Evaluating the removal of pigs from a group and subsequent floor space allowance on the growth performance of heavy-weight finishing pigs

The impact of floor space allowance and dietary energy level on finishing pigs, from 65 to 120 kg, on growth performance

The objective of this experiment was to evaluate the impact of lowering floor space allowance in finishing hogs from 65 to 120 kg when fed high- vs. low-energy diets on growth performance. Eighty-eight mixed-sex pens with 24 ± 1 pigs per pen were randomly assigned by weight in a complete block design to one of eight treatments in a 2 × 4 factorial arrangement with two energy levels: low (LE, 3267 ± 15 kcal/kg) vs. high (HE, 3389 ± 15 kcal/kg) accomplished through fat inclusion; and four floor space allowances: 0.6, 0.63, 0.65, and 0.67 m²/pig. Assigned floor space was accomplished by moveable gates in the rear of the pen which were adjusted at each pig removal until the marketing phase. Pen weight was measured at days 0, 29, and 48, with feed disappearance measured at days 29 and 48 to calculate average daily gain (ADG), average daily feed intake (ADFI), and gain-to-feed ratio (GF). Data were analyzed by pen (SAS 9.4, Cary, NC), as repeated measures, with the fixed effects of floor space allowance, dietary energy level, and the interaction between floor space allowance and energy level. For the overall experiment, decreased floor space had no effect (P > 0.1) on ADG, ADFI, or GF. Energy had a significant effect (P < 0.01) on ADFI (3.17 vs. 3.12 kg for LE and HE, respectively) and GF (0.35 and 0.36 for LE and HE, respectively), and tended to impact (P = 0.08) ADG (1.12 vs. 1.13 kg, for LE and HE, respectively). In conclusion, reducing space allowance from 0.67 m² down to 0.6 m² did not affect the growth performance of pigs from 65 to 120 kg. Pigs fed LE consumed more than the HE diets but had generally similar growth and no difference in body weight.

Effect of Phase Feeding, Space Allowance and Mixing on Productive Performance of Grower-Finisher Pigs

This study investigates the effects of space allowance (SA), mixing and phase feeding (PF) on performance of grower-finisher pigs. Three trials (T) were conducted. In T1 and T2, 345 pigs/trial were moved to finisher stage at 11 weeks of age and assigned to two SAs: 0.96 (n = 15 pens; 10 pigs/pen) and 0.78 (n = 15; 13 pigs/pen) m²/pig. Mixing was applied to 5 pens of each SA leading to a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement (SA × Mixing). For PF, 2 diets with 0.95 and 0.82 g SID Lys/MJ NE were applied to 5 pens of each SA (not mixed) leading to another 2 × 2 factorial arrangement (SA × PF). In T3, 230 pigs were moved to the grower-finisher stage at 11 weeks of age, mixed, and assigned to 4 treatments (SA × PF; n = 5 pens). Data were analyzed using general linear mixed models. SA did not affect performance (p > 0.05). Non-mixed pigs were 5.40 (T1) and 5.25 (T2) kg heavier than mixed pigs at 21 weeks of age (p < 0.001). PF reduced performance of pigs by 3.45 (T1) and 4.05 (T2) kg at 21 weeks of age (p < 0.001). In conclusion, mixing and reducing SID Lys:NE ratio from 0.95 to 0.82 g/MJ at 15-16 weeks of age, have a more marked impact on performance than reducing SA from 0.96 to 0.78 m²/pig.

A Meta-Analysis to Understand the Relationship between Pig Body Weight and Variation from Birth to Market

Simple Summary

Understanding and managing variation in live weight within a pig population is key for swine producers to avoid economic penalties at processing plants. The objective of this meta-analysis was to determine the relationship between coefficient of variation (CV) and standard variation (SD) as a function of body weight for pigs and develop equations to predict CV and SD of a population of pigs from birth to market weight. Results reveal that there is a quadratic relationship between variation and body weight. Coefficient of variation decreases as live weight increases, but the slope is less pronounced as body weights became greater. Conversely, SD increases quadratically as body weight (BW) increases, with a less pronounced slope when BW is high within the population. Thus, the equations developed can be an effective tool for producers to predict normal BW variation within a group of pigs, which can then aid in the development of marketing strategies for finishing pigs.

Abstract

This meta-analysis aims to understand the changes in pig body weight (BW) variation from birth to market and develop prediction equations for coefficient of variation (CV) and standard deviation (SD) as a function of BW. Standard deviation is the measure of dispersion of a set of values from the mean and CV is the SD expressed as a percentage of the mean. Data collected from 16 papers and data sets yielded 117,268 individually weighed pigs with sample size ranging from 120 to 4108 pigs. Polynomial regression analysis was conducted separately for each variation measurement. The resulting prediction equations (CV (%) = 20.04 − 0.135 × (BW) + 0.00043 × (BW)², R² = 0.79; SD = 0.41 + 0.150 × (BW) − 0.00041 × (BW)², R² = 0.95) suggest that there is a quadratic decreasing relationship between the CV of a population and BW, the slope gets smaller as mean BW increases from birth to market. A quadratic increasing relationship is observed for SD, with slope being smaller as mean BW of pigs increases from birth to market. These prediction equations can be used by swine producers to estimate expected CV and SD of BW among a population of pigs.

Effects of dietary chromium propionate and space allowance on performance and carcass responses of growing-finishing pigs

In a 72-d trial, 256 pigs (Line 600 × 241, DNA Columbus, NE) were used to determine the effect of dietary Cr (Cr propionate; Kemin Industries, Des Moines, IA) and physical space restriction on performance and carcass characteristics of finishing pigs. Pens were blocked by initial weight and randomly assigned to treatments with eight pigs per pen and eight pens per treatment. Treatments were arranged in a 2 × 2 factorial with main effects of Cr (control and Cr propionate, 200 µg/kg added Cr) and space allowances (0.91 m²/animal: normal and 0.63 m²/animal: restricted). Pigs were fed in three dietary phases and pigs were weighed approximately every 14 d throughout the study. Feed efficiency was calculated as both a standard gain to feed ratio and as an adjusted G:F ratio at a common final bodyweight. There were no evidence of space allocation × Cr interactions for any measured responses (P > 0.05). Space restriction decreased (P < 0.001) daily weight gain, final body weight, hot carcass weight, and daily feed intake, but increased carcass yield (P = 0.009) and decreased backfat depth (P = 0.003). Feed efficiency was greater for pigs provided a normal space allowance when adjusted for a common final bodyweight (P = 0.021), although no evidence of a difference was observed for unadjusted G:F (P = 0.687). Adding Cr to the diet reduced G:F on both an adjusted and unadjusted basis (P ≤ 0.021). There was marginally significant evidence that pigs provided Cr had lower average daily gain (P = 0.079) and final bodyweight (P = 0.056) compared to pigs not provided added Cr. There was marginally significant evidence that Cr resulted in greater backfat depth (P = 0.069), although no evidence of a difference in other carcass parameters were observed (P > 0.10). These results demonstrated that there were no interactions between Cr propionate and space allocation, illustrating that under the conditions of this study Cr propionate did not provide an advantage in growth performance or carcass characteristics in either adequate or restricted space allocation.

Effects of space allowance and marketing strategy on growth performance of pigs raised to 165 kg

A total of 976 pigs (PIC 327 × Camborough; PIC, Hendersonville, TN; initially 22.0 ± 1.53 kg body weight [BW]) were used in a 160-d growth study to evaluate the effects of increasing space allowance and varying marketing strategies on growth performance of pigs raised to market weights of ~165 kg. Pens of pigs were blocked by location within the barn and allotted to one of six treatments. Pen served as the experimental unit, and there were eight replicate pens per treatment. The first four treatments consisted of increased initial stocking density and did not utilize topping strategies: (1) 14 pigs/pen (1.17 m²/pig), (2) 17 pigs/pen (0.97 m²/pig), (3) 20 pigs/pen (0.82 m²/pig), and (4) 23 pigs/pen (0.71 m²/pig). The fifth treatment began with 25 pigs/pen (0.66 m²/pig) and had four marketing events with the heaviest 3 pigs/pen removed on day 93, and additional pigs removed to a common inventory of 20 pigs/pen on day 122 and 17 pigs/pen on day 147 with final marketing on day 160. The final treatment began the experiment with 23 pigs/pen (0.71 m²/pig) with three marketing events to achieve a common inventory of 20 pigs/pen on day 108 and 17 pigs/pen on day 147. Pens of pigs were weighed and feed disappearance measured on days 0, 55, 93, 108, 122, 135, 147, and 160. As space allowance decreased from 1.17 to 0.71 m²/pig via increased initial pen inventory (treatments 1 to 4), overall average daily gain (ADG) and average daily feed intake (ADFI) decreased (linear, P < 0.001), while gain:feed ratio (G:F) did not differ (P > 0.05). The treatments with multiple marketing events were compared with each other and with the treatment that began with 0.71 m²/pig and only marketed once at the end of the study. Overall ADG and ADFI were not different (P > 0.05) among these three treatments. Marketing pigs three or four times improved (P < 0.05) G:F compared with the treatment that began the study with 0.71 m²/pig and marketed only once. Reducing floor space allowance for heavy weight pigs decreased intake, which resulted in lower growth rate and final BW, with these reductions occurring before the critical k-value was reached. Total weight gain per pen was maximized with the lowest space allowance and the multiple marketing treatments. Thus, strategic use of pig removals prior to final marketing may allow producers to maximize both number of pigs and total weight marketed through a barn when feeding to heavy weights.

Effects of increased space allowance on animal welfare, meat and ham quality of heavy pigs slaughtered at 160Kg

Sixty barrows (Body Weight–BW- range: 23.9–160 kg) were allotted to two experimental groups (6 pens of 5 pigs each): the control group was kept at a space allowance of 1m²/head; the second group was kept at 1.3m²/head. Behaviour, growth parameters, carcass and meat quality were assessed, as well as fat and cured ham quality. Results showed that pigs raised at 1.3m²/head spent more time laying (particularly in lateral recumbency, P<0.01 and P<0.001, respectively) compared to pigs kept at lower space allowance. They also reduced the aimless exploration of the slatted pen floor (P<0.001) and increased overall expression of other, mainly active, behaviors (e.g., drinking, walking and standing, P<0.01). Pigs raised at 1.3m^2/head showed higher final BW (P = 0.02), more favourable Average Daily Gain (ADG) and gain-to-Feed ratio (G:F) both during the last period of the trial (P<0.05 for both parameters) and over the entire trial (P = 0.01 for both parameters). No significant difference was observed between groups for carcass traits and the main meat quality attributes. Subcutaneous fat from green hams had higher α-linolenic acid content (P<0.01) in the group reared at greater space allowance. Green hams from this group lost less weight at trimming (P<0.01) and the resulting cured hams received better sensory evaluations (P<0.05). No difference was observed in fatty acid composition and unsaturation levels of the subcutaneous fat from cured hams. Our data suggest that heavy pigs intended for Parma ham would benefit from the adoption of higher individual floor space allowances, both in terms of animal welfare (increased possibility to rest) and of productive parameters, without having any detrimental effect on the suitability of the thighs for dry-curing or on the quality of the final product.

Potential risk factors related to pig body weight variability from birth to slaughter in commercial conditions

The aim of this observational study is to identify risk factors associated with body weight (BW) variability in three data sets (DS) in commercial conditions. A total of 1,009 (DS1), 460 (DS2), and 1304 (DS3) male and female crossbreed pigs (Pietrain × [Landrace × Large White]), respectively, were included in each trial. Pigs were periodically weighed until slaughter. Then, variables such as length of gestation, length of lactation, parity, litter size, sex, birth BW, and ADG were considered. Pigs remaining on the farm after two loads to the slaughterhouse were defined as last group of animals sent to slaughterhouse (LGS). Descriptive statistics of variability were calculated, and a risk analysis approach was used to look for the factors related to LGS. A multiple logistic regression was performed to identify all variables that were significant (P < 0.05). The risk ratio (RR), odds ratio (OR), and population attributable risk (PAR) were calculated for all of the significant variables after transforming all of them into binary factors using the 25th percentile as the cut-off point. Results showed that the major part of the variability (as CV) comes from birth (20% to 25%) and increased only a little during lactation and 14-d post weaning. From this point onwards, CV tended to decrease, as pigs got closer to the marketing weight (down 11.5% to 12.7%). Regarding the indicators selected, RR, OR, and PAR presented similar trends in the three DS studied. Therefore, for the variables finally included, these indicators had their minimum values at the start of the cycle and then gradually increased at the end. Those results, based on an epidemiological approach, suggest that the closer to the end of the cycle the greater the probability for a light piglet of being/becoming LGS. It might be explained by the shorter available time to efficiently implement preventive measures aimed to improve the performance of delayed pigs and, thus, reducing variability.Those results, based on an epidemiological approach, make sense as the probability for a light piglet to be a LGS increases the closer to the end of the cycle, due to the short time to implement preventive measures and increase the performance of delayed pigs and reduce variability. The differential PAR associated with both, the nursery and the growing period, was 1.7% and 1.5% for DS1, 5.1% and 3.1% for DS2, and 3.7% and 2.8% for DS3. For the lactation period, the results were 4.3% for DS2 and 4.5% for DS3. Results suggest that the most critical periods, in relation to retardation of growth in swine, are lactation and nursery. Implementing measures that maintain risk factors under or above thresholds, especially in the initial phases of growth, will reduce the percentage of LGS pigs and positively affect the overall homogeneity of the batch.

Effects of increasing space allowance by removing a pig or gate adjustment on finishing pig growth performance

A total of 256 pigs (initially 55.9 ± 4.88 kg) were used in a 71-d study to determine the effects of increasing space allowance and pig removal on pig growth performance. Pens of pigs were blocked by body weight (BW) and allotted to 1 of 4 space allowance treatments, initially with 8 pigs per pen and 8 pens per treatment. First 2 treatments included pens with 0.91 m2 per pig or 0.63 m2 per pig for the entire study; two additional treatments initially provided 0.63 m2 per pig, but either a gate was adjusted on days 28, 45, and 62 or the heaviest pig in the pen was removed from the pen on days 28 and 45 to provide more space and keep pigs in accordance with their predicted minimum space requirement [(m2) = 0.0336 × (BW, kg)0.67]. From days 0 to 14 (56 to 69 kg), there was no effect of stocking density observed for average daily gain (ADG), average daily feed intake (ADFI), and gain:feed (G:F). From days 14 to 28 (69 to 83 kg), pigs provided 0.91 m2 had increased (P < 0.05) ADG and G:F compared with those allowed 0.63 m2. Pigs provided 0.91 m2 were marginally heavier (P = 0.081) on day 28 and had greater ADFI (P = 0.025) during days 28 to 45 than those provided 0.63 m2 or those that had the heaviest pig removed. From days 45 to 62 (98 to 116 kg), pigs provided 0.91 m2 were heavier (P < 0.01) than all others, wheras pigs provided 0.63 m2 had reduced ADFI compared with other treatments. From days 62 to 71 (116 to 124 kg), pigs provided 0.91 m2 and those with space adjustment treatments had greater (P < 0.05) ADG and ADFI than those provided 0.63 m2. Overall (56 to 124 kg), pigs provided 0.91 m2 had increased (P = 0.001) ADG compared with those allowed 0.63 m2 with pigs provided space adjustments intermediate. In summary, pigs with 0.91 m2 grew faster and consumed more feed than pigs restricted in space. As pigs reached the critical k value, gate adjustments and pig removals affected growth similarly. As pigs grew to the predicted space requirement and were subsequently allowed more space, performance was greater than those provided 0.63 m2 but less than those allowed 0.91 m2. It appears that the industry accepted critical k value, 0.0336, may not be adequate for optimal pig performance across multiple BW ranges.

Effects of wet/dry feeder and pen stocking density on grow-finish pig performance

Three thousand one hundred and eighty-two terminal cross pigs (barrows and gilts) PIC line 359 sires × 1,050 dams were used from three consecutive grow-finish groups (initial BW of 21.51 ± 0.42 kg, 31.61 ± 1.18 kg, 29.41 ± 0.28 kg for replicates 1-3). Pigs were randomly assigned to each pen at the start of the trial and the research period continued for 106, 94, and 100 d for the first, second, and third replicates, respectively. The experimental treatments were designed as a two by three factorial (pen space of 0.65 or 0.78 m²/pig with 10, 13, or 16 pigs per feeder space), each pen had an equal number of barrows and gilts with 20, 26, and 32 pigs per pen for the 10, 13, and 16 pigs per feeder space pens. Each pen was equipped with one double-sided wet/dry feeder, 37.5 cm wide, with one nipple drinker. All pigs had ad libitum access to feed and water supply during the trial period. Pigs for all the three replicates were fed with the same series of diets. Pigs were weighed by pen at the start of trial and at the end of the trial to calculate ADG. Feed was removed from the feeders and weighed to determine ADFI and G:F. To express floor space allowance, the k value was estimated by the equation: space per pig   ( m 2 ) = k × BW  ( kg ) 0.67 . No interactions (P > 0.05) of floor space allowance with pigs per feeder were observed. Pigs with less floor space allowance had reduced BW (128.8 vs. 129.5 kg, P = 0.026), ADG (1.00 vs. 1.02 kg/d, P = 0.002), and ADFI (2.52 vs. 2.61 kg/d, P < 0.001). However, G:F was improved (0.402 vs. 0.397, P = 0.039) with less floor space allowance per pig. Increased pigs per feeder space reduced final BW (129.7, 129.4, 128.4 kg, linear; P = 0.001). However, ADG had a quadratic relationship (P = 0.005) with pigs per feeder space with means of 1.03, 1.01, and 1.01 kg/d for 10, 13, and 16 pigs per feeder space. Overall, ADFI had a quadratic relationship (P < 0.0001) with number of pigs per feeder space with means of 2.62, 2.52, and 2.55 kg/d for 10, 13, and 16 pigs per feeder space. Gain efficiency had a quadratic relationship (P = 0.005) with number of pigs per feeder space with means of 0.395, 0.404, and 0.400 for 10, 13, and 16 pigs per feeder space. In conclusion, a floor space allowance of 0.65 m²/pig in the grow-finish period reduced ADFI and ADG compared with 0.78 m²/pig. Overall, with the type of wet/dry feeder used in this study, 10 pigs per feeder had the greatest ADG and ADFI, compared with 13 or 16 pigs per feeder space. However, G:F improved as the number of pigs per feeder space increased.

Effect of floor space allowances on growth performance of finishing pigs marketed at 138 kilograms

Current floor space allowances were determined in research studies conducted 10 to 20 yr ago using pigs that were marketed at a BW of about 113 kg or less. Currently, pork producers are regularly marketing pigs that weigh over 128 kg. Given this precipitous increase in market weight, we conducted 2 experiments to determine if floor space allowances previously determined apply to pigs marketed at greater than 128 kg. Experiment 1 was conducted at 5 university research stations throughout the Upper Midwest region. In this experiment, we evaluated the growth performance, salivary cortisol concentrations, and lesion scores of pigs weighing between 27 and 138 kg provided 0.71, 0.80, 0.89, 0.98, or 1.07 m/pig of floor space. Within each station, group size (range = 6 to 19 pigs) remained constant across floor space treatments but pen size was altered to achieve the desired space allocations. There were 14 replicate pens for each treatment. Overall, increasing floor space allowance increased final BW (linear, = 0.04) and tended (linear, < 0.06) to increase ADG and ADFI. There were no improvements in final BW or ADG beyond 0.89 m/pig. The G:F was not influenced by increasing floor space allocation. Salivary cortisol concentrations and lesion scores were not affected by floor space allowances. Experiment 2 focused on floor space needs of pigs nearing market weight and was conducted at 4 research stations. Pigs weighing about 130 kg were assigned to pens that provided 0.71, 0.80, 0.89, 0.98, or 1.07 m/pig of floor space. Group size ranged from 4 to 11 pigs per pen but was constant across floor space treatments within station. The study lasted 2 wk and there were 8 replicate pens per treatment. As floor space allowance increased, ADG (0.86, 0.95, 0.95, 1.10, and 1.06 kg; linear, < 0.01), ADFI (3.03, 3.26, 3.22, 3.49, and 3.25 kg; quadratic, < 0.05), and final BW (145.6, 145.7, 146.4, 148.3, and 147.9 kg; linear, < 0.01) increased. Based on the results of these 2 experiments, pigs marketed at about 138 kg require at least 0.89 m/pig to support optimal growth performance. However, heavier pigs (about 148 kg) at the end of the finishing period require 0.98 m/pig.

Development of equations to predict the influence of floor space on average daily gain, average daily feed intake and gain : feed ratio of finishing pigs

Floor space allowance for pigs has substantial effects on pig growth and welfare. Data from 30 papers examining the influence of floor space allowance on the growth of finishing pigs was used in a meta-analysis to develop alternative prediction equations for average daily gain (ADG), average daily feed intake (ADFI) and gain : feed ratio (G : F). Treatment means were compiled in a database that contained 30 papers for ADG and 28 papers for ADFI and G : F. The predictor variables evaluated were floor space (m2/pig), k (floor space/final BW0.67), Initial BW, Final BW, feed space (pigs per feeder hole), water space (pigs per waterer), group size (pigs per pen), gender, floor type and study length (d). Multivariable general linear mixed model regression equations were used. Floor space treatments within each experiment were the observational and experimental unit. The optimum equations to predict ADG, ADFI and G : F were: ADG, g=337.57+(16 468×k)-(237 350×k 2)-(3.1209×initial BW (kg))+(2.569×final BW (kg))+(71.6918×k×initial BW (kg)); ADFI, g=833.41+(24 785×k)-(388 998×k 2)-(3.0027×initial BW (kg))+(11.246×final BW (kg))+(187.61×k×initial BW (kg)); G : F=predicted ADG/predicted ADFI. Overall, the meta-analysis indicates that BW is an important predictor of ADG and ADFI even after computing the constant coefficient k, which utilizes final BW in its calculation. This suggests including initial and final BW improves the prediction over using k as a predictor alone. In addition, the analysis also indicated that G : F of finishing pigs is influenced by floor space allowance, whereas individual studies have concluded variable results.

Effects of space allocation on finishing pig growth performance and carcass characteristics

A total of 405 pigs (PIC 327 × 1,050) were used in 2 experiments (Exp. 1, initially 66.1 ± 1.8 kg BW, Exp. 2 initially 60.8 ± 2.5 kg BW) to examine the effects of space allocation on finishing pig growth performance and carcass characteristics. Pigs were randomly allotted to pens on entry into the finishing facility. Pens of pigs were balanced by initial BW and randomly allotted to 1 of 3 treatments with either 7 or 8 replications per treatment (Exp.1 and 2, respectively). There were 9 pigs per pen and gates were adjusted to provide 0.84, 0.74, or 0.65 m² per pig. Each pen was equipped with a dry single-sided feeder with two 35.6 cm × 11.4 cm (length × width) feeder spaces and a cup waterer. In both experiments, as space allocation decreased, overall ADG and ADFI decreased (linear, P < 0.019) with no evidence for differences in G:F. In Exp. 2, there was marginal evidence for a linear improvement (P = 0.061) in G:F as space allocation decreased from d 42 to 56. Final BW was 3.8 and 5.3 kg greater (linear, P ≤ 0.005) in Exp. 1 and 2, respectively, when comparing the 0.65 to the 0.84 m² per pig space allocation treatments. Using a predicted k-value of 0.0336, ADFI and, subsequently, ADG should have begun to decrease when pigs reached 121.2, 101.7, and 83.3 kg at 0.84, 0.74, or 0.65 m² per pig, respectively. In Exp. 1, we found marginal evidence for a reduction in ADFI as space allocation decreased starting at a mean BW of 80.3 kg (d 14; linear, P = 0.072). In Exp. 2, ADFI and consequently ADG decreased linearly (P < 0.029) starting at a mean BW of 74 kg, as space allocation decreased, before pigs reached the k-value that should have influenced performance. It is unknown if growth performance was impacted for the 0.84 m² treatment group as this was the greatest space allocation treatment. Overall, these studies indicate that decreasing space allocation resulted in poorer ADG driven by a reduction in ADFI. The data suggests that the accepted k-value of 0.0336 might underestimate the impact of space restriction on finishing pig ADG and ADFI.