Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T12:34:39.961Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Maternal influences on litter size in pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. W. B. King  and
G. B. Young
J. W. B. King
Affiliation:
A.R.C. Animal Breeding Research Organisation, Edinburgh 9
G. B. Young
Affiliation:
A.R.C. Animal Breeding Research Organisation, Edinburgh 9
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The effects of inbreeding of the sow and plane of nutrition after mating on litter size at 28 days were investigated.

Outbred Large White sows were mated at first heat after weaning to inbred boars, and inbred sows to outbred boars, so that both groups of sows carried the same type of embryo. The sows were then placed at random on either high or low planes of nutrition until slaughter 28 days later, when their corpora lutea and number of embryos were counted.

Litter size was significantly higher in outbred than in inbred sows by 2·52 ± 0·93 pigs. This resulted from 2·89 ± 0·94 more ova shed and 0·37 ± 0·93 more embryos dying. The general conclusion is that inbreeding of the sow reduces early litter size mainly by depressing ovulation rate.

The different planes of nutrition produced negligible differences in within-litter mortality and, therefore, on litter size, but resulted in a marked difference in conception rate. All animals on the high plane were pregnant, whereas on the low plane 25% were empty, this difference being highly significant.

Age of the sow, but not her weight, was found to be significantly correlated with number of corpora lutea (r = 0·39). The latter had a correlation with litter size of 0·55 and with mortality of 0·45. The correlation between litter size and mortality was −0·50.

Parity increased and inbreeding reduced the length of the uterus which was not, however, significantly correlated with litter size.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 48 , Issue 4 , April 1957 , pp. 457 - 463
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1957

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Blunn, C. T. & Baker, M. L. (1949). J. Anim. Sci. 8, 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brambell, F. W. R. (1948). Biol. Rev. 23, 370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, D. & Whatley, J. A. Jr., (1951). J. Anim. Sci. 10, 505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christian, R. E. & Nofziger, J. C. (1952). J. Anim. Sci. 11, 789 (abs.).Google Scholar
Comstock, R. E. & Winters, L. M. (1944). J. Anim. Sci. 3, 380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corner, G. W. (1922). Johns Hopk. Hoap. Bull. 33, 389.Google Scholar
Dickerson, G. E., Blunn, C. T., Chapman, A. B., Kottman, R. M., Krider, J. L., Warwick, E. J. & Whatley, J. A. Jr., (1954). Res. Bull. Mo. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 551.Google Scholar
Donald, H. P. (1955). Proc. Roy. Soc. B, 144, 192.Google Scholar
Fisher, R. A. (1950). Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Green, W. W. & Winters, L. M. (1947). J. Morph. 78, 305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, W. (1927). Biol. Bull., Woods Hole, 52, 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, P. G. D. (1954). Vet. J. 110, 205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, J. S. (1954). J. Embryol. Exp. Morph, 2, 308.Google Scholar
Pomeroy, R. W. (1952). Proc. IInd Int. Congr. Phys. Path. Anim. Rep. and A.I. Addendum, p. 5.Google Scholar
Robertson, G. L., Casida, L. E., Grummer, R. H. & Chapman, A. B. (1951). J. Anim. Sci. 10, 841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, G. L., Grummer, R. H., Casida, L. E. & Chapman, A. B. (1951). J. Anim. Sci. 10, 647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Self, H. L., Grummer, R. H. & Casida, L. E. (1955). J. Anim. Sci. 14, 573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squiers, C. D., Dickerson, G. E. & Mayer, D. T. (1952). Res. Bull. Mo. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 494.Google Scholar
Stewart, H. A. (1945). J. Anim. Sci. 4, 250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warnick, A. C., Wiggins, E. L., Casida, L. E., Grummer, R. H. & Chapman, A. B. (1951). J. Anim. Sci. 10, 479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar