Escalante-Rivero A, Alzina-López A, Segura-Correa JC, Rodríguez- Buenfil JC

Language: Spanish
References: 38
Page: 85-92
PDF size: 36.12 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction. The objective of this study was to compare the fertility rate, total number of piglets born and number of piglets born alive of first farrowing gilts using two mating systems, as well as to determine the effect of the time of service and age of the gilt at farrowing on the aforementioned response variables. Material and methods. The effects of two types of breedings, three moments of service and two gilt age groups on the fertility, total number of pigs born and the number of pigs born alive, and piglet mortality at farrowing were studied. Data of 502 gilts from a commercial farm in Yucatán, Mexico were used. The semen was collected from boars from the same farm. Doses with a number of 5 x 109 spermatozoa in a volume of 100 ml were used which were conserved at 15-18oC for a period not longer than three days. Oestrus detection ocurred twice a day (6:00 and 18:00 h) using vasectomized boars. The first type of breeding consisted in one natural service plus two AI services with a 12 ho ur interval and the second type of breeding in three AI with 12 h intervals. Fertility data were analized using Chi square tests and the data on litter size and mortality by analysis of variance procedures. Type of breeding, moment of service and gilt’s age group were the main factors of interest. Results. There were no differences (p› 0.05) on fertility or litter size of the sows between the types of breeding or the moment of service. However, there were differences (p ‹ 0.01) on litter size and pigs born alive from gilts mated at 210 days of age or younger and those mated after 210 days of age (9.04 ± 2.57 and 9.71 ± 2.65 piglets) and (8.52 ± 2.66 and 9.26 ± 2.69 piglets). Discusion. AI could be used for breeding gilts without negative effects on reproductive parameters of the breeding stock. Under the conditions of this study gilts younger than 210 days of age had smaller litters than those older than 210

REFERENCES

1. 1.- INEGI. Anuario Estadístico de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos. Instituto Nacional de Estadística, Geografía e Informática. México, 1995.

2. 2.- Confederación Nacional Ganadera. Mesas de Trabajo de la LX Asamblea General Ordinaria. Porcicultura. México Ganadero. 1995; 412: 22-3.

3. 3.- Duch GJ. La Conformación Territorial del Estado de Yucatán. Los Componentes del medio Físico. Chapingo: Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo; 1988.

4. 4.- Kubus SA. Manual de Inseminación Artificial Porcina.Madrid: MAR-CAR, S.A.; 1993.

5. Conejo NJJ. Manual de Inseminación Artificial del Ganado Porcino con Semen Diluido. Morelia: Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo; 1990.

6. 6.- SAS Institute Inc. SAS/STAT User’s Guide. Release 6.03. Cary: SAS Institute Inc; 1988.

7. 7.- Burke P. Beneficios de la inseminación artificial en porcinos. Síntesis Porcina 1996; 4:8-10.

8. 8.- Steane DE, Guy DR. The analysis of the use of AI in pig breeding. Pig News and Information 1981; 2:193.

9. 9.- Polge C. Fertilization in the pig and horse. J Reprod Fertil 1978; 54:461-74.

10. 10.- Flowers WL, Esbenshade KL. Optimizing management of natural and artificial matings in swine. J Reprod Fertil 1993; 48 (Suppl 1): 217-28.

11. 11.- Flowers WL, Alhusen HD. Reproductive performance and estimates of labor requirements associated with combinations of artificial insemination and matural service in swine. J Anim Sci 1992; 70: 615-21.

12. 12.- Pérez GJ, Raga SJ. Does AI affect sow productivity?. PIGS. Breeding Production Marketing; 1992. p. 15-9.

13. 13.- Salaün Y. Natural mating or AI?. Good accounts make a good technique. Pig News and Information 1993; 14: 313.

14. 14.- Tilton JE, Cole DJA. Effect of triple versus double mating on sow productivity. Anim Prod 1982; 34:279-82.

15. 15.- Bearden HJ, Fuquay J. Reproducción Animal Aplicada. Mexico: El Manual Moderno;1982.

16. 16.- Pay MG, Davies TE: Growth, food consumption and litter production of female pigs mated at puberty and a low body weights. Anim Prod 1973; 17:85-91.

17. 17.- MacPherson RM, Hovell FD, Jones AS. Performance of sows mated at puberty or second or third oestrus and carcass assessment of once-breed gilts. Anim Prod 1977; 24:333-42.

18. 18.- Brooks PH, Smith DA: The effect of mating age on the reproductive performance, food utilisation and liveweight change of the female pig. Pig News and Information 1980; 1:378.

19. 19.- Archibong AE, England DC, Stormshak F: Factors contributing to early embryonic mortality in gilts bred at first estrus. J Anim Sci 1987; 64:474-78.

20. 20.- Clark LK, Leman AD, Morris R: Factors influencing litter size in swine: parity-one females. Pig News and Information 1988; 9: 354.

21. 21.- Clark LK, Leman AD. Factors that influence litter size in pigs. Part 1. Pig News and Information 1986a; 3: 303-10.

22. 22.- Clark LK, Leman AD. Factors that influence litter size in pigs. Part 2. Pig News and Information 1986b; 7:431-37.

23. 23.- Stefanek V. The effect of the development and age of gilts on the size of their first litters. Pig News and Information 1991; 12: 187.

24. 24.- Dial GD, Marsh WE, Polson DD, Villancourt JP.Diferential diagnosis. In: Lemanm AD, Glock RD, Mengeling WL., Penny RHC, Scholl E and Straw B. eds. Diseases of Swine. 7th ed. Ames: Iowa State University Press; 1993. p. 88-137.

25. 25.- Schukken Y H, Buurman J, Huirne RB, Willemse A.H,Vernooy JC, Broek J. Evaluation of optimal age at first conception in gilts from data collected in commercial swine herds. J Anim Sci 1994; 72:1387-92.

26. 26.- Britt JH. New technologies to increase litter size. In: Proceedings of swine reproduction symposium. Ed: American College of Theriogenologist, Society for Theriogenology and American Association of Swine Practioners. Hastings, N.E. USA. August. 1996. p. 103- 12.

27. 27.- Rozeboom DW, Pettigrew JE, Moser RL, Cornelius SG, Kandelgy SM. Influence of gilt age and body composition at first breeding on sow reproductive performance and longevity. J Anim Sci 1996; 74:138-50.

28. 28.- Perry JS, Rowlands IW. Early pregnancy in the pig. J Reprod Fertil 1962; 4:175-88.

29. 29.- Archibong AE, England DC, Stormshak F. Ovulation and embryonic survival in pubertal gilts treated with gonadotropin releasing hormone. J Anim Sci 1987b; 65:752-5.

30. 30.- Arias T, Pérez R. Estudio sobre el comportamiento reproductivo de las cerdas en Cuba. 2. La influencia del año sobre la efectividad (partos/cubriciones, %), entre puercas y cochinitas y entre el 1º,2º y 3er celos. Cienc. Tec. Agric.. Ganado Porcino 1986; 7:15-21.

31. 31.- Conor JS, Van Lunet TA. Ovulation rate and early embryonic survival in gilts. Pig News and Information 1989; 10:123.

32. 32.- Vermer HM, Slijkhuis A. Insemination of breeding sows at the firts or second oestrus. Pig News and Information 1990; 11:146.

33. 33.- Gauthier MC, Legault C, Caritez JC. Effect of age at first farrowing on subsequent productivity of sows. Pig News and Information 1993; 14:405.

34. 34.- Brooks PH, Cole DJA. Meat production from pigs which have farrowed. 1. Reproductive performance and food conversion. Anim Prod 1973; 17:305-15.

35. 35.- Stancic B, Lipozenciv J, Sahinovic R, Grkovic B.Ovulation rate and embryo survival in Swedish Landrace, German Landrace and F1 Large White-Swedish Landrace crossbred sows. Pig News and Information 1993; 14:206.

36. 36.- Young LG, King GJ. Reproductive performance of gilts bred on first versus third estrus. J Anim Sci 1981; 53:19.

37. 37.- Esbenshade KL, Paterson AM, Cantley TC, Day BN.Changes in plasma hormone concentrations associated with the onset of puberty in the gilt. J Anim Sci 1982; 54:320.

38. 38.- Moore NW. The use of embryo transfer and steroid hormone replacement therapy in the study of prenatal mortality. Theriogenology 1985; 23:121.