lifetime differences in cohort
performance were found between genetic lines, highlighting the opportunity for
improved total herd efficiency by selection of sow genetic line.
Ranges in output of the 130 cohorts show the great
biological opportunity in production efficiency that is still possible. Table 6
shows the extremes in production from a 25-sow cohort. The total possible
litters born from a 25-female cohort over six parities is at 150. Actual
records show a range of 40 litters for the worst cohort group to 127 litters
for the best.
The most productive cohort farrowed 1,347 live pigs during
its 6-parity productive life while the poorest farrowed only 397.
Clearly, measuring and comparing these fertility traits give
a more complete measure of performance than single sow prolificacy traits.
The combination of superior sow longevity and superior
number of live pigs born/litter gives the Monsanto GPK347 line female a
lifetime live pig born output advantage of 48 % over the average of the other
five lines. (This genetic line was originally called Dekalb Monsanto MXP200.)
Note that this advantage is due mostly to the superior fertility of GPK347 gilts and first parity sows (Table 3).
This line produced 36% more litters through their sixth parity.
After the first two
parities, the percentage of sows leaving the herd due to illness, injury, death
and infertility is nearly the same in each parity for all genetic lines (see
Table 4).
The figures in Table 4 reinforce that an opportunity to
improve sow longevity exists by developing gilts with the highest P1 farrowing
rate. Simply stated, the gilt must farrow a first litter. Anything done to
improve her first parity farrowing rate should indirectly improve sow
longevity.
The first opportunity for
improving herd performance is selecting a maternal line with higher fertility.
Of course, this is easier said than done given the lack of reliable data
available. The heritablities of fertility traits are low to medium so improving
the environment in which gilts are developed should improve farrowing rates.
Sow longevity may be improved by implementing gilt development programs (i.e.
gilt nutrition, boar stimulation, acclimatization) that better prepare gilts
for mating success.
There has been remarkable improvement in prolificacy traits,
such as pigs weaned/litter, throughout the industry. The results presented here
show that great opportunity remains for increasing breeding herd output. Greater
attention to fertility traits is needed to capture this opportunity.
Table 3. Percent of 3283 entered females that produced
litters by line and parity.
|
Genetic Line |
P1, % |
P2, % |
P3, % |
P4, % |
P5, % |
P6, % |
|
American Diamond Genetics |
77 |
64 |
57 |
50 |
40 |
30 |
|
Danbred USA |
77 |
63 |
56 |
48 |
39 |
26 |
|
Monsanto DK44 |
75 |
65 |
57 |
50 |
39 |
32 |
|
Monsanto GPK347 |
92 |
83 |
77 |
70 |
63 |
51 |
|
National Swine Registry |
76 |
63 |
57 |
52 |
43 |
32 |
|
Newsham Hybrids USA |
78 |
65 |
59 |
52 |
43 |
30 |
|
Total Litters |
2602 |
2206 |
1984 |
1750 |
1459 |
1104 |
Table 4. Parity to
parity loss of females by line.
|
Genetic Line |
P1, % * |
P2, % |
P3, % |
P4, % |
P5, % |
P6, % |
|
American Diamond Genetics |
23 |
13 |
7 |
7 |
10 |
10 |
|
Danbred USA |
23 |
14 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
13 |
|
Monsanto DK44 |
25 |
10 |
8 |
7 |
11 |
7 |
|
Monsanto GPK347 |
8 |
9 |
6 |
7 |
7 |
12 |
|
National Swine Registry |
24 |
13 |
6 |
5 |
9 |
11 |
|
Newsham Hybrids USA |
22 |
13 |
6 |
7 |
9 |
13 |
*Percent of entered gilts that never farrowed a litter.
Table 5. Production of 130 cohorts through six parities.
Genetic Line
|
Total sow days |
Ave sow life, days |
Total pigs born |
Total pigs born live |
Live pigs / sow day |
Total litters born |
|
ADG |
14138 b |
566 b |
835 c |
758 c |
.054 d |
79.7 b |
|
DB |
13632 b |
545 b |
860 bc |
767 bc |
.056 cd |
76.9 b |
|
DK44 |
14009 b |
560 b |
944 b |
843 b |
.060 b |
80.5 b |
|
GPK347 |
17197 a |
688 a |
1312 a |
1172 a |
.068 a |
109.0 a |
|
NSR |
14033 b |
561 b |
871 bc |
790 bc |
.056 c |
80.6 b |
|
NSH |
14230 b |
569 b |
870 bc |
790 bc |
.055 cd |
81.4 b |
Means with the same superscript are not different
(P>.05).
Table 6. Six parity output among the 130 MLP cohorts.
|
Trait |
Best cohort |
Worst cohort |
Goal |
|
Total litters born |
127 |
40 |
150 |
|
Live pigs born |
1347 |
397 |
1575* |
|
Ave sow life, day |
781 |
358 |
900 |
|
Total sow days |
19542 |
8957 |
22500** |
* 10.5 live pigs born per litter
** 900 day life times 25 sows
Sow longevity is a complex goal that involves genetics,
nutrition, herd health and breeding herd management. Improvement must include a
strategy that includes all areas of management. Detailed reproductive records,
starting when gilts enter the herd, and sow feed consumption records may be the
best tools to maintaining high performance sows in the herd.