Feeding the breeding herd: Developing gilts, gestating sows and lactating sows

Feeding the breeding herd: Developing gilts, gestating sows and lactating sows 2 Typical Problems when Feeding the Breeding Herd 1) Gilt development Wrong weight Too fat, too old 2) Gestation Feeding correct amount Over formulated diets 3) Lactation Feed intake Feed intake Feed intake Feed intake Feed intake Inadequate nutrients 3 Gilt guidelines Breed at 210 days of age Minimum weight of 300 lb (130 kg) At least 1 recorded estrus 1

4 Gilt Development Goals Breed at second or later estrous at 300 lb (approximately 210 d of age) Moderate Growth Rate - Approximately 16 mm back fat at breeding - 400 lb and < 21 mm backfat at farrowing target 15 to 19 mm Feed 0.1% higher Ca:P than finishing pigs Feed sow vitamins for at least 30 days before breeding. Gilt Development feed management problems Healthy gilts growing too fast Sick gilts growing too slow Training gilts to ESF setting them back 3 weeks in growth Obese gilts from being on full feed feeders for multiple cycles Feeding too little/much in first gestation 6 Common Nutritional Problem: Over feeding gestating sows Problems with overfeeding gestating sows: Unnecessary expense Impaired mammary development Reduced feed intake in lactation Problem with thin sows: Poor reproductive performance Increased mortality Welfare (ex. shoulder sores) 2

7 Tracking gestation and lactation feed intake Six month rolling average kg kg Translating Condition Score to Feeding Rate Calibration of feed boxes Determine base feeding rate Female size Thermal environment Feed base to females in ideal condition Feed less to fat sows Feed more to thin sows 8 9 Gestation feed usage Feed delivered (total kg in period) gestation sow inventory x days in period Normal range of 7.0 to 7.7 Mcal ME/sow/day Daily feed intake should be: If diet ME is 3.1 Mcal ME/kg = 4.8 to 5.4 lb/d If diet ME is 3.3 Mcal ME/kg = 4.6 to 5.0 lb/d 3

10 Sow maintenance requirements in gestation 80% of feed requirement 11 Using the weight tape 12 Backfat by Percent of Sows at Farrowing 4

13 Body Condition Scoring Courtesy Dr. Joe Connor Carthage Vet Service 14 Influence of Backfat at Farrowing on Lactation Feed Intake a, b P < 0.05 SED = 0.14 a a b a, b, c P < 0.05 SED = 0.38 b c a Young et al., 2004 15 Influence of Backfat at Farrowing on Subsequent Total Born a, b, c P < 0.05 SED = 0.44 a b a b Young et al., 2004 5

Why Condition Score? Sow condition drives lactation feed intake Lactation feed intake drives weaning weight and subsequent reproductive performance Body condition can affect sow productivity Sow condition affects longevity Over-feeding increases feed cost 16 Effect of Gilt Gestation Feeding on Lactation Intake 12 Gestation Feed Intake, lb 4 5 6 10 8 Lb 6 4 1 7 14 21 Day of Lactation Dourmad et al., 1991 90 O 75 O 60 O 6

Case Study Large production system in the U.S. with high gestation feed usage and low lactation intake Changed gestation feeding program to lower intake and tracked changes in reproductive performance 20 Tracking gestation and lactation feed intake Six month rolling average kg 7

Relationship between lactation feed intake and subsequent born alive Relationship between lactation feed intake and interval from wean to estrus Average Daily Gestation Intake, lb Implementation of Gestation Feeding program was July/August 2003 24 8

Pigs Weaned per Sow Per Year 25 Annual Sow Mortality 26 Is the Gestation Feed Intake Pattern Important? Yes Research supports this pattern! and No You can have great production without a pattern! Weaning 0 12 45 75 100 112 Gestation Lactation 9

Sow Feeding Strategy lbs of feed 8 7 6 Higher Intake 5 Feed to Condition 4 Reduce Embryonic Mortality Wean Mate 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Weeks post-mating Farrow 100 Post Weaning Recovery: Influence of feed intake in early gestation on embryo survival Embryo survival, % 90 80 70 67.4 75.8 84.6 80.6 60 50 4 lb 8 lb 4 lb 8 lb Low High During Lactation 29 Baidoo et al. (1992) Good Resource in Feeding After Breeding Dr Tim Safranski University of Missouri- Columbia 573-884-7994 sanfranskit@missouri.edu 30 10

Day 0 to 30 of gestation Classic data indicated high intake from d 0 to 30 reduced embryo survival Now know: Only in gilts or sows in good condition First 48 to 72 hours are the critical period Want to provide more nutrients for sows in poor condition 0 12 30 45 75 100 112 Gestation Lactation Day 12 to 45 of gestation Feed to maintain body condition May be impact area of the future??? Period of muscle differentiation pst, high feed intake, or other possibilities 0 12 45 75 100 112 Gestation Lactation Gestation Treatments that Increase Total Muscle Fiber Number in Offspring Total muscle fibers 11

Day 45 to 100 of gestation Feed to maintain body condition Critical period for mammary development (d75 to 100) Excess energy will decrease secretory cells, DNA, and RNA in mammary gland and lower milk production Day 45 to 100 0 12 45 75 100 112 Gestation Lactation Effect of gestation energy intake on mammary development and milk production Item Mammary DNA, mg/g tissue Secretory Cells, 10 6 /g tissue Milk production, kg/d Fat Gilts 0.5 15.4 7.0 Lean gilts 2.1 19.7 8.9 Head and Williams, 1991 Day 100 to 112 of gestation Increase intake by 1 to 2 kg per day Period of exponential fetal growth Failure to increase energy may result in sows in catabolic state at farrowing. - May contribute to sows gorging and going off feed after farrowing 0 12 30 45 75 100 112 Gestation Lactation 12

Bump Feeding Late Gestation Rapid growth of fetuses last 3 weeks of gestation Historically have done it blindly As feed prices increase is bump feeding still cost effective? Each 1 lb bump for 30 days costs > $2.60/litter 37 Absolute difference in piglet birth weight compared to January 2014 Difference in individual piglet birth weight, g 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 100 g + 60 g (PIC, 2015) How easy is to manipulate piglet birth weight from a nutritional perspective? 13

Piglet birth weight, kg 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.9 Buitrago et al., 1974 1.03a 1.18ab 1.21b 0.7 2.2 5.1 1.5 8.0 2.4 Feed intake, kg/d P < 0.05 SD = 0.07 Feed intake x Piglet birth weight Gestation length Early and mid (virtually no impact) Late Dwyer et al., 1994 Nissen et al., 2003 Bee, 2004 Heyer et al., 2004 Lawlor et al., 2007 Cromwell et al., 1989 Miller et al., 2000 Shelton et al., 2009 Soto et al., 2011 Gonçalves et al., 2015 Feed intake x Piglet birth weight Cromwell et al., 1989 8 universities; 1,080 females; 10,6 Total born Piglet birth weight, kg 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.44a 1.48b + 40 g (2.7%) 1.8 3.2 Feed intake, kg/d Corn-SBM based diet P < 0.01 SD = 0.21 14

1.8 SID Lys x Piglet birth weight 9.7 Total born Quadratic, P < 0.01 EPM = 0.02 Piglet birth weight, kg 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.0 0.40 (0.49) 0.49 (0.59) 0.59 (0.68) 0.68 (0.78) SID Lys (Total), % Zhang et al., 2011 Energy x piglet birth weight Independently of SID Lys or parity Born alive piglet birth weight, kg 1.50 1.45 1.40 1.35 1.30 1.25 1.20 1.33 a 1.36 b + 30 g (2.3%) 5,90 4.50 1.85 8,85 2.75 6.75 Energy Consumo intake, de ração, Mcal kg/d NE/d P = 0.01 SEM = 0.008 (Gonçalves et al., 2015) Lysine x Piglet birth weight Independently of Energy or Parity Born alive piglet birth weight, kg 1.50 1.45 1.40 1.35 1.30 1.25 1.20 1.34 1.35 10.7 1.85 2.75 20.0 SID Lys, g/d P = 0.29 EPM = 0.008 (Gonçalves et al., 2015) 15

Energy x Stillbirth Independently of SID Lys Stillbirth, % 8 6 4 2 0 Leitoas Gilts Porcas Sows 4.4 a 3.4 a 3.4 a 1.85 4.50 5,90 8,85 2.75 6.75 Energy Consumo intake, de ração, Mcal NE/d kg/d Parity x Energy, P = 0.01 SEM = 0.8 6.5 b (Gonçalves et al., 2015) 47 Bump feeding summary Increasing feeding level from d 90 to farrowing by 2 lb (0.9 kg) will: Increase sow and gilt weight gain Increase birth weight by 30 g/pig Increase feed cost by $3.00 to $5.00 per sow Current recommendation If you bump feed, do gilts and/or thin sows No more than 2 lb and no sooner than d 90 of gestation 4.00 Birth Weight, lb 3.80 3.63 3.60 3.40 * 3.23 3.20 3.00 2.80 2.60 3.20 3.08 2.98 3.04 2.94 2.92 2.96 2.94 3.03 2.85 2.83 2.91 2.91 2.91 2.84 2.85 2.84 2.91 2.82 ** * * 2.69 2.40 2.20 2.00 Kentucky Nebraska Applewood Iowa South Utah Applewood Applewood Applewood Applewood Applewood Average Commercial Commercial America Commercial Commercial 48 *Means statistically different than negative control (P < 0.05) ** Means statistically different than negative control (P < 0.10) Control Gen 1 Gen 2 Evosure 16

Pre-Weaning Mortality, % 15 14 13 13.4 12.2 12.8 12.9 12.2 12 11 10 9 8 8.2 10.8 9.3 * 11.6 10.9 10.2 11.6 11 10.8 10.4 9.9 10.1 ** 8 7.5 10.4 8.4 11.2 9.6 7 6 6.3 * * 5 University of Nebraska Applewood Iowa South Utah Applewood Applewood Applewood Applewood Applewood Average Kentucky Commercial Commercial America Commercial Commercial Control * Means statistically different than negative control (P < 0.05) Gen 1 ** Means statistically different than negative control (P < 0.10) Gen 2 Evosure Wean Weight, lb 16.0 15.3 15.1 15.0 14.6 * 14.0 13.6 13.5 13.5 13.2 12.9 12.9 13.0 12.7 12.6 12.6 12.5 12.6 12.6 12.3 12.1 12.0 11.8 * 11.4 11.0 11.1 11.0 10.8 10.8 10.6 ** * 10.0 9.0 8.0 Kentucky Nebraska Applewood Iowa South Utah Applewood Applewood Applewood Applewood Applewood Average Commercial Commercial America Commercial Commercial Control * Means statistically different than negative control (P < 0.05) Gen 1 ** Means statistically different than negative control (P < 0.10) Gen 2 Evosure Day 112 to 114 of gestation Controversial area Recommend feeding at least 1.8 kg/day to: increase feed intake rapidly after farrowing prevent potential ulcer problems Consider full feeding 0 12 30 45 75 100 112 Gestation Lactation 17

52 Ad lib vs restricted feeding from d 4 to d 7 of lactation Cool et al. 2014 Ad lib vs restricted feeding from d 4 to d 7 of lactation Cool et al. 2014 54 Full feed from d 108 of gestation to weaning vs. normal program Item Full feed Normal P < Lactation intake, kg/d 5.3 5.8 0.166 Intake from d 108 to wean, total kg 129 117 0.054 Backfat change in lactation, mm 2.6 1.6 0.034 Backfat change d 108 to farrow, mm 0.05 1.7 0.001 Backfat change d 108 to wean, mm 2.6 3.3 0.188 Colostrum yield, kg 4.0 3.5 0.074 Increased PUFA in colostrum and decreased NEFA in plasma with full feed Decaluwe et al. 2014 18

Energy Requirements Feed requirements for gestating sow by standing time Scenario 1 2 3 Housing system Individual Group Sow standing time, min/day 240 360 360 Temperature, ºF 68 68 68 Floor type Slat Slat Slat Feed intake (d 0 to 90), lb/d 4.87 5.09 5.09 Avg feed intake (d 0 to 114), lb/d c 5.07 5.29 5.29 Energy required, kcal ME 7,203 7,517 7,517 55 Energy Requirements Feed requirements for gestating sow by temperature and floor type Scenario 3 4 5 Housing system Group Sow standing time, min/day 360 360 360 Temperature, ºF 68 50 50 Floor type Slat Slat Straw Feed intake (d 0 to 90), lb/d c 5.09 5.60 5.26 Avg feed intake (d 0 to 114), lb/d c 5.29 5.79 5.46 Energy required, kcal ME d 7,517 8,238 7,758 56 Energy Requirements Accounting for Feed Wastage Feeding levels will likely need to be increased by 5 to 10% for wastage for sows that are floor fed compared to ESF fed. ~0.5 lb per day 57 19

Energy Requirements Adjusting for body condition Competitive Systems Sows should be grouped by parity and body condition. Feeding levels may need to be increased slightly to account for variation in feed intake that occurs in competitive feeding situations. 58 Energy Requirements Extra feed before and after mixing Providing high levels of feed just prior to and for the first couple days after mixing may be necessary to have sow s nearly full fed to reduce fighting. Extra feed will increase feed wastage and cost. Photo: Lee Whittington, Prairie Swine Centre (Canada) 59 Diet and Feed Characteristics Decreasing the energy density by adding fiber Suggested to provide gut fill and make the sows feel more comfortable. Most research has demonstrated reduced stereotypic behaviors in gestating sows fed high dietary fiber; however, not all research has observed this response. Increasing fecal excretion and difficulties in manure handling systems also must be considered 60 20

Diet and Feed Characteristics Calibrating feeding levels The quantity delivered must be adjusted as the bulk density of the diet changes to provide the proper amount of feed to the sow. 61 62 Common Nutritional Problem: Limiting Lactation Feed Intake Lactation Feeding Goals: Maximize feed intake Prepare sow for rebreeding - Litter size and prompt return to estrus Maximize milk production Match nutrient levels to feed intake and level of productivity Maintain reasonable feed cost per weaned pig 21

64 Lactation Feed Intake Problem: Too many people voluntarily or involuntarily limit sow feed intake Goal: Get sows to eat as much as possible! Reasons why: Energy intake (and amino acids) will drive milk production Energy intake affects reproductive hormones 65 Effect of feed intake during lactation on milk yield and sow weight loss Adapted from Whittemore, 1984 66 Impact of Lactation Weight Loss Thaker et al., 2005 22

How to determine feed intake 3,000 sow farm 450 farrowing crates 3,615 litters in 6 month period Weaning weight = 46 kg at 19 days 381 tons of lactation feed used in 6 months Meticulous lactation sow feed intake records How to calculate lactation feed intake? 1) 2) 3) Count feed records for individual sows Total feed Crates x days Total feed Litters x lactation length How to calculate lactation feed intake? Count feed records 1) = 6.5 kg/day for individual sows Total feed 381 tons x 1000 kg 2) = = 4.7 kg/day Crates x days 450 crates x 182 d Total feed 381 tons x 1000 kg 3) = = 5.5 kg/d Litters x lact length 3,615 x 19 d 23

70 Factors affecting sow lactation feed intake Ambient Environment Facilities Equipment Sow Factors Gestation Feeding Feed Intake Management Air Velocity Feeder Design Ambient Temperature Floor Surface Evaporative Cooling Crate Design Humidity Ventilation Rates Lactation Length Litter Size Genetics Parity Disease Feeding Frequency Amount/feeding Feed Monitoring 71 Factors influencing lactation feed intake Gestation feed intake Feeding management Frequency Level Barn temperature Water availability 72 Water Availability Nipple drinker should allow a flow of 2 liters per minute 24

73 Voluntary energy intake Effects of ambient temperature on energy intake of lactating sows Critical Temperature LCT UCT 19 22 C Zone of thermal comfort 66 72 F 10 19 22 30 Ambient Temperature, Celsius Temperature & lactation performance Quiniou and Noblet, 1999 75 Effect of Drip Cooling Drip Control Feed/day, kg Sow Wt Loss, kg Litter Weaning Wt, kg 5.8 4.8 3.8 17.5 56 51 Nichols et al. 1983 25

Hand-feeding vs. self-feeder Treatments Hand-fed (57 sows) Fed to appetite 2x/d An amount slightly exceeding disappearance in previous meals Self-feeder (57 sows) Feed manually added to hopper 1 to 2 times/d Nipple in feeder Automated Production Systems J. Anim. Sci. 85:853 Feed disappearance + 8% P < 0.01 J. Anim. Sci. 85:853 78 26

Piglet weaning wt + 8% P < 0.01 J. Anim. Sci. 85:853 Hand-feeding vs. self-feeder Treatments (96 PIC C23 gilts) Hand-fed Fed to appetite 4x/d Self-feeder Sow operated a dispensing mechanism with a hopper 80 J. Anim. Sci 82(Suppl 2):65 Feed Disappearance + 7% P < 0.05 J. Anim. Sci 82(Suppl 2):65 27

Backfat Loss - 42% P < 0.05 J. Anim. Sci 82(Suppl 2):65 Hand vs. Self-Feeding Summary Study % increase in feed disappearance P value Michigan State 8 < 0.01 Univ. Illinois 7 < 0.05 Netherlands Hoofs et al. 1993 10? Time of Day & Feed Consumed Time % of total daily feed consumed Midnight to 6:00 am 24 6:00 am to noon 38 Noon to 6:00 pm 20 6:00 pm to midnight 18 89 lactating sows 2007 ASAS Midwest abstract #321 28

Corn Particle Size for Sows Linear P = 0.04 J. Anim. Sci: 73:421 Corn Particle Size for Sows Linear P = 0.05 J. Anim. Sci: 73:421 87 Avg 6.8 kg 4.8 kg 5.2 kg Courtesy Dr. Joe Connor 29

Feed Wastage Poor feeder design Worn-out feeders Poorly adjusted 88 89 Lactation diet basics More energy than corn soy diet At least 60 g/d of SID lysine intake Typically 0.95 to 1.15% SID lysine 0.75 to 1.0% total Ca (without phytase) > 0.4% avail P 10 lb/ton of salt 90 Nutrition for the breeding herd: Focus on the basics 1) Gilts 135 kg at 210 d 2 nd estrus 2) Gestation Average 4.5 to 5.0 lb/d Don t over formulated 3) Lactation Ad libitum intake Higher amino acids and energy with increased litter size 30

Meeting Nutritional Needs of Breeding Boars 91 Protein Effects on Sperm Output Kemp, 1989 - Lysine intake 18g/d vs. 31g/d no difference in sperm production Louis, 1993 Extreme restriction of protein, 7 g/d lysine reduced libido 92 Effects of fiber upon doses of semen/ejaculate Doses of semen 1 2 3 4 5 6 Weeks 2.9% fiber 4.9% fiber Mark Wilson, when with JBS 31

Monitor and Avoid Mycotoxins Zearalenone - Ruhr et al, 1983 decreased sperm production Aflatoxin B 1 - decreased fertility and semen quality - Levis,1997 94 Number of Sperm Cells Ejaculated (billions/week) as affected by feeding level 200 150 100 H M L 50 0 1-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Kemp, 1989 Boar Nutrition How to set feeding rates and minimum feeding levels http://www.thepigsite.com/articles/2748/boarnutrition/ 96 32

Good Source on Boar Feed Questions Mark E Wilson 952-983-3841 mwilson@zinpro.com 97 Specific Nutritional Considerations Meeting protein and energy needs Under feeding results in reduced libido and semen output Vitamins Feet and legs (biotin) Vitamin C (not likely needed) Vitamin E (likely do not need more than the sow) Trace Minerals Zinc, copper, chromium, selenium, manganese, iron I do use some organic selenium Other (not compelling) L-carnitine Betaine Fiber Welfare Satiety 98 Boar Basic Plan 99 Ask what the least they feed any boar Put 16 grams of TID lysine in that amount of feed Use the TID amino acid ratios 70 for methionine plus cysteine 74 for threonine 67 for valine 58 for isoleucine 20 for tryptophan Use the sow VTM Clean fiber if available 5% crude fiber in diet 9 lb of salt 33

Thank You! 34