Effect of Different Cross-Fostering Strategies on Growth Performance, Stress Status and Immunoglobulin of Piglets
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Animals and Experimental Design
2.2. Measurements
2.3. Statistical Analyses
3. Results
3.1. Birth Weight, Weaning Weight and Average Daily Gain
3.2. Growth Performance
3.3. Suckling Positions
3.4. Plasma Serum Parameters
3.5. Correlations between Growth Performance and Plasma Serum Parameters
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Alexopoulos, J.G.; Lines, D.S.; Hallett, S.; Plush, K.J. A Review of Success Factors for Piglet Fostering in Lactation. Animals 2018, 8, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rutherford, K.; Baxter, E.; D’Eath, R.; Turner, S.; Arnott, G.; Roehe, R.; Ask, B.; Sandøe, P.; Moustsen, V.; Thorup, F.; et al. The welfare implications of large litter size in the domestic pig I: Biological factors. Anim. Welf. 2013, 22, 199–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prunier, A.; Heinonen, M.; Quesnel, H. High physiological demands in intensively raised pigs: Impact on health and welfare. Animal 2010, 4, 886–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Milligan, B.N.; Fraser, D.; Kramer, D.L. The effect of littermate weight on survival, weight gain, and suckling behavior of low-birth-weight piglets in cross fostered litters. J. Swine Health Prod. 2001, 99, 161–166. [Google Scholar]
- Heim, G.; Mellagi, A.; Bierhals, T.; De Souza, L.; De Fries, H.; Piuco, P.; Seidel, E.; Bernardi, M.; Wentz, I.; Bortolozzo, F. Effects of cross-fostering within 24h after birth on pre-weaning behaviour, growth performance and survival rate of biological and adopted piglets. Livest. Sci. 2012, 150, 121–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schmitt, O.; Baxter, E.M.; Boyle, L.A.; O’Driscoll, K. Nurse sow strategies in the domestic pig: I. Consequences for selected measures of sow welfare. Animal 2019, 13, 580–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bierhals, T.; Magnabosco, D.; Ribeiro, R.; Perin, J.; Da Cruz, R.; Bernardi, M.; Wentz, I.; Bortolozzo, F. Influence of pig weight classification at cross-fostering on the performance of the primiparous sow and the adopted litter. Livest. Sci. 2012, 146, 115–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Calderón, D.J.A.; García, M.E.; Alessia, D. Cross-Fostering implications for pig mortality, welfare and performance. Front. Vet. Sci. 2018, 5, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Baxter, E.M.; Rutherford, K.M.D.; D’Eath, R.B.; Arnott, G.; Turner, S.P.; Sandoe, P.; Moustsen, V.A.; Thorup, F.; Edwards, S.A.; Lawrence, A.B. The welfare implications of large litter size in the domestic pig II: Management factors. Anim. Welf. 2013, 22, 219–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pajžlar, L.; Skok, J. Cross-fostering into smaller or older litter makes piglets integration difficult: Suckling stability-based rationale. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2019, 220, 104856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Illmann, G.; Chaloupková, H.; Melišová, M. Impact of sow prepartum behavior on maternal behavior, piglet body weight gain, and mortality in farrowing pens and crates1. J. Anim. Sci. 2016, 94, 3978–3986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deen, M.; Bilkei, G. Cross fostering of low-birthweight piglets. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2004, 90, 279–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferrari, C.; Sbardella, P.; Bernardi, M.; Coutinho, M.; Vaz, I.; Wentz, I.; Bortolozzo, F. Effect of birth weight and colostrum intake on mortality and performance of piglets after cross-fostering in sows of different parities. Prev. Veter. Med. 2014, 114, 259–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huting, A.M.S.; Almond, K.; Wellock, I.; Kyriazakis, I. What is good for small piglets might not be good for big piglets: The consequences of cross-fostering and creep feed provision on performance to slaughter1,2. J. Anim. Sci. 2017, 95, 4926–4944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Souza, L.; Fries, H.; Heim, G.; Faccin, J.; Hernig, L.; Marimon, B.; Bernardi, M.; Bortolozzo, F.; Wentz, I. Behaviour and growth performance of low-birth-weight piglets cross-fostered in multiparous sows with piglets of higher birth weights. Arq. Bras. Med. Vet. Zootec. 2014, 66, 510–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arnott, G.; Elwood, R.W. Assessment of fighting ability in animal contests. Anim. Behav. 2009, 77, 991–1004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- King, R.; Mullan, B.; Dunshea, F.; Dove, H. The influence of piglet body weight on milk production of sows. Livest. Prod. Sci. 1997, 47, 169–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skok, J.; Škorjanc, D. Group suckling cohesion as a prelude to the formation of teat order in piglets. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2014, 154, 15–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandrick, M.; Pieters, M.; Pijoan, C.; Molitor, T.W. Passive transfer of maternal Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae-specific cellular immunityto piglets. Clin. Vaccine Immunol. 2008, 15, 540–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pieters, M.; Bandrick, M.; Pijoan, C.; Baidoo, S.; Molitor, T. The effect of cross-fostering on the transfer of Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae maternal immunity from the sow to the offspring. Clin. Vaccine Immunol. 2008, 15, 540–543. [Google Scholar]
- Neal, S.M.; Irvin, K.M. The effects of crossfostering pigs on survival and growth. J. Anim. Sci. 1991, 69, 41–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Straw, B.E.; Bürgi, E.J.; Dewey, C.E. Effects of extensive cross fostering on performance of pigs on a farm. J. Am. Vet. Med. A 1998, 212, 855–856. [Google Scholar]
- Giroux, S.; Robert, S.; Martineau, G.P. The effects of cross-fostering on growth rate and post-weaning behavior of segregated early-weaned piglets. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 2000, 80, 533–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Robert, S.; Martineau, G.P. Effects of repeated cross-fosterings on preweaning behavior and growth performance of piglets and on maternal behavior of sows. J. Anim. Sci. 2001, 79, 88–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cronin, G.; Van Amerongen, G. The effects of modifying the farrowing environment on sow behaviour and survival and growth of piglets. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1991, 30, 287–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jarvis, S.; Vegt, B.J.V.D.; Lawrence, A.B. The effect of parity and environmental restriction on behavioural and physiological responses of pre–parturient pigs. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2001, 71, 203–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ran, M.-L.; He, J.; Tan, J.-Y.; Yang, A.-Q.; Li, Z.; Chen, B. The complete sequence of the mitochondrial genome of Luchuan pig (Sus scrofa). Mitochondrial DNA 2014, 27, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Klobasa, F.; Werhahn, E.; Butler, J.E. Regulation of humoral immunity in the piglet by immunoglobulin of maternal origin. Res. Vet. Sci. 1981, 32, 195–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tuboly, S.; Bernath, S.; Glavits, R.K.; Medveczky, I. Intestinal absorption of colostral lymphoid cells in newborn piglets. Vet. Immunol. Immunop. 1988, 20, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandrick, M.; Pieters, M.; Pijoan, C.; Baidoo, S.K.; Molitor, T.W. Effect of cross-fostering on transfer of maternal immunity to Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae to piglets. Veter. Rec. 2011, 168, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- English, J.G.H.; Bilkeit, G. The effect of litter size and littermate weight on pre-weaning performance of low-birth-weight piglets that have been cross-fostered. Anim. Sci. 2004, 79, 439–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Algers, B.; Madej, A.; Rojanasthien, S.; Uvns-Moberg, K. Quantitative relationships between suckling-induced teat stimultion and the release of prolactin, gastrin, somatostatin, insulin, glucagon and vasoactive intestinal polypeptide in sows. Vet. Res. Commun. 1991, 15, 395–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- English, P.R. Ten basic principles of fostering piglets. Pig Prog. 1998, 4, 39–41. [Google Scholar]
- Milligan, B.N.; Fraser, D.; Kramer, D.L. Birth weight variation in the domestic pig: Effects on offspring survival, weight gain and suckling behaviour. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2001, 73, 179–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kingston, N.G. Farrowing house management. Pig. Vet. J. 1989, 22, 62–74. [Google Scholar]
- Vaillancourt, J.P.; Tubbs, R.C. Preweaning mortality. Vet. Clin. N. Am. Food A 1992, 8, 685–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Price, E.O.; Hutson, G.D.; Price, M.I.; Borgwardt, R. Fostering in swine as affected by age of offspring1. J. Anim. Sci. 1994, 72, 1697–1701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kooij, E.V.E.-V.D.; Kuijpers, A.; Van Eerdenburg, F.; Tielen, M. Coping characteristics and performance in fattening pigs. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2003, 84, 31–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wattanaphansak, S.; Luengyosluechakul, S.; Larriestra, A.; Deen, J. The impact of cross-fostering on swine production. Thai J. Vet. Med. 2002, 32, 101–106. [Google Scholar]
- Puppe, B.; Tuchscherer, A. Developmental and territorial aspects of suckling behaviour in the domestic pig (Sus scrofa f. domestica). J. Zool. 1999, 249, 307–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skok, J.; Škorjanc, D. Formation of teat order and estimation of piglets’ distribution along the mammary complex using mid-domain effect (MDE) model. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2013, 144, 39–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horrell, I.; Bennett, J. Disruption of teat preferences and retardation of growth following cross-fostering of 1-week-old pigs. Anim. Sci. 1981, 33, 99–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petrowski, K.; Wintermann, G.-B.; Schaarschmidt, M.; Bornstein, S.R.; Kirschbaum, C. Blunted salivary and plasma cortisol response in patients with panic disorder under psychosocial stress. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 2013, 88, 35–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, Y. Psychological stress-induced changes in salivary alpha-amylase and adrenergic activity. Nurs. Health Sci. 2011, 12, 477–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arey, D.; Edwards, S. Factors influencing aggression between sows after mixing and the consequences for welfare and production. Livest. Prod. Sci. 1998, 56, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horrell, I.; Hodgson, J. The bases of sow-piglet identification. 2. Cues used by piglets to identify their dam and home pen. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1992, 33, 329–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- D’Eath, R.B. Socialising piglets before weaning improves social hierarchy formation when pigs are mixed post-weaning. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005, 93, 199–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Item | Treatment | Birth Weight Class (BWC) | SEM | p-Values | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LBW | IBW | HBW | Treatment | BWC | Treatment × BWC | |||
BW (kg) | NC-F | 0.46 | 0.71 | 0.94 | 0.02 | 0.88 | <0.01 | 0.93 |
C-F | 0.47 | 0.70 | 0.94 | |||||
WW (kg) | NC-F | 3.78 | 4.46 | 5.06 | 0.06 | 0.19 | <0.01 | 0.53 |
C-F | 3.68 | 4.31 | 4.80 | |||||
ADG (g) | NC-F | 128.69 | 145.52 | 159.70 a | 1.72 | 0.07 | <0.01 | 0.48 |
C-F | 124.76 | 139.59 | 149.58 b |
Item | Day | Treatment | SEM | p-Values | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NC-F1 | C-F1 | C-F2 | Treatment | Day | Treatment × Day | |||
BW1 (kg) | 0 | 0.73 | 0.77 | 0.73 | 0.12 | 0.04 | <0.01 | 0.02 |
7 | 1.51 | 1.47 | 1.47 | |||||
14 | 2.69 a | 2.61 a | 1.99 b | |||||
21 | 3.58 a | 3.50 a | 2.73 b | |||||
ADG (g) | 0–7 | 111.07 | 99.52 | 104.76 | 5.82 | 0.01 | 0.06 | 0.03 |
7–14 | 169.52 a | 163.33 b | 75.17 c | |||||
14–21 | 126.43 | 127.02 | 105.07 | |||||
ADG (g) | 0–21 | 135.67 a | 129.96 a | 95.00 b | 6.46 | 0.01 | - | - |
Item | Day | Treatment | SEM | p-Values | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NC-F1 | C-F1 | C-F2 | Treatment | Day | Treatment × Day | |||
Suckling position | 3 | 3.00 | 3.08 | 3.08 | 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.20 | 0.01 |
5 | 3.33 | 3.33 | 3.25 | |||||
8 | 3.16 a | 3.25 a | 4.33 b | |||||
12 | 2.75 a | 3.08 a | 4.92 b | |||||
16 | 2.92 a | 3.12 a | 4.92 b | |||||
20 | 3.08 a | 3.08 a | 5.00 b |
Plasma Parameters | NC-F1 | C-F1 | C-F2 | SEM | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
GH (ng/mL) | 1.99 | 1.90 | 1.87 | 0.13 | 0.93 |
COR (ng/mL) | 14.08 a | 15.52 a | 17.44 b | 0.56 | 0.03 |
α-AMY (U/dL) | 153.12 | 148.71 | 150.85 | 5.90 | 0.96 |
IgA (g/L) | 1.04 | 1.01 | 0.92 | 0.03 | 0.36 |
IgG (g/L) | 9.31 | 9.52 | 9.46 | 0.16 | 0.87 |
IgM (g/L) | 0.86 | 0.83 | 0.77 | 0.03 | 0.50 |
Growth Performance | GH | COR | α-AMY | IgA | IgG | IgM |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BW1 at day 21 | 0.527 * | −0.734 * | −0.197 | 0.132 | 0.108 | 0.216 |
ADG from day 0 to day 21 | 0.488 * | −0.736 * | −0.211 | 0.134 | 0.024 | 0.133 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zhang, X.; Wang, M.; He, T.; Long, S.; Guo, Y.; Chen, Z. Effect of Different Cross-Fostering Strategies on Growth Performance, Stress Status and Immunoglobulin of Piglets. Animals 2021, 11, 499. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020499
Zhang X, Wang M, He T, Long S, Guo Y, Chen Z. Effect of Different Cross-Fostering Strategies on Growth Performance, Stress Status and Immunoglobulin of Piglets. Animals. 2021; 11(2):499. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020499
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhang, Xiaojun, Meizhi Wang, Tengfei He, Shenfei Long, Yao Guo, and Zhaohui Chen. 2021. "Effect of Different Cross-Fostering Strategies on Growth Performance, Stress Status and Immunoglobulin of Piglets" Animals 11, no. 2: 499. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020499
APA StyleZhang, X., Wang, M., He, T., Long, S., Guo, Y., & Chen, Z. (2021). Effect of Different Cross-Fostering Strategies on Growth Performance, Stress Status and Immunoglobulin of Piglets. Animals, 11(2), 499. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020499