Lauren Christian Endowed Lecture Egbert F. Knol

1. Peri-natal survival of piglets understanding and genetics Lauren Christian Endowed Lecture Egbert F. Knol

2. Road map Challenge • Our business is efficient pork production • Our responsibility is to maintain animal integrity • Pork chain mortality is out of bounds in many situations Peri-natal survival: • Basics • Genetics • Piglet side : vitality • Nurse sow side : mothering ability Genomics will help Mission for all of us

3. Challenge

4. Our business FARROW FINISH PORK FEED

5. Efficiency FARROW FINISH PORK FEED PORK FE =----------- FEED

6. Losses on the way FARROW FINISH FEED PORK † † † † † † † † † † † Losses drain efficiency; feed is invested, but not harvested

7. GOOD: 12 weaned FARROW FINISH Gestation lactation nursery finishing LOSSES 30 ova shed 15 piglets born 1 stillborn 14.3% PWM 2% nursery 5% sow mortality 3% finishing 76% of total born reaches plant

8. GOOD: 12 weaned FARROW FINISH Gestation lactation nursery finishing LOSSES 30 ova shed 15 piglets born Crowding? Selection for increased litter size overdone? (Canada, university of Alberta, Foxcroft et al.)

9. GOOD: 12 weaned FARROW FINISH Gestation lactation nursery finishing LOSSES 30 ova shed 15 piglets born 1 stillborn 14.3% PWM 2% nursery 20% peri-natal mortality in a good situation

10. GOOD: 12 weaned FARROW FINISH Gestation lactation nursery finishing   farrowing survival preweaning survival Correlated responses backward and forward

11. Added challenge Hours spent per piglet in a farrowing unit Hours Year

12. Basics

13. Modeling of test farm Frequency/% survival Weight (kg) Bell curve is birth weight distribution S – curve is Survival curve

14. Increasing birth weight

15. Reducing variation

16. Increasing survival

17. Duroc (black) against Pietrain

18. Sire differences Pre-weaning survival >350 offspring each 2 lbs 4 lbs

19. Genetics of survival

20. Death: whom to blame? Genes of the piglet? Genes of the sow? Genes of the foster?

21. Genetic models Classic approach • Litter mortality = HYS + sow (+ error) • Litter survival = HYS + service sire + sow Improved (still recording at litter level) • Litter survival = HYS + service sire + sow Our perception • Piglet survival = HYS + f(BW) + animal + dam + foster • Animal = piglet vitality, • Dam = uterine quality and • Foster = mothering ability

22. Piglet weighing > 500,000 piglets per per year

23. Validation: 100 low against 100 high EBV litters

24. Validation: 100 low against 100 high EBV litters

25. Validation: 100 low against 100 high EBV litters

26. Piglet vitality The animal effect from the model

27. Why does it work? • 25 high EBV gilts mated to high EBV boars • 25 low low • All 50 caesarian sectioned 2 days before farrowing, placentae weighed • All 650 piglets fully dissected • Organs weighed, length of intestinal tract, blood parameters etc. etc. • More vital: heavier livers, more glycogen (P=0.04)

28. 2000 1600 1200 Weight piglet 800 400 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 Weight placenta Blue: high EBV litters Jascha Leenhouwers en Tette van der Lende

29. High EBV litters more cortisol Jascha Leenhouwers, JAS 2002

30. Stronger piglets, not heavier!

31. Mothering ability Foster effect from the model

32. What do we LIKE in a sow • Quiet • Attentive • Enough teats • Quality of teats • Enough milk • Uniformity at birth and at weaning • Maintenance of body condition • .... Lots of grad students needed… Or: use EBV for mothering ability

33. 1. Visual scan sampling • 4 hours walking through farrowing rooms • Visually ‘Scanning’ each sow every 5 minutes • 5 observation days (days -2, 0, 7, 14) • 80 sows, 150 traits

34. Position

35. Behaviour

36. 2. Open field test

37. 3. Aggression test

38. 4. Questionnaire

39. Results: 1. Scan sampling Sows with high EBV-MA: • Less changes of posture • Less activity • Less in sitting position

40. Results: 2. Open field test Sows with high EBV-MA: • More exploring behaviour in open field

41. Results: 3. Aggression test Sows with high EBV-MA: • More lying laterally • More vocalisation • Less aggression (biting plush piglet)!!!

42. Results 4. Questionnaire

43. Conclusion Statistical model results in what we want: • Quiet • Attentive • Enough teats • Quality of teats • Uniformity at birth and at weaning No need for grad students here

44. Implementation in breeding program

45. EBV estimation 4 million piglets weighed 1.2 million sows 2 million piglets with underline count

46. Validation 1 take out 10,000 records 2 estimate breeding values on the remaining data 3 predict the 10,000 4 expected b-value should be 1.00

47. General conclusions • Survival: management = selection • Survival selection: hard work, but feasible • Most genetic companies select, be it with different tools • Faster than economic progress should be an option • Longer gestation, lower variation in bw, but not higher bw Next table closer than you might expect

48. Labour per piglet produced

49. Miranda’s slide, quoted by Foxcroft in Banff

50. Validation of this graph: 2 extreme sows