| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
* Animal Breeding and Genetics Group, Wageningen Institute of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands;
and
IPG, Institute for Pig Genetics B.V., Beuningen, The Netherlands;
and
TOPIGS France, Le Haut de Serre, 55700 Brouennes, France
2 Correspondence: P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH (phone: +31-317-482335; fax: +31-317-483929; E-mail: jascha.leenhouwers{at}wur.nl).
The objectives of this study were to analyze the incidence of different categories of stillborn piglets in relation to genetic merit for farrowing survival of sows and litters and to analyze relationships of total number of piglets born per litter, average BW of the litter, and within-litter variation in BW with genetic merit for farrowing survival of sows and litters. Records of 336 purebred litters, produced by 307 first- to eighth-parity sows, were collected on a nucleus farm in Brouennes, France. Breeding values for farrowing survival were estimated for sows (EBVfs_maternal) and litters (EBVfs_direct) using a large data set from which information obtained in the current study was excluded. For each litter, BW, number of stillborn piglets (classified as nonfresh stillborn, prepartum stillborn, intrapartum stillborn, and postpartum stillborn), and number of live-born piglets were recorded. Birth weights of stillborn piglets were lower than BW of live-born piglets (P < 0.0001), except for prepartum stillbirths. The total number of stillborn piglets per litter and the number of stillborn piglets in each category decreased with increasing EBVfs_maternal (P < 0.01). An increase in EBVfs_direct was also associated with a decrease in the total number of stillborn piglets per litter (P < 0.01). This decrease was due to a decrease in the number of nonfresh, prepartum, and postpartum stillborn piglets but not to a decrease in the number of intrapartum stillborn piglets. Probabilities of stillbirth in relation to EBVfs_maternal were higher than probabilities of stillbirth in relation to EBVfs_direct. Total number of piglets born decreased with increasing EBVfs_direct (P = 0.0003), but was not related to EBVfs_maternal. Average BW of the litter (P < 0.0001) and within-litter variation in BW (P = 0.05) decreased with increasing EBVfs_maternal but were not related to EBVfs_direct. Selection for the maternal genetic component of farrowing survival seems a better strategy than selection for the direct genetic component. Selection for the maternal genetic component of farrowing survival reduces stillbirth in all categories and does not affect litter size.
Key Words: Animal Breeding • Breeding Value • Pigs • Stillbirths
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A. Rosendo, T. Druet, J. Gogue, L. Canario, and J. P. Bidanel Correlated responses for litter traits to six generations of selection for ovulation rate or prenatal survival in French Large White pigs J Anim Sci, July 1, 2007; 85(7): 1615 - 1624. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Canario, E. Cantoni, E. Le Bihan, J. C. Caritez, Y. Billon, J. P. Bidanel, and J. L. Foulley Between-breed variability of stillbirth and its relationship with sow and piglet characteristics J Anim Sci, December 1, 2006; 84(12): 3185 - 3196. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Mesa, T. J. Safranski, K. M. Cammack, R. L. Weaber, and W. R. Lamberson Genetic and phenotypic relationships of farrowing and weaning survival to birth and placental weights in pigs J Anim Sci, January 1, 2006; 84(1): 32 - 40. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Arango, I. Misztal, S. Tsuruta, M. Culbertson, and W. Herring Threshold-linear estimation of genetic parameters for farrowing mortality, litter size, and test performance of Large White sows J Anim Sci, March 1, 2005; 83(3): 499 - 506. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Holm, M. Bakken, O. Vangen, and R. Rekaya Genetic analysis of litter size, parturition length, and birth assistance requirements in primiparous sows using a joint linear-threshold animal model J Anim Sci, September 1, 2004; 82(9): 2528 - 2533. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
