Deschambault swine testing station Station trials 32 and 33

Similar documents
Deschambault Swine Testing Station. Trials 29 and 30. Commercial hog performance data Final Report

Effect of breed and sex on growth, carcass and meat quality traits

Growth and Characterization of Individual Backfat Layers and Their Relationship to Pork Carcass Quality

Swine nutrition and management systems that alter productivity and carcass traits

Potential for a Genetic Solution for Boar Taint in Canadian Pigs

M. Jafarikia 1,2, L. Maignel 1, F. Fortin 3, S. Wyss 1, W. Van Berkel 4, D. Cohoe 5, F. Schenkel 2, J. Squires 2, B. Sullivan 1

Feeding to MAXIMIZE Your Grid

Change over 25 years in efficiency, composition and nutrient excretion of pigs. By Justin Fix. Objective

Use of IGF-1 as a selection criteria in pig breeding

Responses of pigs divergently selected for cortisol level or feed efficiency to a challenge diet during growth

Grower-Finisher Performance and Carcass Characteristics of Pigs Fed Genetically Modified Bt Corn

Evaluation of the Magnitude of Ractopamine Treatment Biases When Fat- Free Lean Mass is Predicted by Commonly Used Equations

Feeding Guidelines 1

Effect of the Halothane and Rendement Napole Genes on Carcass and Meat Quality Characteristics of Pigs.

Prediction of within-herd differences in total feed intake between growing pigs

Evaluation of Four Ractopamine Use Programs on Pig Growth and Carcass Characteristics

Consumer Preference for Pork Quality

Feeding Value of DDGS for Swine. Dr. Jerry Shurson Department of Animal Science University of Minnesota

Dr. Jerry Shurson, Dr. Guowu Xu, Dr. Sam Baidoo, and Dr.Lee Johnston. University of Minnesota

The Effect on Pig s Growth and Meat Quality from PRIMOS 25, an Applied Microbial Mixed Feed

Babcock Purebred Hampshire

Hog Finishing Practices that Impact Your Profit Margin Eduardo Beltranena

Adopting Technology in the Swine Industry: the impact of precision feeding

Genetics of pork quality. D. W. Newcom, T. J. Baas, and K. J. Stalder. Dept. of Animal Science, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.

Paylean Update. Prairie Swine Center Producer Meetings. Peter Provis DVM Elanco Animal Health

Effects of genetic type and protein levels on growth of swine

Evaluation of Genotype, Therapeutic Antibiotic, and Health-Management Effects and Interactions on Lean Growth Rate

Effects of Ractopamine and Carnitine in Diets Containing 5% Fat for Finishing Pigs

From genetic to phenotypic trends

understood as achieving highest possible efficiency (combined pigs produced per sow per

National FFA Convention Livestock Coaches Clinic Swine Segment. Tammy Miller Joliet Junior College October 25, 2012

Assessment of growth performance and meat quality of finishing pigs raised on the low plane of nutrition

Impact of increased energy and amino acids in sow lactation diets on piglet performance in large litters

Response of Growing and Finishing Pigs to Dietary Energy Concentration J. F. Patience, A. D. Beaulieu and R.T. Zijlstra

SUPPLEMENTATION OF L-CARNITINE AND PAYLEAN IMPROVE GROWTH PERFORMANCE OF PIGS IN A COMMERCIAL FINISHING FACILITY

Evaluation of Commonly Used Lean Prediction Equations for Accuracy and Biases

An Overview of USMARC Swine Genomics Research

GROW/FINISH VARIATION: COST AND CONTROL STRATEGIES

CANADIAN EXPERIENCE WITH FEEDING DDGS

EFFECTS OF RACTOPAMINE (PAYLEAN TM ) DOSE AND FEEDING DURATION ON PIG PERFORMANCE IN A COMMERCIAL FINISHING FACILITY 1

nutrition, vitamin levels in other ingredients and level of metabolic precursors in the diet. Summary

Benefits and Limitations of Using DDGS in Swine Diets. Dr. Jerry Shurson Department of Animal Science University of Minnesota

Dr. Jerry Shurson Department of Animal Science

EFFECTS OF VITAMINS AND MINERAL PROTEINATES ON GROWTH PERFORMANCE AND PORK QUALITY IN FINISHING PIGS

C. N. Groesbeck, R. D. Goodband, M. D. Tokach, S. S. Dritz 2, J. L. Nelssen, J. M. DeRouchey, B. W. James, T. P. Keegan, and K. R.

IMPLANT EFFECTS ON CARCASS COMPOSITION AND MEAT QUALITY AS AFFECTED BY DIET

Genotype by environment interactions between pig populations in Australia and Indonesia

Carcass Terminology. Goal (learning objective) Supplies. Pre-lesson preparation. Lesson directions and outline

EFFECTS OF DRIED DISTILLERS GRAINS WITH SOLUBLES ON GROWTH PERFORMANCE AND FAT QUALITY OF FINISHING PIGS 1

SELECTION FOR HIGH AND LOW FATNESS IN SWINE

Juvenile IGF-I: an update

The effect of boar breed type on reproduction, production performance and carcass and meat quality in pigs

PORCINE EPIDEMIC DIARRHEA : A Canadian perspective

Determining an optimum lysine:calorie ratio for barrows and gilts in a commercial finishing facility 1,2

Ractopamine Treatment Biases in the Prediction of Fat-free Lean Mass

Growth and Carcass Characteristics of Pigs Fed Bt and Non-Bt Corn and Harvested at US and European Market Weights

EAAP-57th Annual Meeting, Antalya, Turkey, September 2006, Session P24.8 ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIAL AND METHODS

loin clepih measuremeni was taken. by an RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CARCASS WEIGHTS, BACKFAT AND LOIN MUSCLE DEPTH IN CULL SOWS

INFLUENCE OF REARING SPACE ON THE CARCASS AND MEAT QUALITY OF PIGS

A Good Start is a Golden Finish

Genetic parameters and trends for lean growth rate and its components in U.S. Yorkshire, Duroc, Hampshire, and Landrace pigs 1

Body Composition and Sensory Characteristics of Pork from CLA-Fed Pigs

Comparison of growth rates in the tissues of primal cuts of Canadian composites

Effect of Ad libitum Feeding of Gilt Developer Diets Differing in Standard Ileal Digestive Lysine Concentrations on Growth Traits

Swine Industry. Swine Terms. Today's pig yields a pork loin with: 77% less fat 53% fewer calories!

PRRSV Control and Elimination in Canada

Evaluating Genetic Sources

Efficacy of Pantothenic Acid as a Modifier of Body Composition in Pigs

Evaluation of an in-feed appetite suppressant as a. means to manipulate feed intake of pigs

Effect of Formulating Diets to Reduce Excess Amino Acids on Performance of Growing and Finishing Pigs

EVALUATION OF A SATIETY HORMONE IN PIGS WITH DIVERGENT GENETIC POTENTIAL FOR FEED INTAKE AND GROWTH

FEEDING MANUAL Feed manual TOPIGS Finishers

Analysis of Body Composition Changes of Swine During Growth and Development

Performance and Body Composition of Gilts from Differing Genetic Lines as Affected by Nutritional Program

INFLUENCE OF DIETARY NIACIN ON FINISHING PIG PERFORMANCE AND MEAT QUALITY

Iowa s Changing Swine Industry

CANADIAN PORK COUNCIL CANADIAN MEAT COUNCIL CANADIAN SWINE BREEDERS ASSOCIATION ATLANTIC SWINE CENTRE CENTRE DE DÉVELOPPEMENT DU PORC DU QUÉBEC INC.

Grow - Finish Nutrition Concepts: Impact of Nutrition on Lean Growth

INTERACTIVE EFFECTS BETWEEN PAYLEAN (RACTOPAMINE HCl) AND DIETARY L-CARNITINE ON FINISHING PIG GROWTH PERFORMANCE AND CARCASS CHARACTERISTICS

Birth weight and biometry of purebred Landrace pigs under Indian farm condition

Evaluation of procedures to predict fat-free lean in swine carcasses

NUTRITIONAL MANAGEMENT OF GROW-FINISH PIGS: ENERGY

THE PASSIONATE PURSUIT of lactating sows feeding. PERFORMANCES. World best lactating sow Feeding System.

THE OPTIMAL TRUE-ILEAL-DIGESTIBLE LYSINE AND TOTAL SULFUR AMINO ACID REQUIREMENT FOR FINISHING PIGS FED PAYLEAN 1

Evaluation and Economic Impact of Boar Fertility

DDGS in Swine, Poultry, and Aquaculture Diets

Report on American Society of Animal Science Meetings in Des Moines, Iowa, USA March R G Campbell

Consequences of selection for lean growth and prolificacy on piglet survival and sow attribute traits

Predicting loin-eye area from ultrasound and grading probe measurements of fat and muscle depths in pork carcasses

Effect of dietary leucine levels on carcass composition, meat quality, and growth performance in finishing pigs 1

MARKET NEWS for pig meat

Initial Evaluation of a Model to Describe the Compositional Growth of Pigs Fed Paylean 1

Effects of Adding Enzymes to Diets Containing High Levels of Dried Distillers Grains with Solubles on Growth Performance of Finishing Pigs 1

C. Pomar and M. Marcoux

Mating Systems. 1 Mating According to Index Values. 1.1 Positive Assortative Matings

The Effect of the Time of Feeding Prior to Slaughter of Supplemental Magnesium Sulfate Heptahydrate on Pork Quality.

Benefits and Limitations of Using DDGS in Swine Diets

Ractopamine hydrochloride and the environmental sustainability of pork production

DIETARY ENERGY DENSITY AND GROWING-FINISHING PIG PERFORMANCE AND PROFITABILITY

Transcription:

September 5, 2013 Deschambault swine testing station Station trials 32 and 33 Evaluation of sire lines: Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Frédéric Fortin, M. Sc., geneticist

Outline Introduction Description of the test Results per sire line Live performances Carcass quality Meat quality Additional results Conclusion and acknowledgements

CDPQ Test Station Built in 1994 at Deschambault Nursery finishing for 360 pigs All-in-all-out swine production

CDPQ Test Station Station s features include: Individual feeding system Carcass and meat quality measurements at the slaughter plant Experienced team and thorough measurements

A tool of and for the swine industry Station Owned by the swine industry Provides answers to questions from the swine industry Useful for R & D projects Objectives defined: By a test station committee with industry representatives Purebred trials or commercial trials

Description of the test The results are a reference for: Quebec swine industry commercial producers slaughterhouses advisers scientists decision-makers etc. Participating organizations

Description of the test Objective of the test: To measure, in a controlled and non-limiting environment, the growth performances, carcass and meat quality of commercial pigs sired from terminal lines representative of genetic lines available in Québec

Protocol of terminal line trials Registration of breeding companies 3 to 4 terminal lines evaluated per trial Piglets from 10 to 20 commercial herds Canadian Swine Health Board 2013

Protocol of terminal line trials For the matings, a minimum of 15 boars per terminal line available in Quebec boar studs is required At entry, piglets are between 10 and 16 days old Slaughter over approx. 6 weeks (one a week)

Terminal lines tested at the station in the past 8 years List of trials Sire lines Participating organizations Trials 19-20 (July 2005 and January 2006) Trials 21-22 (November 2006 and May 2007) Duroc P76 PIC 337 Vivanda 300 Duroc Sogeporc EB5 Genex Duroc QBX TM Alliance Duroc Pen Ar Lan Canada inc. PIC Canada Ltd. Génétiporc inc. Sogeporc inc. Monsanto Choice Genetics Hypor Inc. Monsanto Choice Genetics

Terminal lines tested at the station in the past 8 years List of trials Sire lines Participating organizations Trials 23-24 (November 2007 and May 2008) Trials 25-26 (November 2008 and May 2009) Trials 32-33 (May and November 2012) Duroc PIC 280 Rock-Y G Performer Alliance Duroc PIC Canada Ltd. Hypor Inc. Génétiporc inc. Shade Oak Duroc Hypor Inc. Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Genesus inc. Hypor Inc. Topigs Canada Topigs Canada

Description of the test Sire lines Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Participating organizations Genesus inc. Hypor inc. Topigs inc. Topigs inc.

Description of the test Two commercial trials Trial 32: May 2012 Oct.-Nov. 2012 Trial 33: November 2012 April-May 2013

Description of the test Boars Sows Genesus Duroc Talent Yorkshire-Landrace Magnus Tempo 15 commercial farms 652 females and barrows in the test station (2 commercial trials) Slaughterhouse: Abattoir Aliments ASTA inc.

Interpretation of the results for the lines Sire lines Line A Line B Line C Line D Traits LS Mean w x y z 1 st position 2 nd position

Growth Performances

Description of growth traits Test period On test weight: 29.6 kg Off test weight: 129.7 kg Growth Performances Genesus Duroc Sire lines Magnus Talent Tempo On test weight (kg) 30.8 A 29.7 AB 28.3 B 29.6 AB Off test weight (kg) 130.1 A 130.3 A 128.4 A 129.7 A The effects of the initial and final weight were taken into account in the data analysis of some traits

Description of growth traits Off-test age (days) Age of commercial pigs at the end of the finishing phase Takes into account growth in the nursery and finishing phases Average daily gain (g/day) Growth of the finishing phase

Performances of lines for growth traits Sire lines Growth Performances Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Desired value Off test Age < LS Mean (day) 161.4 B 161.8 B 166.0 A 163.3 AB ADG (30 130 kg) > LS Mean (g/d) 1 067 AB 1 081 A 1 038 B 1 066 AB

Description of feed intake measurements Total feed intake (kg) Total feed intake during trial Feed conversion ratio (kg/kg) Hog feed intake / liveweight gain Daily feed intake (kg/day) Hog feed intake / duration

Performances of lines for feed intake Growth Performances Genesus Duroc Sire lines Magnus Talent Tempo Desired value Total feed intake 30-130 kg < LS Mean (kg) 260.2 A 251.4 B 249.6 B 250.7 B Feed conversion ratio 30 130 kg < LS Mean (kg/kg) 2.61 B 2.52 A 2.51 A 2.51 A Daily feed intake 30 130 kg LS Mean (kg/d) 2.78 A 2.70 AB 2.58 C 2.65 BC

Description of growth traits per period Average daily gain (g/day) Per period: ADG 30 50 kg (g/day) ADG 50 75 kg (g/day) ADG 75 100 kg (g/day) ADG 100 130 kg (g/day) Feed conversion ratio (kg/kg) Per period: FCR 30 50 kg (kg/kg) FCR 50 75 kg (kg/kg) FCR 75 100 kg (kg/kg) FCR 100 130 kg (kg/kg)

Performances of lines for growth traits per period Sire lines Growth Performances Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Desired Value ADG 30-50 kg (g/day) > LS Mean (g/d) 968 A 944 A 934 A 940 A ADG 50-75 kg (g/day) > LS Mean (g/d) 1051 A 1053 A 1011 A 1049 A ADG 75-100 kg (g/day) > LS Mean (g/d) 1130 A 1147 A 1108 A 1116 A ADG 100-130 kg (g/day) > LS Mean (g/d) 1112 AB 1175 A 1101 B 1150 AB

Performances of lines for growth traits per period Sire lines Growth Performances Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Desired Value FCR 30-50 kg < LS Mean 1.80 A 1.73 A 1.75 A 1.73 A FCR 50-75 kg < LS Mean 2.41 A 2.31 A 2.31 A 2.33 A FCR 75-100 kg < LS Mean 2.77 A 2.68 A 2.65 A 2.68 A FCR 100-130 kg < LS Mean 3.15 A 3.03 AB 3.03 AB 2.98 B

Carcass Quality

Description of carcass grading measurements Destron backfat and muscle depth Lean yield (based on backfat and muscle depth) Lean yield (%) 64.30 - et plus 61.80-64.29 59.60-61.79 57.70-59.59 56.80-57.69 56.10-56.79 54.70-56.09 1.00-54.69 Hogs index from «Porc Qualité Québec» pricing grids Including only pigs between 92.5 and 115.4 kg carcass weight Carcass weight (kg) 0.1 70.1 77.5 82.5 87.5 92.5 100 107.5 115.5 118.5 70.0 77.4 82.4 87.4 92.4 99.9 107.4 115.4 118.4 999.9 40 65 80 95 103 110 110 110 99 80 40 65 85 99 103 110 110 110 100 80 40 65 85 100 109 115 115 115 104 80 40 65 85 102 107 112 112 112 102 80 40 65 85 95 100 107 107 107 96 75 40 65 80 85 90 102 102 102 90 75 40 65 80 80 90 95 95 95 85 70 40 65 80 65 70 75 75 75 70 50 Grid effective during trials 32-33 (http://www.fppq.upa.qc.ca/nsphp/portail/info_grille.php) https://www.westernhogexchange. com/gradinggrids.aspx

Performances of lines for carcass grading measurements Carcass quality Backfat Destron Genesus Duroc Sire lines Magnus Talent Tempo Desired value LS Mean (mm) 20.54 A 19.86 A 17.41 B 17.78 B Muscle depth Destron LS Mean (mm) 67,13 A 68,15 A 69,66 A 68,76 A Lean yield LS Mean (%) 60,01 B 60.34 B 61.49 A 61.25 A Grading grid index (92.5-115.4 kg)* > LS Mean 112.01 A 112.84 A 112.37 A 112.30 A

Description of carcass quality measurements Off-test backfat and muscle depth Ultrasound measurements (US) Loin eye area

Description of carcass quality measurements Carcass yield Hot carcass weight / Off test weight Half-carcass length Foster rule (cm)

Performances of lines for carcass quality measurements Sire lines Carcass quality Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Desired value Carcass length LS Mean (cm) 84.97 A 85.26 A 85.25 A 85.46 A Off-test backfat LS Mean (mm) 18.14 A 17.03 AB 15.01 C 15.68 BC Off-test muscle depth LS Mean (mm) 66.96 A 67.42 A 67.67 A 66.90 A Loin eye area LS Mean (cm 2 ) 50.14 B 50.94 AB 53.29 A 51.50 AB Carcass yield > LS Mean (%) 80.47 A 80.44 A 80.86 A 80.57 A

Description of carcass quality measurements Primal cuts yield Primal cut weight / Reconstituted half carc.

Performances of lines for carcass quality measurements Sire lines Primal cuts Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Desired value Ham yield (%) 25.90 C 26.09 BC 26.81 A 26.38 B Loin yield (%) 28.42 A 28.15 A 28.13 A 28.04 A Shoulder yield (%) 27.23 AB 27.43 A 26.88 B 27.09 AB Belly yield (%) 18.45 A 18.31 A 18.14 A 18.49 A

Meat Quality

Description of loin quality measurements Ultimate ph 24h Luminosity Color

Performances of lines for loin quality measurements Sire lines Loin quality Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Desired value Ultimate ph 24 h LS Mean 5.62 A 5.60 A 5.57 A 5.60 A Luminosity LS Mean 50.45 A 51.12 A 51.13 A 50.64 A Color (Japanese scale) LS Mean 3.65 A 3.48 AB 3.42 B 3.50 AB

Description of loin quality measurements Firmness Marbling Drip loss 1: soft 2: medium 3: firm ( < )

Performances of lines for loin quality measurements Sire lines Loin quality Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Desired Value Firmness LS Mean 2.69 A 2.43 B 2.47 AB 2.26 B Marbling (NPPC scale) LS Mean 2.89 A 2.76 A 2.23 B 2.31 B Drip loss < LS Mean (%) 2.87 B 3.40 AB 3.62 AB 4.04 A

Description of ham quality measurements Gluteus profundus Gluteus medius - Ultimate ph 24h - Luminosity - Color Bicoloration: Tech. yield: Color difference between gluteus medius and gluteus profundus Prediction equation from color and reflectance measurements of gluteus medius and profundus ( > )

Performances of lines for ham quality measurements Sire lines Ham quality Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Desired Value Ultimate ph 24 h LS Mean 5.59 AB 5.59 AB 5.55 B 5.61 A Luminosity LS Mean 52.10 B 53.15 AB 53.60 A 52.34 AB Color (Japanese scale) LS Mean 3.75 A 3.53 BC 3.47 C 3.66 AB

Performances of lines for ham quality measurements Sire lines Ham quality Genesus Duroc Magnus Talent Tempo Desired Value Bicoloration LS Mean 1.57 A 1.61 A 1.71 A 1.59 A Technological yield > LS Mean (%) 126.84 AB 127.22 A 126.55 AB 126.41 B

More Results

Gender performances Growth performances Females Barrows Sex diff. Off-test age* (days) 166.3 159.9 6.4 ADG 30-130 kg* (g/day) 1 032 1 094 62 * Significantly different (p<0.05) between sex

Gender performances Carcass grading performances Females Barrows Sex diff. Off-test backfat DESTRON* (mm) 17.23 20.63 3.40 Off-test muscle DESTRON* (mm) 69.47 67.38 2.10 Lean yield* (%) 61.55 59.99 1.56 * Significantly different (p<0.05) between sex

Gender performances Feed intake performances Females Barrows Sex diff. Total feed intake* (kg) 248.5 257.4 8.9 Daily feed intake* (kg/day) 2.55 2.80 0.25 Feed conversion ratio* (kg/kg) 2.49 2.58 0.09 * Significantly different (p<0.05) between sex

Gender performances Carcass quality measurements Females Barrows Sex diff. Loin eye area* (cm 2 ) 53.46 49.48 3.98 Carcass lenght* (cm) 85.63 84.83 0.80 Ham yield* (%) 26.59 26.00 0.58 Loin yield* (%) 28.06 28.31 0.25 Shoulder yield* (%) 27.05 27.27 0.22 * Significantly different (p<0.05) between sex

Gender performances Meat quality measurements Females Barrows Sex diff. Marbling (NPPC scale) 2.38 2.70 0.32 * Significantly different (p<0.05) between sex

Health performances Mortality reasons Trial 32 Trial 33 Nursery Finishing Nursery Finishing Bad condition 1 Weakening 3 2 1 Locomotive problems 3 2 Nervous problems Respiratiry problems 10 Sudden death 4 1 4 Meningitis 7 1 4 Others conditions 3 3 Total (%) 24/352 (6.8%) 10/328 (3.0%) 8/352 (2.3%) 6/344 (1.7%) 1 Piglets in bad condition at beginning (0-3 days)

Nursery performances Table of piglets performances during the nursery: Diet Age (days) Weight (kg) ADG (g/day) Feed conv. 1 12.9 à 22.9 5.0 à 6.0 98 1.03 2 22.9 à 30.4 6.0 à 7.5 199 1.51 3 30.4 à 41.9 7.5 à 13.2 492 1.23 4 41.9 à 68.4 13.2 à 29.7 617 1.58 Global 13.2 à 68.4 5.0 à 29.7 438 1.47

Warning: not relevant to compare the results of sire lines in different trials More differences of performance within each trial than between trials Traits Result Test 19 Test 20 Test 21 Test 22 Test 23 Test 24 Test 25 Test 26 Test 32 Test 33 ADG (g/d) By test 1077 1003 1047 1020 1017 1027 1035 1066 1054 1066 By trial 1038 1030 1022 1051 1061 Off-test backfat (mm) By test 15.0 13.6 15.1 16.5 15.0 15.4 14.2 14.2 16.8 16.6 By trial 14.4 15.8 15.2 14.2 16.7

Conclusion The 32 nd and 33 rd station trials have showed: Differences of performance for the sire lines: Growth performances Carcass quality Meat quality

Acknowledgements Financial partners Ministère de l Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l Alimentation du Québec (MAPAQ) Programme d appui financier aux associations de producteurs désignées (MAPAQ) Fédération des producteurs de porcs du Québec (FPPQ)

Acknowledgements Team work Planning Comité d orientation des épreuves en station du CDPQ Frédéric Fortin Application of protocol Richard Mailhot Jean-Paul Daigle Mélanie Roy Marie-Pierre Fortier CDPQ technicians Farm operation Louis Moffet Statistical analysis Joël Rivest Health protocol and follow-up Réal Boutin Andréanne Caron Feeding protocol Richard Mailhot

Acknowledgements Commercial farms 3089-9512 Québec inc Agri-Marché inc. (Ferme du Plateau) Élevages Lessard inc. Ferme A. Coupal et fils inc. Ferme Aguy et fils Ferme Curran Ferme Danmarc Ferme Hugo Bergeron Ferme Le Point-des-Porcs Ferme Mario Mathieu Ferme Mirotec Isoporc inc. Progeniporc 2011 inc.

Acknowledgements Close collaborators Agri-Marché inc. (SIAM) Centre d insémination porcine du Québec inc. (CIPQ) F. Ménard inc. Gène-Alliance Inc. Genesus inc. Hypor inc. Topigs Canada inc.

Any questions? Thank you!