Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-tq7bh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T00:18:56.375Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The anatomical mammary gland position influences the weight gain and morphometry of piglets at weaning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 November 2024

Pedro Henrique da Silva Fidelis Open the ORCID record for Pedro Henrique da Silva Fidelis [Opens in a new window] ,
Thatila Ellinna Batista de Lima Open the ORCID record for Thatila Ellinna Batista de Lima [Opens in a new window] ,
Lígia Vanessa Leandro Gomes Open the ORCID record for Lígia Vanessa Leandro Gomes [Opens in a new window] ,
João Paulo Bezerra Saraiva Open the ORCID record for João Paulo Bezerra Saraiva [Opens in a new window] ,
Tiago Silva Andrade Open the ORCID record for Tiago Silva Andrade [Opens in a new window] ,
Cibele dos Santos Borges Open the ORCID record for Cibele dos Santos Borges [Opens in a new window] ,
Adriano Henrique do Nascimento Rangel Open the ORCID record for Adriano Henrique do Nascimento Rangel [Opens in a new window] ,
Michelly Fernandes de Macedo Open the ORCID record for Michelly Fernandes de Macedo [Opens in a new window] ,
Pedro Henrique Watanabe Open the ORCID record for Pedro Henrique Watanabe [Opens in a new window]  and
Rennan Herculano Rufino Moreira Open the ORCID record for Rennan Herculano Rufino Moreira [Opens in a new window]
Pedro Henrique da Silva Fidelis
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido, Mossoró, RN, Brazil
Thatila Ellinna Batista de Lima
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
Lígia Vanessa Leandro Gomes
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido, Mossoró, RN, Brazil
João Paulo Bezerra Saraiva
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido, Mossoró, RN, Brazil
Tiago Silva Andrade
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
Cibele dos Santos Borges
Affiliation:
Department of Bioscience, Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido, Mossoró, RN, Brazil
Adriano Henrique do Nascimento Rangel
Affiliation:
Academic Unit Specialized in Agricultural Sciences, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Macaíba, RN, Brazil
Michelly Fernandes de Macedo
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido, Mossoró, RN, Brazil
Pedro Henrique Watanabe
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil
Rennan Herculano Rufino Moreira*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Universidade Federal Rural do Semi-Árido, Mossoró, RN, Brazil
*
Corresponding author: Rennan Herculano Rufino Moreira; Email: rennanherculano@hotmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The objective was to evaluate the performance of suckling piglets based on their choice of mammary gland. A completely randomized design was used, considering the position of the mammary glands pair and their respective piglets as experimental unit. The mammary gland position was considered for the treatments, being 1st, 4th and 7th pair. The ration and leftovers were weighed daily to obtain daily feed intake of the sow. On post-natal day (PND) 3 and 21, 80 ml of milk was collected to analyse crude protein, fat, lactose, non-fatty solids, mineral matter and total solids. On PND 3 and 21, the piglets were weighed to determine weight gain and estimate milk consumption. The piglets' longitudinal length and head circumference were measured in the same period and estimated body surface area/mass ratio. Blood samples from the sows and piglets were collected on PND 3 and 21 to analyse total cholesterol, triglycerides, total protein, fractions and glucose. There was an effect of mammary gland position on piglets at PND 21 suckling on the 7th pair, which had a 23.88 cm2/kg greater body surface/mass ratio compared to those who suckled in the 1st pair. In turn, at PND 21, the piglets that suckled in the 1st pair presented higher weight, weight gain and milk consumption (0.685, 0.033 and 0.127 kg, respectively) than those that suckled in the 7th pair. Anterior mammary glands result in better productive performance and better chances of maintaining piglet homeostasis at PND 21.

Keywords

feeding behaviourlittermilkpig farmingteat position

Information

Type
Animal Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 162 , Issue 5 , October 2024 , pp. 521 - 527
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alexopoulos, J, Lines, D, Hallett, S and Plush, K (2018) A review of success factors for piglet fostering in lactation. Animals 8, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Atwood, CS and Hartmann, PE (1992) Collection of fore and hind milk from the sow and the changes in milk composition during suckling. Journal of Dairy Research 59, 287–298.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brody, S, Comfort, JE and Matthews, JS (1928) Growth and Development with Special Reference to Domestic Animals. XI, Further Investigations on Surface Area with Special Reference to Its Significance in Energy Metabolism, 115th Edn. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri, College of Agriculture, Agricultural Experiment Station.Google Scholar
Cecchin, D, Da Cruz, VF, Campos, AT, Sousa, FA, Amaral, PIS, da Freitas, LCSR and Andrade, RR (2017) Thermal environment in growing and finishing pig facilities of different building typologies. Journal of Animal Behaviour and Biometeorology 5, 118–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costermans, NGJ, Teerds, KJ, Middelkoop, A, Roelen, BAJ, Schoevers, EJ, van Tol, HTA, Laurenssen, B, Koopmanschap, RE, Zhao, Y, Blokland, M, van Tricht, F, Zak, L, Keijer, J, Kemp, B and Soede, NM (2020) Consequences of negative energy balance on follicular development and oocyte quality in primiparous sows†. Biology of Reproduction 102, 388–398.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
de Paula, YH, Magalhães, HIR, Romão, FB, Junior, RLF, Moreira, MS, Barcelos, JB and de Ribeiro, LA (2019) Irrigation of the mammary glands of sows (Sus scrofa domesticus Linnaeus, 1758). International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Science 6, 214–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devillers, N, Giraud, D and Farmer, C (2016) Neonatal piglets are able to differentiate more productive from less productive teats. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 174, 24–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diaz Gonzalez, FH and da Silva, SC (2017) Introdução à Bioquímica Clínica Veterinária, 3rd Edn. Porto Alegre: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul.Google Scholar
dos Santos, GA, do Oliveira, MCd, de Oliveira, AMA, Batista, VHT, Costa, PO, Heck, A, Silva, CM, do Rangel, AHN, de Macedo, MF and Moreira, RHR (2023) Phytogenic bioactive compounds in the diet of lactating sows, litter performance, and milk characteristics. Animals 13, 1–12.Google Scholar
Farmer, C and Edwards, SA (2022) Review: improving the performance of neonatal piglets. Animal: An International Journal of Animal Bioscience 16, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gomboc, MD, Skok, J, Škorjanc, D and Povše, MP (2023) Suckling behaviour of piglets affected by body weight and sex. Agricultura Scientia 20, 35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huting, AMS, Sakkas, P, Wellock, I, Almond, K and Kyriazakis, I (2018) Once small always small? To what extent morphometric characteristics and post-weaning starter regime affect pig lifetime growth performance. Porcine Health Management 4, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ji, F, Hurley, WL and Kim, SW (2006) Characterization of mammary gland development in pregnant gilts1. Journal of Animal Science 84, 579–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kabalin, AE, Balenović, T, Šperanda, M, Milinković-Tur, S, Štoković, I, Menčik, S, Maurić, M and Pavičić, Ž (2017) Serum biochemical parameters in suckling piglets with low and average birth mass. Veterinarski arhiv 87, 171–184.Google Scholar
Kim, SW, Hurley, WL, Hant, IK and Easter, RA (2000) Growth of nursing pigs related to the characteristics of nursed mammary glands. Journal of Animal Science 78, 1313–1318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, SW, Weaver, AC, Shen, YB and Zhao, Y (2013) Improving efficiency of sow productivity: nutrition and health. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology 4, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moreira, RHR, Pérez Palencia, JY, Moita, VHC, Caputo, LSS, Saraiva, A, Andretta, I, Ferreira, RA and de Abreu, MLT (2020) Variability of piglet birth weights: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 104, 657–666.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nielsen, OL, Pedersen, AR and Sørensen, MT (2001) Relationships between piglet growth rate and mammary gland size of the sow. Livestock Production Science 67, 273–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noblet, J and Etienne, M (1989) Estimation of sow milk nutrient output. Journal of Animal Science 67, 3352–3359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ocepek, M, Andersen-Ranberg, I, Edwards, SA and Andersen, IL (2016) Udder characteristics of importance for teat use in purebred and crossbred pigs1. Journal of Animal Science 94, 780–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padilha, JB, Falbo, MK, Teixeira, HS, dos Santos, SK, Mareze, M, Costa, LMD, Groff, PM and Sandini, IE (2017) Perfil bioquímico sérico em porcas no terço final de gestação. Revista Electrónica de Veterinaria 18, 1–13.Google Scholar
Rempel, LA, Vallet, JL and Nonneman, DJ (2018) Characterization of plasma metabolites at late gestation and lactation in early parity sows on production and post-weaning reproductive performance1. Journal of Animal Science 96, 521–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rendón del Águila, JU, Martínez-Gamba, RG, Herradora Lozano, MA and Alonso-Spilsbury, M (2017) Efecto del peso al nacer, tamaño de camada y posición en la ubre sobre el crecimiento de cerdos durante la lactancia y engorda. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias 8, 75–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ribeiro, BPVB, Lanferdini, E, Palencia, JYP, Lemes, MAG, de Abreu, MLT, de Cantarelli, VS and Ferreira, RA (2018) Heat negatively affects lactating swine: a meta-analysis. Journal of Thermal Biology 74, 325–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosillon-Warnier, A and Paquay, R (1984) Development and consequences of teat-order in piglets. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 13, 47–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skok, J and Škorjanc, D (2013) Formation of teat order and estimation of piglets’ distribution along the mammary complex using mid-domain effect (MDE) model. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 144, 39–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Topigs Norsvin (2017) Feed Manual TN70: Rearing Gilts and Sows. Netherlands: Topigs Norsvin: Helvoirt.Google Scholar
Tucker, BS, Petrovski, KR, Craig, JR, Morrison, RS, Smits, RJ and Kirkwood, RN (2022) Piglet morphology: indicators of neonatal viability? Animals 12, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vasdal, G and Andersen, IL (2012) A note on teat accessibility and sow parity – consequences for newborn piglets. Livestock Science 146, 91–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, J, Xiao, Y, Li, J, Qi, M and Tan, B (2021) Serum biochemical parameters and amino acids metabolism are altered in piglets by early-weaning and proline and putrescine supplementations. Animal Nutrition 7, 334–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed