2020
DOI: 10.3390/ani10020309
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Are Larger Litters a Concern for Piglet Survival or An Effectively Manageable Trait?

Abstract: As sows continue to be selected for greater prolificacy, it is important to review problems that arise in larger litters, and whether these issues can be appropriately managed. Although a proportion of piglets in larger litters can be born underweight, proper supervision around farrowing and adequate colostrum intake has the potential to improve the survival of low-birth-weight piglets and their ongoing growth to weaning. As larger litters can impart greater stress and discomfort on sows, implementing a low-st… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
35
0
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(49 citation statements)
references
References 128 publications
2
35
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Given that the pigs in this study were considered less resilient because of their low body weight and younger age, this lower resilience did not seem to apply to a more profound stressor as drenching. Due to the LBW piglets’ low energy reserves [ 10 , 39 ] and smaller size, they are generally unable to compete against heavier littermates for the better, anterior teats, resulting in an insufficient colostrum intake [ 2 , 29 , 46 ]. This inadequate consumption of colostrum further depletes the LBW piglets’ energy reserves, which can explain why the animals were not able to struggle much during this experiment’s drenching moments and did not experience this as a significant stressor.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Given that the pigs in this study were considered less resilient because of their low body weight and younger age, this lower resilience did not seem to apply to a more profound stressor as drenching. Due to the LBW piglets’ low energy reserves [ 10 , 39 ] and smaller size, they are generally unable to compete against heavier littermates for the better, anterior teats, resulting in an insufficient colostrum intake [ 2 , 29 , 46 ]. This inadequate consumption of colostrum further depletes the LBW piglets’ energy reserves, which can explain why the animals were not able to struggle much during this experiment’s drenching moments and did not experience this as a significant stressor.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…During their domestication, the descendants of wild boars have undergone strong selection pressures for greater productivity [1,2], resulting in a doubling of average litter size at birth, from 5.4 (± 1.5) live born offspring in wild boars [3] to 11.7 (± 3.2) in domestic breeds [4], with the largest litters often containing more than piglets [5].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Less attention has been given to the potential impacts of these selection pressures on the welfare of sows and their offspring [2,5]. From an evolutionary perspective, producing larger litters is expected to exacerbate short-term fitness tradeoffs for mothers, between investing in more versus healthier offspring within a current litter, as well as long-term fitness trade-offs, between investing in current versus future litters [6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, much of the existing literature comparing the performance of low birthweight pigs to heavier counterparts has been conducted on litter sizes of 11 pigs or less and a birthweight of over 1 kg, which is not reflective of current commercial practice ( Douglas et al, 2014 ). Although some recent studies have analyzed the performance and mortality of compromised pigs reared in large litters, this was not balanced with a comparison to heavier littermates ( Ward et al, 2020 ; Feldpausch et al, 2019 ). These studies were also conducted under controlled conditions, where animal responses may differ from those recorded in the field ( Magowan et al, 2007 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%