UDC 636.4.082

 

О. Mykhalko

M. Povod

 

The article examined the productive qualities of sows and the growth rate of suckling piglets in farrowing machines with different design features.The design features of the sows’ maternity farrowing equipment did not affect the number and weight of piglets during birth and the individual weight of piglets during weaning parturition. They tended to improve the conservation of piglets before weaning and they  tended  to raise  increasing the weight of the piglets’ nests during this period.The growth rate of piglets was higher in farrowing  equipment of both constructions in winter and transition periods and it decreased significantly in summer.This tendency is more pronounced in «La-TEK» farrowing equipment compared to Terra Exim-Agroimpex analogues. The index of complex evaluation of reproductive qualities of sows kept during farrowing and lactation in farrowing equipment with limiting arcs and adjustable length was 6,77% higher than the index of complex evaluation of analogues found at the time in farrowing equipment without limiting arcs and with fixed length.The multiplicity of sows in both types of farrowing equipment was higher in winter and spring compared to summer and autumn. The design of the farrowing equipment had a greater influence on the tendency of the piglets to change when they were weaned. A similar dependence was in the safety of piglets. The weight of the piglets’ nests when they were weaned in farrowing equipment with adjustable length and bounding arcs was consistently higher compared with farrowing equipment without limiting arcs and unregulated length throughout the all study period. The mass of piglets’ nests has become the minimum in summer and the maximum in spring. The average weight of one weaner during weaning decreased in both types of farrowing equipment in the summer and increased at other times of the year. Fluctuations in the average mass of one pig during weaning were significantly smaller in the «La-TEK» farrowing equipment compared to the counterparts held in the Terra Exim-Agroimpex farrowing equipment. These fluctuations were much smaller in the «La-TEK» farrowing equipment compared to the Terra Exim-Agroimpex counterparts. The number of weaned piglets depended more on the seasons compared to the design features of the farrowing equipment. The safety of piglets before weaning, the weight of one head during weaning and the weight of the piglets’ nest during weaning, depended both on the time of year and on the design features of the farrowing equipment for farrowing and lactation of the sow.

Keywords: sow, piglet, farrowing machine, multiple pregnancy, weight of the nest of piglets, safety, growth.

References:

1. Voloshchuk, V.M. and Ivanov, V.O., (2018). Rozrobka ta zastosuvannia stankovoho obladnannia dlia vyroshchuvannia porosiat za umov promyslovoi tekhnolohii [Development and application of machine tools for growing pigs under the conditions of industrial technology]. Tvarynnytstvo Ukrainy, 4 (74), pp. 18–23.
2. Herasymchuk, V.M., (2018). Assessment and improvement of ventilation of pigs for various purposes. Ph.D. Thesis. Instytut svynarstva i ahropromyslovoho vyrobnytstva NAAN Ukrainy.
3. Kostenko, S.V., (2004). Scientific rationale for two-phase pig breeding technology. Ph.D. Thesis. Kubanskyi HAU. Krasnodar.
4. Kvasnytskyi, A.V., (1983). Iskusstvennoe osemenenye svynei [Artificial insemination of pigs]. Kyiv: Urozhai.
5. Kovalenko, V.P., (2007). Vidtvoriuvalni yakosti svynei pry vykorystanni plidnykiv universalnykh ta miasnykh porid [Reproductive qualities of pigs when using universal and meat breeders]. Tavriiskyi Naukovyi Visnyk, 48, pp. 79–83.
6. Kozlovskyi V.H. (1984). Tekhnolohyia promyshlennoho svynovodstva [Industrial pig technology]. Moscow: Rosselkhozyzdat.
7. Leontev, V.V., (2008). Vidtvoriuvalni yakosti svynomatok ukrainskoi miasnoi porody zalezhno vid sezonu roku [Reproductive qualities of sows of Ukrainian meat breed depending on the season of the year]. Tavriiskyi Naukovyi Visnyk, 58, pp. 236–238.
8. Lykhach, V.A., (2015). Tekhnolohichni osoblyvosti vyroshchuvannia porosiat [Technological features of growing piglets]. Tvarynnytstvo Ukrainy, 6, pp. 11–13.
9. Noinaber, M., (2007). Zashchytnie duhy protyv poter porosiat [Protective arcs against piglet losses]. Sovremennoe Svynovodstvo, Fastov: Iunyvest prynt, pp. 18–19.
10. Pokhodnia, H.S. (1985). Optymalnie uslovyia soderzhanyia matok na komplekse [Optimal conditions for the maintenance of uterus in the complex]. Svynovodstvo, 1, pp. 30–31.
11. Pokhodnia, H.S., Fedorchuk, E.H. and Manokhina, L.A., (2008). Produktyvnost svynomatok v zavysymosty ot sezona hoda [Sow productivity according to season]. Tavriiskyi Naukovyi Visnyk, 58, pp. 298–302.
12. Pokhodnia, H.S., Fedorchuk, E.H. and Popova, O.А., (2008). Luchshye pokazately vosproyzvodstva – zymoi [Best reproduction rates in winter]. Zhyvotnovodstvo Rossyy, 2, pp. 41–42.
13. Starodubets, A.A., (2015). Vlyianye sezona hoda na vosproyzvodytelnye kachestva svynomatok [The influence of the season on the reproductive quality of sows]. Visnyk Ahrarnoi Nauky Prychornomoria, 4(2), pp. 100–103.
14. Topchii, L.I. (2008). Vplyv sezonnosti na vidtvoriuvalni yakosti svynomatok ukrainskoi stepovoi biloi porody svynei [Influence of seasonality on reproductive qualities of sows of Ukrainian steppe white breed of pigs]. Visnyk Instytutu Tvarynnytstva Stepovykh Raioniv Imeni M.F. Ivanova «Askaniia Nova», pp. 155–160.
15. Khlopytskyi, V.P. and Rud, A.Y. (2011). Osnovnye tekhnolohycheskye, byolohycheskye y veterynarnie aspekty vosproyzvodstva svynei [The main technological, biological and veterinary aspects of pig reproduction]. Vestnik Vserossiyskogo Nauchno-issledovatelskogo Instituta Zhivotnovodstva Imeni Akademika L.K. Ernsta, p. 277.
16. Khlopytskyi, V.P. (2011). Nekotorie еtapy upravlenyia reproduktyvnym zdorovem svynei [Some steps in managing pig reproductive health]. Svynovodstvo, 7, pp. 70–72.
17. Danholt, L., Moustsen, V.A., Nielsen, M.B.F. and Kristensen, A.R., (2011). Rolling behaviour of sows in relation to piglet crushing on sloped versus level floor pens. Livestock Science, 141, pp. 59–68.
18. Edwards, S.A., (2002). Perinatal mortality in the pig: environmental or physiological solutions? Livestock Production Science, 78(3), p. 12. doi: 10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00180-X.
19. Marchant, J.N., Rudd, A.R., Mendl, M.T., Broom, D.M., Meredith, M.J., Corning, S. and Simmins, P.H., (2000).Timing and causes of piglet mortality in alternative and conventional farrowing systems. The Veterinary Record, 147(8), pp. 209–214, DOI:10.1136/vr.147.8.209.
20. Mazzoni, C., Scollo, A., Righi, F., Bigliardi, E., Di Ianni, F., Bertocchi, M., Parmigiani, E. and Bresciani, C., (2018). Effects of three different designed farrowing crates on neonatal piglets crushing: preliminary study. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 17(2), pp. 505–510, DOI: 10.1080/1828051X.2017.1385428.
21. Nicolaisen, T., Lühken, E., Volkmann, N., Rohn, K., Kemper, N. and Fels, M., (2019).The effect of sows’ and piglets’ behaviour on piglet crushing patterns in two different farrowing pen systems. Animals (Basel), 9(8), p. 538.
22. Weary, D.M., Phillips, P.A., Pajor, E.A., Fraser, D. and Thompson, B.K., (1998). Crushing of piglets by sows: effects of litter features, pen features and sow behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 61, pp. 103–111.