Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-78bd46657c-t6dlm Total loading time: 0.198 Render date: 2021-05-08T09:02:27.834Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Fat changes in breeding sows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. T. Whittemore
Affiliation:
Edinburgh School of Agriculture, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
M. F. Franklin
Affiliation:
ARC Unit of Statistics, James Clerk Maxwell Building, May field Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JZ
B. S. Pearce
Affiliation:
Meat and Livestock Commission, PO Box 44, Bletchley MK2 2EF
Get access

Abstract

One hundred and eight crossbred sows from nine different commercial sources were monitored over two parities for changes in live weight and fatness. All sows were given a common nutritional regime. Thirty sows were slaughtered and physically dissected. After weaning the second litter, mean carcass measurements ( ± s.d.) were: live weight, 139±9·5kg; lean mass, 26·6 ± 2·8kg; subcutaneous fat mass, 4·l ± l·7kg; ultrasonic P2 backfat depth (USP2), 11·3±2·8mm; total dissected fat (kg) = 0·63 ± 0·073 USP2 —1·1 ±0·85(r = 0·85). Between mating (parity 1) and weaning (parity 2) sows gained 22kg live weight and lost 6·8mm backfat. There were significant differences between sources with respect to fatness, despite standardized feeding. It is suggested that for breeding pigs such as these, starting their reproductive life with limited fat reserves (16·4 ± 3·0mm USP2 at 92 ± 6kg live weight), a conventional fat-exploiting feeding regime is unlikely to be appropriate.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Agricultural Research Council. 1967. Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 3, Figs. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H. 1972. Some aspects of productivity in the sow. In The Improvement of Sow Productivity (ed. Jones, A. S.Fowler, V. R. and Yeats, J. C. R.), pp. 7187. Rowett Research Institute, Aberdeen.Google Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H., Bannerman, Mary, Bathurst, E. V. J., Bracewell, A. G., Cunningham, J. M. M., Dodsworth, T. L., Dodds, P. A., Forbes, T. J. and Laird, R. 1969. The effect of level of feed intake in pregnancy and in lactation upon the productivity of sows. Anim. Prod. 11: 225241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H., Bathurst, E. V. J., Bracewell, A. G., Cunningham, J. M. M., Dent, J. B., Dodsworth, T. L., MacPherson, R. M. and Walker, N. 1971. The effect of pattern of food intake in pregnancy upon sow productivity. Anim. Prod. 13: 257270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H., MacPherson, R. M. and Lodge, G. A. 1968. The effects of level of feeding of sows during pregnancy. III. Body composition. Anim. Prod. 10: 149156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenhalgh, J. F. D., Elsley, F. W. H., Grubb, D. A., Lightfoot, A. L., Saul, D. W., Smith, P., Walker, N., Williams, D. and Yeo, M. L. 1977. Coordinated trials on the protein requirements of sows. 1. A comparison of four levels of dietary protein in gestation and two in lactation. Anim. Prod. 24: 307321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodge, G. A., Elsley, F. W. H. and MacPherson, R. M. 1966. The effects of level of feeding of sows during pregnancy. II. Changes in body weight. Anim. Prod. 8: 499506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1978. Nutrient allowances for pigs. Ministry of Agriculture. Fisheries and Food, London.Google Scholar
O'Grady, J. F., Elsley, F. W. H., MacPherson, R. M. and McDonald, I. 1975. The response of lactationg sows and their litters to different dietary energy allowances. 2. Weight changes and carcass composition of sows. Anim. Prod. 20: 257265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. 1976. A study of growth responses to nutrient inputs by modelling. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 35: 383391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Fat changes in breeding sows
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Fat changes in breeding sows
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Fat changes in breeding sows
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *