Swine fertility in a changing climate

Climate change has been linked to increasing temperatures and weather extremes. Certain regions around the world become more susceptible to environmental hazards that limit pig production and reproductive fertility. Environmental measures that link to pig fertility are needed to assess change, risk and develop solutions. Sub-populations of pigs display lower fertility in summer and are susceptible to heat stress. In the context of a warming climate, elevated temperatures and number of heat stress days increase body temperature and change the physiology, behavior, feed intake, and stress response of the pig. These changes could alter follicle development, oocyte quality, estrus expression, conception and litter size. In boars, sperm quality and production are reduced in response to summer heat stress. Nevertheless, while temperature increases have occurred over the years in some warmer locations, other regions have not shown those changes. Perhaps this involves the measures used for heat stress assessment or that climate is buffered in more temperate areas. Reductions in pig fertility are not always evident, and depend upon climate, year, genotype and management. This could also involve selection, as females more susceptible to heat stress and fertility failure, are subsequently culled. In the years from 1999 to 2020 when increases in global temperature from baseline occurred, measures of female fertility improved for farrowing rate and litter size. Progressive reduction in fertility may not be apparent in all geo-locations, but as temperatures increases become more widespread, these changes are likely to become more obvious and detectable.

Relationships of genomic estimated breeding values for age at puberty, birth weight, and growth during development in normal cyclic and acyclic gilts

Managing replacement gilts to reach optimal body weight and growth rate for boar stimulation and first breeding is a key component for sow reproductive longevity and producer profitability. Failure to display pubertal estrus remains a major reason that gilts are culled from the herd. Puberty is metabolically gated so evaluating phenotypic and genetic relationships between birth weight and growth traits with age at puberty and acyclicity can provide valuable insight for efficient gilt development. Data on a litter of origin of the gilt, average daily gain at different stages of development, and age at puberty were available for age-matched cyclic (n = 4,861) and acyclic gilts (prepubertal anestrus, n = 578; behavioral anestrus, n = 428). Genomic estimated breeding values were predicted for each trait using genomic best linear unbiased prediction. Primiparous sows produced more acyclic gilts than multiparous sows (P < 0.05). Accounting for effects of parity and litter size, prepubertal anestrus gilts were heavier at birth and behaviorally anestrus gilts grew faster during the finisher period compared to cyclic gilts (P < 0.05), reflecting possible prenatal programming that negatively affects optimal pubertal development and antagonistic effects between adolescent growth and expression of estrus of gilts from first parity sows. Regression of phenotypic age at puberty with lifetime growth rate (birth to selection) showed a negative linear relationship whereas genomic estimated breeding values showed a negative quadratic relationship indicating that gilts with the least and greatest growth are less optimal as replacements. The slopes of these relationships are small with low negative phenotypic (r = -0.06) and genetic correlations (r = -0.13). The addition of data from acyclic gilts did not substantially change the estimates for genetic relationships between growth and pubertal onset. Although this study identified differences in birth weight and growth rate between cyclic and acyclic gilts the genetic relationships are weak, suggesting that genetic selection for these traits can be achieved separately. Avoiding the smallest and largest gilts in a cohort born to first parity sows could result in gilts with optimal development and reduce the proportion of replacement gilts that are acyclic.

Effects of physical or fenceline boar exposure and exogenous gonadotropins on puberty induction and subsequent fertility in gilts

The present study was part of a larger experiment that evaluated litter of origin effects on gilt production. The objectives of this study were to determine the effect of physical or fenceline boar exposure and exogenous gonadotropins on puberty induction and subsequent fertility in a commercial farm environment. The experiment was performed in three replicates. Prepubertal gilts were assigned by pen (13/pen) to receive 15 min of daily Fenceline (FBE, n = 153) or Physical (PBE, n = 154) Boar Exposure (BE) for 3 weeks starting at 184 d of age in a purpose-designed Boar Exposure Area (BEAR). At the start of week 3, prepubertal gilts were randomly assigned to receive PG600 or none (Control). From weeks 4 to 6, estrus was checked using only FBE. During weeks 1 to 3, measures of reproductive status were obtained weekly or until expression of estrus. Upon detection of first estrus, gilts were relocated into stalls and inseminated at second estrus. PBE reduced age (P = 0.001) and days to puberty (P = 0.002), increased the proportion of gilts in estrus (P = 0.04) in week 1 (38.3 vs. 27.5%), and tended (P = 0.08) to improve estrus in week 2 (37.6 vs. 26.1%) compared to FBE, respectively. In week 3, more prepubertal gilts receiving PBE-PG600 exhibited estrus (P = 0.04; 81.8%) compared to PBE-Control (40.3%), FBE-PG600 (56.4%), and FBE-Control (47.8%). Overall, expression of estrus through week 6 tended (P = 0.08) to be greater for PBE than FBE (91.5 vs. 85.0%). PBE increased (P ≤ 0.05) or tended to increase (P > 0.05 and ≤0.10) service and farrowing rates in parities 1 through 4, but within parity, there were no effects (P > 0.10) on pig production or wean to service interval. Analyses also indicated that weeks from start of boar exposure to puberty, litter of origin traits, and follicle measures at puberty were related to the subsequent fertility. The results of this study confirm the advantages of using increased intensity of boar exposure, combined with PG600 treatment, for effective induction of pubertal estrus in a commercial setting.

Associations among individual gilt birth weight, litter birth weight phenotype, and the efficiency of replacement gilt production

Selection for larger litter size has increased the number of low individual birth weight (BWi) pigs and produced sows with a repeatable low average litter birth weight phenotype (BWP). Using an average of 3.6 litters records per sow, BWP was established in 644 nucleus-multiplication sows producing replacement gilts in a large commercial operation and classified as low (L-BWP, <1.18 kg, n = 85), medium (M-BWP, ≥1.18 to ≤1.35 kg, n = 250), or high (H-BWP, >1.35 kg, n = 309) on the basis of a BWi of 1.18 kg below which there was a high risk of early mortality and the average BWi (1.35 kg) for the population. In subsequent litters, potential replacement gilts born to these sows (n = 7,341) received a unique identification tag that allowed the impact of BWi, BWP, and their interactions on the efficiency of replacement gilt production to be evaluated. Negative effects of BWi on mortality until day 4 after birth were confirmed (P < 0.05) and cumulative losses to weaning, to day 70 of age, and to final pre-selection at 165 d of age were affected (P ≤ 0.05) by the interaction between BWP and BWi. Among the 2,035 gilts for which records for selection efficiency and production to fourth parity were available, a lower BWi decreased the probability of gilts reaching pubertal estrus (P < 0.05) after 21 and 28 d of boar stimulation starting at 180 d of age, with no effect of BWP. Overall, neither BWi, BWP, nor their interaction affected age at puberty. After breeding, only the main effect of BWP affected productivity and retention in the sow herd. In parities 1 and 2, percent stillborn was higher in litters born to gilts from H-BWP compared with L-BWP dams (P < 0.05), and in parity 2, total born and born alive were lower in sows derived from H-BWP compared with other BWPs. There were no differences in retention based on BWP classes until parity 2, after which retention tended (P ≤ 0.09) to be lower in sows derived from H-BWP compared with L-BWP dams. These results provide evidence that sow BWP is an important factor in the overall efficiency of replacement gilt management. This study also confirms that effective gilt selection and pre-breeding management protocols support excellent sow lifetime productivity and mitigate the risk of a high BWP in the litter of origin affecting retention in the breeding herd.

Farm data analysis for lifetime performance components of sows and their predictors in breeding herds

Our objectives in this review are 1) to define the four components of sow lifetime performance, 2) to organize the four components and other key measures in a lifetime performance tree, and 3) to compile information about sow and herd-level predictors for sow lifetime performance that can help producers or veterinarians improve their decision making. First, we defined the four components of sow lifetime performance: lifetime efficiency, sow longevity, fertility and prolificacy. We propose that lifetime efficiency should be measured as annualized piglets weaned or annualized piglets born alive which is an integrated measure for sow lifetime performance, whereas longevity should be measured as sow life days and herd-life days which are the number of days from birth to removal and the number of days from date of first-mating to removal, respectively. We also propose that fertility should be measured as lifetime non-productive days, whereas prolificacy should be measured as lifetime pigs born alive. Second, we propose two lifetime performance trees for annualized piglets weaned and annualized piglets born alive, respectively, and show inter-relationships between the four components of the lifetime performance in these trees. Third, we describe sow and herd-level predictors for high lifetime performance of sows. An example of a sow-level predictor is that gilts with lower age at first-mating are associated with higher lifetime performance in all four components. Other examples are that no re-service in parity 0 and shorter weaning-to-first-mating interval in parity 1 are associated with higher fertility, whereas more piglets born in parity 1 is associated with higher prolificacy. It appears that fertility and prolificacy are independent each other. Furthermore, sows with high prolificacy and high fertility are more likely to have high longevity and high efficiency. Also, an increased number of stillborn piglets indicates that sows have farrowing difficulty or a herd health problem. Regarding herd-level predictors, large herd size is associated with higher efficiency. Also, herd-level predictors can interact with sow level predictors for sow lifetime performance. For example, sow longevity decreases more in large herds than small-to-mid herds, whereas gilt age at first-mating increases. So, it appears that herd size alters the impact of delayed gilt age at first-mating on sow longevity. Increased knowledge of these four components of sow lifetime performance and their predictors should help producers and veterinarians maximize a sow's potential and optimize her lifetime productivity in breeding herds.

Increased age at first-mating interacting with herd size or herd productivity decreases longevity and lifetime reproductive efficiency of sows in breeding herds

Background

Our objectives were to characterize sow life and herd-life performance and examine two-way interactions between age at first-mating (AFM) and either herd size or herd productivity groups for the performance of sows. Data contained 146,140 sows in 143 Spanish herds. Sow life days is defined as the number of days from birth to removal, whereas the herd-life days is from AFM date to removal date. Herds were categorized into two herd size groups and two productivity groups based on the respective 75th percentiles of farm means of herd size and the number of piglets weaned per sows per year: large (> 1017 sows) or small-to-mid herds (< 1017 sows), and high productivity (> 26.5 piglets) or ordinary herds (< 26.5 piglets). A two-level liner mixed-effects model was applied to examine AFM, herd size groups, productivity groups and their interactions for sow life or herd-life performance.

Results

No differences were found between either herd size or herd productivity groups for AFM or the number of parity at removal. However, late AFM was associated with decreased removal parity, herd-life days, herd-life piglets born alive and herd-life annualized piglets weaned, as well as with increased sow life days and herd-life nonproductive days (P < 0.05). Also, significant two-way interactions between AFM and both herd size and productivity groups were found for longevity, prolificacy, fertility and reproductive efficiency of sows. For example, as AFM increased from 190 to 370 days, sows in large herds decreased herd-life days by 156 days, whereas for sows in small-to-mid herds the decrease was only 42 days. Also, for the same AFM increase, sows in large herds had 5 fewer sow life annualized piglets weaned, whereas for sows in small-to-mid herds this sow reproductive efficiency measure was only decreased by 3.5 piglets. Additionally, for ordinary herds, sows in large herds had more herd-life annualized piglets weaned than those in small-to-mid herds (P < 0.05), but no such association was found for high productivity herds (P > 0.10).

Conclusion

We recommend decreasing the number of late AFM sows in the herd and also recommend improving longevity and lifetime efficiency of individual sows.

Gilt Management for Fertility and Longevity

Simple Summary

Improving sow lifetime productivity, herd stability, and maximizing lifetime performance and longevity in the sow herd, represent significant challenges to the swine industry. Routine implementation of efficient gilt development unit (GDU) programs which deliver high quality, breeding-eligible gilts to the sow farm is still needed. Good gilt management starts at birth, because litter of origin, lactation management and the application of early selection strategies are early indicators of future performance and efficiency. A failure to select gilts with the greatest reproductive potential and inappropriate management of their physiological state and metabolic condition at service, are key risk factors for poor sow lifetime productivity (SLP). Management practices that deliver gilts with the greatest potential SLP are crucial to the productivity of conventional production systems.

Abstract

Substantial evidence supports successful management of gilts as an absolutely necessary component of breeding herd management and the pivotal starting point for the future fertility and longevity of the breeding herd. Therefore, gilt management practices from birth have the potential to influence the future reproductive performance of the sow herd. A good gilt management program will address several key components such as birth traits that determine the efficiency of replacement gilt production; effective selection of the most fertile gilts for entry to the breeding herd; effective management programs that provide a consistent supply of service eligible gilts; and appropriate management of weight, physiological maturity, and a positive metabolic state at breeding. Good gilt management can largely resolve the existing gap between excellent genetic potential and the more modest sow lifetime productivity typically achieved in the industry. Investment in good gilt development programs from birth represents a foundational opportunity for improving the efficiency of the pork production industry.

Sow housing associated with reproductive performance in breeding herds

Female pigs in breeding herds can be managed through four phases-gilt development, breeding, gestation, and lactation-during which they may be housed in group or individual pens, stalls, or on pasture. In this review, we focus on housing environments that optimize outcomes during gestation and lactation. Appropriate housing is important during early gestation, to protect embryos and to confirm pregnancy, and from mid-to-late gestation, to ensure sufficient nutrition to increase placental and fetal growth. No difference in the number of pigs born alive were reported between group housing and individual stall housing, although more risk factors for reproductive performance are associated with group housing than stall housing including genetics, bedding, floor space allowance, group size, social ranking, and parity. Furthermore, lameness in pregnant pigs is more frequent in group housing than in stall housing. Housing during lactation helps protect piglets from being crushed or from contracting disease, and can foster the transfer of enough colostrum from mother to piglets. Indeed, lactating sows in pen housing tend to have higher pre-weaning mortality and lighter litter weights than those in crated housing.