dr. dave rosero - influence of wean age and disease challenge on progeny lifetime performance
TRANSCRIPT
Influence of Wean Age and Disease Challenge on Progeny Life-time Performance
D. S. Rosero*, T. Donovan and R. D. Boyd
The HanorCompany, Franklin, KY USA
WEANING: myriad of stressors for the young pig!
abrupt maternal separationso
cial
hie
rarc
hytr
ansp
orta
tion
hand
ling
different food source
co-mingling different litters
physical environment pathogens
antig
ens
WEANING: Disruption of GI structure and function
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Villo
us h
eigh
t, µm
Days after weaning
Unweaned
Weaned
Hampson, 1986; Res Vet Sci 40:32-40; Lindemann et al., 1986; J Anim Sci 62:1298-1307
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
-8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Enzy
me
activ
ity (X
1000
0)
Days after weaning
Unweaned Unweaned
Weaned Weaned
Amylase
Reduced digestive enzyme activityVilli atrophyLipase
(hypothetical)
PARADIGM: Early-life Stress and GI disease development
Early weaning
Plasticity
Stre
ss se
nsiti
vity
Dise
ase
Risk
and
Sev
erity
Pohl, Medland, and Moeser 2015; Am J Physiol-GI 309:G927-G941
Life-time
Barrier function is compromised
EARLY-WEANING STRESS: disruption of intestinal barrierUssing Chamber Technique
3H-Mannitol14C-Inulin Supernatant
↑ Flux = ↓ barrier function
a
b
b
c
c
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
15 18 21 23 28
3H-M
anni
tol f
lux,
µm
ol-c
m2
h
Weaning Age
Smith et al., 2010; Am J Physiol GI 298: G352–G363
EARLY-WEANING STRESS: long-lasting impact on barrier functionUssing Chamber Technique
3H-Mannitol14C-Inulin Supernatant
↑ Flux = ↓ barrier function
Smith et al., 2010; Am J Physiol GI 298: G352–G363
*
*
* *
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
3H-M
anni
tol f
lux,
µm
ol-c
m2
h (x
10-3
)
Days after weaning
Early weaning
Late weaning
EARLY-WEANING STRESS: Subsequent stressors
Impact of Wean Age on intestinal barrier function and immune response to E. coli challenge
McLamb et al., 2013; PloS ONE, 8:e59838
b
b
c
aa
bc
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
16 18 20
Muc
osal
-to-
Sero
sal f
lux,
µg
FD4/
min
Weaning Age
Control
ETEC Challenge
c c
bc
c
b
a
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
16 18 20
Neu
trop
hils/
HPF
Weaning Age
Intestinal Permeability Immune response
EARLY-WEANING: myriad of stressors with long-lasting impact
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
BW, l
bs
Age, d
Late weaned
Early weaned
Weaning
Early weaning negatively impact:
• Intestinal structure • Brush border enzyme activity• Intestinal barrier function• Immune response
Impact is exacerbated by other stressors:
• Management – mixing and crowding• Infectious challenges
…. and many more!
Response is immediate, acute and long-lasting
Impact of weaning age on performance of pigs
500
550
600
650
700
750
12 15 18 21 15.5 18.5 21.5
ADG
(wea
ning
to d
153
-156
), g
Weaning Age
Linear, P < 0.001
Linear, P < 0.001
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
12 15 18 21 15.5 18.5 21.5
Wea
n-Fi
nish
Mor
talit
y, %
Weaning Age
Linear, P < 0.001
Linear, P = 0.03
Main et al., 2004; J Anim Sci 82:1499-1507
Growth rate Mortalityn = 1,920 & 3,000 pigs
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 1 Trial 2
n = 1,920 & 3,000 pigs
PURPOSE To investigate and quantify the impact of weaning age on pig performance within a
multisite production system
• Impact of weaning age during health challenge events
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
1/1/2010 7/20/2010 2/5/2011 8/24/2011 3/11/2012 9/27/2012 4/15/2013 11/1/2013 5/20/2014 12/6/2014
Aver
age
Wea
ning
Age
per
wee
k
Wean Date
Active PRRS Active PEDV
Weaning Age of Groups of Pigs by Weaning Date
METHODS
Sow Farm: DN Sow Farm (2,800 sows) located in North Carolina
Pig groups: 143 wean-to-finish groups (1,932 ± 793 pigs per group) located in Iowa
Weaning dates: Jan 2010 to Dec 2014
Weaning age:
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Gro
ups o
f pig
s, n
Weaning Age
METHODS (Cont.)
Calculations:
• Growth performance data (ADG, ADFI, FCR)
were standardized to a final weight of 136 kg
Production records:
• Sow farm: weekly wean age distribution, monthly performance
• Close-outs: placement and end dates, start and end weights, feed per head, mortality, off-grade pigs
Health Status records:
• PRRS, Jan to March of 2010
• PEDV, Jan and Feb of 2014
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 50 100 150 200 250
Fina
l bod
y w
eigh
t, kg
Age, days
136 kg
METHODS (Cont.)
Statistics Description
• Models: linear and non-linear regressions
• Close-out group was the experimental unit.
• Normally distributed and fitted linear models: ADG, FCR and days to final weight
• Non-normally distributed and non-linear models: mortality and off-grade pigs
• Goodness of fit of models
o Linear: RMSE and R-square
o Non-linear: Pearson test and the corrected Akaike Information Criterion (AICc)
WTF Mortality: what variables explain variation?
Weaning age and health status explain a great proportion of variation
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
Weaning Age Health Status WeanDate Facility Type
Corr
elat
ion
coef
ficie
nt, r
Variables
**
*
WTF Mortality: impact of weaning age
0
5
10
15
20
25
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Mor
talit
y, %
Weaning age, days
𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 % = 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 3.73 + (−0.092 × 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝐴𝐴𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊)
P < 0.001
WTF Mortality: impact of weaning age and health
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Mor
talit
y, %
Weaning Age, d18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Weaning Age, d
𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 % = 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 4.10 + (−0.109 × 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝐴𝐴𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊) 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 % = 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 3.05 + (−0.061 × 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝐴𝐴𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊)
P = 0.003 P = 0.04
Poor health Good health
Δ = 0.87
Δ = 0.51
Δ = 0.42
Δ = 0.31
Growth rate: impact of weaning age
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑊𝑊 = 535.3 + (7.8 × 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊)
P < 0.001
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
ADG
, g
Weaning age, d
18 19 20 21 22 23 24Weaning Age, d
620
640
660
680
700
720
740
760
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
ADG
, g
Weaning Age, d
Growth rate: impact of weaning age and health
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑊𝑊 = 504.2 + (9.3 × 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊) 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑊𝑊 = 545.8 + (7.4 × 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊)
P = 0.003 P = 0.04
Poor health Good health
WTF Mortality and off-grades: non-linear models
Parameters
Variables , % a b AICc Goodness of Fit (Pearson) Prob>ChiSq
Off-grade pigs 1.80 -0.044 419 0.0035 0.2321Mortality 3.73 -0.092 626 0.0004 <0.0001
Poor HealthOff-grade pigs 2.31 -0.064 284 0.0985 0.1630Mortality 4.10 -0.109 290 <0.0001 0.0026
Good HealthOff-grade pigs 1.66 -0.045 171 0.0008 0.5102Mortality 3.05 -0.061 385 0.5370 0.0387
𝑀𝑀 = 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸 𝒂𝒂 + (𝒃𝒃 × 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝐴𝐴𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊)
Growth performance: linear models
𝑀𝑀 = 𝒂𝒂 + (𝒃𝒃 × 𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑀𝑀𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊 𝐴𝐴𝑊𝑊𝑊𝑊)
Parameters
Variables a b RMSE R-square P-value
Days to 136 kg 249.8 -2.0 10.139 0.1020 0.0006ADG, g 535.3 7.8 0.083 0.1083 0.0004FCR 2.854 -0.015 0.116 0.0437 0.0276
Poor HealthDays to 136 kg 259.0 -2.5 9.312 0.1445 0.0109ADG, g 504.2 9.3 0.075 0.1528 0.0087FCR 2.788 -0.011 0.140 0.0137 0.4495
Good HealthDays to 136 kg 246.2 -1.9 10.677 0.069 0.0211ADG, g 545.8 7.4 0.089 0.0756 0.0162FCR 2.701 -0.008 0.103 0.0139 0.3104
Rate of Change as weaning age increases (18-24 d)
Variable All Poor Health Good Health
Days to 136 kg -2.0 -2.5 -1.9
ADG, g 7.8 9.3 7.4
FCR -0.014 -0.011 -0.008
Off-grade pigs, % -0.11 -0.17 -0.09
Mortality, % -0.56 -0.68 -0.36
CONCLUSIONS
Weaning age and health status of the sow farm greatly impacted the life-time
performance of pigs overtime (2010 - 2014)
The negative impact of early weaning was more profound under health
challenge conditions (poor health)
On this “healthy” sow farm (few health challenge events) every additional
weaning day (18 to 24 d) reduced the mortality by 0.56% and improved the
growth rate of pigs by 7.8 g/d
THANK YOU!