Reproductive Performance for Four Breeds of Swine: Crossbred Females and Purebred and Crossbred Boars

Abstract

SummaryMatings and litters were studied involving all three-breed crosses (sired by purebred boars) and four-breed crosses (sired by crossbred boars) from the Duroc, Yorkshire, Landrace and Spotted breeds. There were 764 female mating records and 161 boars used over five sequential breeding seasons. A sample of pregnant gilts was slaughtered each season and the remainder were allowed to carry their litters to term so that 493 litters resulted. Crossbred and purebred boars and crossbred females were evaluated for their contributions to conception rate (first service and over an 8-wk breeding season), number of services/ conception, litter size and weight at birth, 21 and 42 d and survival rate to 21 and 42 d. Crossbred boars had a 17.9% higher first service conception rate, a 5.3% higher breeding season conception rate and performed 9 11 fewer services/conception compared with purebred boars. There were no significant differences among the boar breeding groups for litter size, weight or survival rate. The six crossbred female groups (reciprocal crosses were combined) did not differ significantly in conception rate or number of services/ conception. There were significant differences in litter weight born and differences that approached significance (P<.10) for litter size at 42 d and litter weight at 21 d. Yorkshire-Landrace females had the largest litters at birth, 21 and 42 d and the heaviest litters at 21 and 42 d. The smallest litters at 21 and 42 d were from Yorkshire-Spotted females, and they also had the lighest weight litters at all three stages 9

Genetic evaluation for semen characteristics in a crossbreeding project involving Saudi and Spanish V-line rabbits

“…In other species, such as pigs, it seems that crossbred males could be more advanced in sexual maturity. However, at the adult stage, differences among purebred and crossbred bucks in semen parameters tend to disappear (Wilson et al, 1977;Buchanan and Johnson, 1984). In general, crossbreeding among breeds raised in hot climates was associated with heterotic effects in semen characteristics as stated by El-Ezz et al (1985) in Egypt and Al-Sobayil and Khalil (2002) in Saudi Arabia.…”

Growth Performance for Four Breeds of Swine: Crossbred Females and Purebred and Crossbred Boars

“…This advantage is most likely attributable to earlier sexual maturity in crossbred boars (Conlan and Kennedy, 1978;Buchanan and Johnson, 1984). Hybrid boars might, therefore, prove advantageous in a production situation that uses young boars.…”

“…Creep feed was made available and male pigs were castrated at 3 wk of age. Buchanan and Johnson (1984) reported reproductive performance for this phase of the experiment.…”

“…Accepted July 24, 1986Conlon and Kennedy, 1978;Anderson et al, 1981;Buchanan and Johnson, 1984). No real differences between purebred and crossbred boars for sow productivity, or for growth and carcass characteristics of progeny, have been demonstrated (Rempel et al, 1964;Lishman et al, 1975;Fahmy and Hohmann, 1977;Conlon and Kennedy, 1978;Kennedy and Conlon, 1978;Anderson et al, 1981 ;Buchanan and J ohnson, 1984).…”

Estimation of crossbreeding parameters between Large White and Meishan porcine breeds.

“…This could be the case in the present study; parity does not affect total weight loss of sows but, as first parity litter weights are lighter, net weight loss of gilts during lactation is probably higher than weight loss of sows. Otherwise, the increase of litter weight with parity is a well-known result (see for instance Schneider et al, 1982;Buchanan and Johnson (1984) (Sellier, 1976;Johnson, 1981;Bidanel, 1988 1) The great genetic distance between LW and MS breeds. Heterosis level is related to between-breed genetic distance (Glodek, 1982;Lefort-Buson, 1986).…”