Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Comparative study on the relations between backfat thickness in late-pregnant gilts, mammary development and piglet growth

Comparative study on the relations between backfat thickness in late-pregnant gilts, mammary... Comparative study on the relations between backfat thickness in late-pregnant gilts, mammary development and piglet growth C. Farmer,* J.-P. Martineau,† S. Méthot,* and D. Bussières‡ *Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Sherbrooke R & D Centre, Sherbrooke, QC J1M 0C8, Canada; †Hylife Ltd, La Broquerie, MB R0A 0W0, Canada; and ‡Groupe Cérès, St-Nicolas, QC G7A 3W4, Canada ABSTRACT: The potential relation between body on piglet BW gain (Part 1) or on various mammary condition of gilts in late-pregnancy and litter BW gland characteristics (Part 2) were determined using gain as well as mammary development was studied ANOVA. Litters from HIGH sows tended to have a using 2 sets of data. Gilts either from a commercial greater lactation BW gain than those from LOW sows herd (Part 1, n = 182) or from a series of trials looking (P < 0.10). Sows with HIGH BF had more mammary at mammary development (Part 2, n = 172) were parenchymal tissue and more total protein and total separated in 3 groups according to backfat thickness DNA than MED and LOW sows (P < 0.05), which (BF) on d 110 of gestation. Group categorization led to greater total protein and total DNA contents was similar for Parts 1 and 2 of the study and was: (P < 0.05). There were strong positive correlations low (LOW), 13.6 ± 1.6 mm (mean ± SD); medium (P < 0.0001) between parenchymal weight and total (MED), 17.6 ± 1.0 mm (mean ± SD); and high BF protein, total DNA, and total RNA. Results suggest (HIGH), 21.8 ± 1.8 mm (mean ± SD) for Part 1, and that it is beneficial for primiparous sows to have LOW, 14.2 ± 1.3 mm (mean ± SD); MED, 18.1 ± greater BF (i.e., 20 to 26 mm) at the end of gestation 1.0 mm (mean ± SD), and HIGH 23.4 ± 2.6 mm to achieve optimal mammary development and (mean ± SD) for Part 2. The effects of BF group greater litter BW gain in the subsequent lactation. Key words: backfat thickness, gestation, lactation, mammary development, piglet growth, sow © 2017 American Society of Animal Science. This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Transl. Anim. Sci. 2017.1:154–159 doi:10.2527/tas2017.0018 INTRODUCTION productivity, survival and to lower the incidence of leg problems. A longitudinal study done over 5 parities Sow milk yield is a major determinant for the with sows showing a wide range of BF indicated an growth rate of suckling piglets. It can be affected by advantage in terms of lifetime performance for sows various factors and one that requires more attention is that were genetically fatter (Lewis and Bunter, 2013). body condition of gilts. It is known that conditioning However, the potential relationship between body of gilts can impact lifetime reproductive performances, condition of gilts in late gestation and litter growth hence longevity in the herd (see review by Rozeboom, rate is still not clear. Obesity (BF of 36 mm) has a 2015). Certain authors recommended aiming for negative impact on mammary development (Head a backfat thickness (BF) between 16 and 19 mm and Williams, 1991), which potentially translates into (Tarrés et al., 2006) or between 18 and 20 mm (Yang lower milk yield (Head et al., 1991). Furthermore, et al., 1989) at first parturition to optimize fertility, differences in BF that are seen commercially on d 110 of gestation affect mammary development in gilts (Farmer et al., 2016a,b). However, in all studies looking The authors wish to thank A. Bernier for technical assistance, at mammary development, animals were slaughtered the staff of the Swine Complex from the Sherbrooke R & D Centre and the impact of varying BF on litter performance for care and slaughter of the animals and the staff of the Bonanza could not be evaluated. The use of 2 data sets, 1 from Sow barn for care of the animals and data collection. a commercial herd and the other from studies where Corresponding author: chantal.farmer@agr.gc.ca mammary development was measured, and separation Received February 16, 2017. of these gilts into groups according to BF, could allow Accepted April 27, 2017. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018 Backfat thickness in late-pregnant gilts 155 to establish the potential relation between body condition BF were obtained by the same person throughout the of gilts in late pregnancy, litter growth rate and various trial after a training period ensuring there was no more mammary development traits. than 1 mm difference in accuracy between readings. The apparatus was calibrated yearly. MATERIALS AND METHODS Within 24 h of birth, cross-fostering was done in litters that did not have a minimum of 6 piglets. All piglets were This study was performed using 2 data sets. One weighed at 24 h and at weaning (20 ± 2 d). No creep feed based on zootechnical data from gestating and lactating was provided to suckling piglets so that their BW gain primiparous sows in a commercial herd, and the other could reflect sow milk yield. Mortalities were recorded. containing more detailed mammary development measures obtained from sows in research trials performed Part 2 – Mammary Development at the Sherbrooke Research and Development Centre of Data from Research Trials Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Animals used in the AAFC trials were purchased from commercial sources. All animals for which data are reported here were cared for according to the national guidelines for the care and use of animals (CCAC, 2009) and procedures were Part 1 – Sow Data from a Commercial Herd approved by the Institutional Animal Care Committee Data from 182 primiparous sows (Landrace × Large of the Sherbrooke Research and Development Centre White) from the Bonanza Sow barn (La Broquerie, MB, of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Gilts (n = 171) Canada) that met the criteria of having 12 ± 2 piglets from 6 studies performed between the years 1997 and after standardization at 24 h postpartum and a lactation 2015 were used (see Table 1 for description). They were length of 20 ± 2 d were used in the current study. These bred with semen from a pool of Duroc boars, housed in sows farrowed between June 2015 and March 2016 and individual stalls (0.6 m × 2.1 m), and slaughtered on d were cared for according to the national guidelines for 110 ± 1 of gestation. Gilts were weighed and had their BF the care and use of animals (CCAC, 2009). Sows had measured ultrasonically at P2 of the last rib (Vetkoplus; been bred with semen from Duroc boars and were kept NOVEKO Int., Lachine, QC, Canada or WED-3000; in individual stalls throughout gestation. They were fed Schenzhen Well D Medical Electronics Co., Guangdong, 2.35 kg/d of a standard gestation diet (2,289 kcal/kg China) on the day before slaughter. Measurements of NE, 0.56% standard ileal digestible lysine) until d 99 of BF were obtained by the same 2 persons throughout a gestation and 3 kg/d of the same diet from d 100 to d 110 project and these were not necessarily the same for all of gestation. They were then moved to farrowing crates projects. They were all trained on site by the same person and were fed 3.2 kg/d of a standard lactation diet (2,367 and readings were taken in duplicates with less than 2 kcal/kg NE, 1.10% standard ileal digestible lysine). On mm difference accepted between readings. The average the first 4 d of lactation feed was provided progressively was used as value. The apparatus was calibrated yearly. with a 1 kg/d increase in 1 daily meal. As of d 5 of At slaughter, mammary glands from both sides of lactation, sows were fed ad libitum. Animals were the abdominal wall were excised. Those from 1 side of weighed and BF was measured ultrasonically at the last the udder were stored at –20°C and once frozen were rib (Vetkoplus; NOVEKO Int., Lachine, QC, Canada) cut into 2-cm slices and stored again at –20°C. Each at 110 d of gestation and at weaning. Measurements of slice was later trimmed of skin and teats and mammary Table 1. Description of the studies from which gilts are included in part 2 of the current trial Reference Number of gilts Breed Description of study Farmer et al., 2000. 15 F1 Yorkshire × Landrace Control gilts from a study where prolactin was inhibited in the last third of gestation Farmer and Petitclerc, 2003. 12 F2 (Yorkshire × Landrace) × Yorkshire Control gilts from a study where prolactin was inhibited in specific periods of late gestation Farmer et al., 2012a. 32 F1 Yorkshire × Landrace Periods of diet deprivation (70% of protein and DE) and diet overallowance (115% of protein and DE) in growing-finishing Farmer et al., 2014. 28 F1 Yorkshire × Landrace Diet deprivation (70% of protein and DE) for 10 wk followed by overallowance (115% of protein and DE) during gestation Farmer et al., 2016b. 39 F1 Yorkshire × Landrace Creating differences in BF at the end of gestation via different feeding levels in gestation Farmer et al., 2016a. 45 F1 Yorkshire × Landrace Maintaining differences in BF from mating to end of gestation via different feeding levels Translate basic science to industry innovation Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018 156 Farmer et al. parenchymal tissue was dissected from surrounding (MED, n = 92), mean = 17.6 mm, SD = 1.0, minimum adipose tissue (i.e., extraparenchymal tissue) at 4°C. = 15.9, maximum = 19.5, and 3) high BF (HIGH, n = 41), Both parenchymal and extraparenchymal tissue mean = 21.8, SD = 1.8, minimum = 19.9, maximum = 26.3. weights from this side of the udder were recorded. There was a group effect ( P < 0.001) on BF loss in Parenchymal tissue from all dissected and sliced lactation and BF at weaning (Table 2), and BW of sows at glands was homogenized and a representative sample weaning was affected by their BF grouping but BW loss was used for determination of composition by chemical in lactation was not altered (P > 0.10, Table 2). There was analysis. The RNA content of parenchymal tissue was no group effect on average piglet BW at 24 h, at weaning, measured by ultra-violet spectrophotometry (Volkin or on average piglet BW gain between 24 h and weaning and Cohn, 1954) and the DNA content of parenchymal (Table 2). However, when looking at the unadjusted mean tissue was evaluated in all samples using a method comparison, there was a tendency (P = 0.08) for average based on fluorescence of a DNA stain (Labarca and piglet BW gain between 24 h and weaning to be greater Paigen, 1980). Dry matter, protein, and lipid contents for HIGH than for LOW sows (Table 2). The correlation were also determined (methods 950.46, 928.08 and between BF on d 110 of gestation and average piglet BW 991.39, respectively; AOAC, 2005) in parenchyma. gain between 24 h and weaning was 0.17 (P > 0.10). Statistical Analyses Part 2 – Mammary Development Data from Research Trials The Pearson correlation coefficient between BF and average litter BW gain was calculated for sows in Part Separation of the sows in 3 groups using the same 1 of the study. Correlation coefficients between BF and categorization as for Part 1 of the study led to the following: numerous mammary gland characteristics for sows in 1) low BF (LOW, n = 59), mean = 14.2 mm, SD = 1.3, Part 2 of the study were also determined. Sows from Part minimum = 10.7, maximum = 16.0, 2) medium BF (MED, 1 of the study were separated in 3 groups according to BF n = 59), mean = 18.1 mm, SD = 1.0, minimum = 16.4, pre-farrowing. This separation was performed with the maximum = 19.9, and 3) high BF (HIGH, n = 53), FASTCLUS procedure of SAS (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC) mean = 23.4, SD = 2.6, minimum = 20.0, maximum = 32.5. using a disjoint cluster analysis on the basis of distances Table 3 shows mammary gland characteristics for computed between values (k-means clustering). The the 3 BF groups. There was a group effect ( P ≤ 0.01) on all procedure determines the 3 cluster centers (Low, LOW; measured variables except for DNA concentration and Medium, MED; High, HIGH) and assigns animals to total parenchymal RNA (P > 0.10). Extraparenchymal the nearest cluster mean so that the squared distances tissue weight increased with increasing BF (P < 0.05) from the cluster are minimized. Once this categorization from LOW to MED to HIGH sows. Mean comparison was established, the same limits were then used to also showed that HIGH sows had more mammary separate sows from Part 2 of the study. The MIXED procedure of SAS was then used to test for group effects Table 2. Zootechnical data for sows of low (LOW; mean of (with 3 levels). Multiple comparisons were corrected 13.6 mm, n = 49), medium (MED; mean of 17.6 mm, n = with a Tukey adjustment, and the unadjusted probability 92), or high (HIGH; mean of 21.8 mm, n = 41) backfat on d comparing the 2 extreme groups (LOW vs. HIGH) is 110 of gestation and for their litters also presented. For Part 1, the dependent variables were average BW of piglets at 24 h and at weaning, Groups average piglet BW gain, sow BF loss in lactation and Item LOW MED HIGH SEM Birth (24 h postpartum) BF at weaning. For Part 2, dependent variables were a Average piglet BW, kg 1.59 1.58 1.60 0.04 series of mammary development characteristics. Data Weaning in Tables are presented as least squares means ± SEM, Age, d 20.7 20.7 20.9 0.21 except when otherwise mentioned. Average piglet BW, kg 5.17 5.27 5.50 0.15 Average piglet lactation 3.59 3.69 3.90 0.13 RESULTS BW gain, kg a b c Sow BF, mm 12.0 14.9 18.2 0.30 a b c Sow BF lactation loss, mm 1.59 2.69 3.58 0.26 Part 1- Sow Data from a Commercial Herd d e e Sow BW, kg 208.4 216.2 221.8 2.5 Separation of the sows in 3 groups according to Sow BW lactation loss, kg 28.6 29.9 30.6 2.2 their BF on d 110 of gestation led to the following: 1) a–c Means within a row with different superscripts differ ( P < 0.01). low BF (LOW, n = 49), mean = 13.6 mm, SD = 1.6, d,e Means within a row with different superscripts differ ( P < 0.05). minimum = 9.9, maximum = 15.6, 2) medium BF 1 Maximum value. Translate basic science to industry innovation Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018 Backfat thickness in late-pregnant gilts 157 Table 3. Mammary gland composition on d 110 of Table 4. Correlation coefficients between BF on d 110 of gestation for sows with a low (LOW; mean of 14.2 gestation and measured mammary gland characteristics mm, n = 59), medium (MED; mean of 18.1 mm, n = Item Correlation Significance level ( P) 59), or high (HIGH; mean of 23.4 mm, n = 53) backfat Extraparenchymal tissue, g 0.59 < 0.0001 Parenchymal tissue, g 0.29 0.0001 Groups 1 DM, % 0.34 < 0.0001 Item LOW MED HIGH SEM d e f Fat , % 0.15 0.05 Extraparenchymal tissue, g 1125 1287 1709 47 d d e Fat, g 0.44 < 0.001 Parenchymal tissue, g 1257 1325 1533 59 a b b Protein , % –0.18 0.02 DM, % 37.3 39.9 40.9 0.53 2 a b b Protein, g 0.27 0.0004 Fat , % 60.8 64.9 64.8 0.94 a b c DNA , mg/g –0.14 0.06 Fat, g 280.3 338.4 395.4 13.4 2 a b b DNA, g total 0.24 0.001 Protein , % 36.4 32.7 32.4 0.85 d d e Protein/DNA 0.02 0.75 Protein, g 170.2 171.5 203.0 9.2 2 RNA , mg/g –0.29 0.0001 DNA , mg/g 9.55 8.91 9.18 0.33 d d e RNA, g total 0.23 0.003 DNA, g total 4.44 4.63 5.71 0.27 a a b RNA/DNA –0.07 0.38 Protein/DNA 41.2 38.7 35.3 1.4 2 a b b RNA , mg/g 8.74 7.69 7.36 0.20 Expressed on a DM basis. RNA, g total 4.07 4.03 4.53 0.20 d d e RNA/DNA 0.98 0.91 0.80 0.03 a–c relation (P < 0.0001) between total DNA and total Means within a row with different superscripts differ ( P < 0.01). d–f protein (r = 0.85) or total RNA (r = 0.85), as well as Means within a row with different superscripts differ ( P < 0.05). a negative association between percent protein and Maximum value. Expressed on a DM basis. percent fat (r = –0.97, P < 0.0001). DISCUSSION parenchymal tissue and more total protein and total DNA than MED and LOW sows (P < 0.05, Tukey adjusted). Through a comparative study using data sets from Sows with LOW BF had less percent DM, percent fat different populations, current findings provide a first and more percent protein and RNA concentration than look at the potential links between body condition of MED and HIGH sows (P < 0.01). When looking at the primiparous sows at the end of gestation, mammary comparison between the 2 extreme BF groups using the development at that same time and subsequent litter unadjusted probability, all measured mammary gland performance. The effect of body condition on mammary variables differed significantly ( P ≤ 0.01), except for gland development in primiparous sows at the end of total ARN for which there was a tendency (P < 0.10). gestation was previously demonstrated (Farmer et al., Correlations between BF on d 110 of gestation and 2016a,b) but animals were slaughtered and lactation the various mammary characteristics measured are performance could not be determined. The link between shown in Table 4. There were significant correlations body condition and reproductive performance was (P < 0.05) between BF and all measured variables in suggested by many authors (Yang et al., 1989; Tarrés mammary tissue, except for DNA concentration and et al., 2006; Schenkel et al., 2010; Lewis and Bunter, percent parenchymal fat. The greatest correlation was 2013; Rozeboom, 2015) but mammary development observed between BF and extra-parenchymal tissue was not investigated. The only report on the relation weight (P < 0.0001), followed by total parenchymal between body condition, mammary development in fat (P < 0.0001), percent DM (P < 0.0001) and late gestation and subsequent milk yield is that of then parenchymal weight (P = 0.0001). There Head and Williams (1995). However, that study was was a negative correlation between BF and RNA performed with only 7 sows per body condition group, concentration (P = 0.0001; Table 4) but total RNA was which is not adequate to study a factor as variable as positively correlated with BF (P = 0.003). Total DNA piglet growth. Nevertheless, it provided indications was also positively correlated with BF (P = 0.001). that such a line of study would be of interest. When looking at correlations among the mammary The relation between BF in late gestation and piglet gland characteristics on d 110 of gestation (data not growth rate observed in the current study corroborates shown), many variables were related. Of interest were findings of Rempel et al. (2015), who also used a large the strong positive correlations (P < 0.0001) between number of animals. Amdi et al. (2014) also demonstrated parenchymal weight and total protein (r = 0.94), total that maternal body condition at mating has an effect on fat (r = 0.79), total DNA (r = 0.83), and total RNA piglet growth rate; piglets born from gilts with a BF of 19 (r = 0.94) in parenchyma. There was also a positive mm had improved growth compared with piglets from Translate basic science to industry innovation Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018 158 Farmer et al. sows with 12 mm BF. This could have been partly due to development and increased litter BW gain in the the fact that fatter sows had 25% more milk fat than thin subsequent lactation. However, the exact cut-off point sows on d 21 of lactation (Amdi et al., 2013). The greater is not clear and will likely be affected by breed. When extraparenchymal weight reported in the current study a cut-off point of 18 mm BF was used to compare with increased BF was to be expected due to improved lactation performances of primiparous sows, and 20 body condition. The fact that total parenchymal fat also mm was used as cut-off point for multiparous sows, no increased with BF is of interest and this was due both differences in piglet growth rate were reported (Rekiel et to a greater fat percent and to a greater parenchymal al., 2015). However, the sample size was small (10 or 20 weight. To the contrary, the observed effects of BF on sows per group). Kim et al. (2015) compared numerous total protein and total DNA were solely due to greater small ranges of BF on d 109 of gestation and concluded parenchymal weight and not to increased parenchymal that, irrespective of parity, litter weight gain increases concentrations of these variables. In fact, percent protein quadratically with BF to reach an optimal breakpoint decreased with increasing BF. It therefore appears that between 17 and 21 mm, above which there is no further increasing parenchymal weight in late gestation should increase in BW gain. In fact, sows with very high BF be the major goal to improve milk yield and growth of (> 25 mm) had litters with smaller BW gain compared suckling piglets in the subsequent lactation. Yet, it is not with sows having 20 to 24 mm BF. Interestingly, when known if this effect would last in the following parities. using 17.6 mm as cut-off point (MED sows) to compare Rozeboom et al. (1996) showed that body reserves of parenchymal tissue composition, current results show gilts at first breeding impacts BW of mature sows but a greater fat percent and lower protein percent and has no long-term effect on BF. However, it is not known RNA concentrations in sows with greater BF. Previous if changes in mammary development of gilts related and current findings therefore indicate that it is more to their body condition in late gestation would still be detrimental for primiparous sows to be too lean than present in subsequent parities. It was demonstrated too fat at the end of gestation. This is in accordance that non-use of a teat in first lactation will decrease its with the recommendation from Schenkel et al. (2010) milk yield in second lactation (Farmer et al., 2012b) who stated the importance of achieving adequate body but the potential impact of mammary development in condition at parturition. It also corroborates the negative late gestation on lactation performance in subsequent correlation reported between BF around puberty and parities was never investigated. Lewis and Bunter (2013) longevity in sows (López-Serrano et al., 2000). Those suggested a lasting effect of fatness on productivity of last authors attributed this effect to decreased pregnancy sows over 5 parities, and an effect of BF at weaning on rate and greater occurrences of leg weakness syndrome subsequent litter size was also reported (Schenkel et al., but the potential impact on mammary development was 2010). Kim et al. (2016) further reported a long-term not studied. Overall, information from published and effect of BF with multiparous sows having a BF ≥ 20 current results indicate that either too low (< 15 mm) mm on d 107 of gestation showing increased growth of or too high (> 26 mm) a BF in late gestation may lead their piglets until weaning, and this over 2 consecutive to reduced piglet growth rate. Maintaining a moderate parities. Yet, further research is needed to determine if body condition therefore seems to be the best strategy. the effect of BF on mammary development would be present in subsequent parities. LITERATURE CITED The strong positive correlations between parenchymal Amdi, C., L. Giblin, T. Ryan, N. C. Stickland, and P.G. Lawlor. weight and total protein, total DNA and total RNA in 2014. Maternal backfat depth in gestating sows has a greater parenchyma suggest that a measure of parenchymal influence on offspring growth and carcass lean yield than maternal feed allocation during gestation. Animal 8:236–244. weight could be a good estimate of important mammary doi:10.1017/S1751731113002073 composition variables. It would be of interest to develop Amdi, C., L. Giblin, A. A. Hennessy, T. Ryan, C. Stanton, N. C. methods to estimate mammary parenchymal weight Stickland, and P. G. Lawlor. 2013. Feed allowance and mater- in live animals to assess their mammary development. nal backfat levels during gestation influence maternal corti - Balzani et al. (2015) developed a methodology to look sol levels, milk fat composition and offspring growth. J. Nutr. Sci. 2:e1. doi:10.1017/jns.2012.20 at udder conformation in sows but they did not attempt AOAC. 2005. Official Methods of Analysis international. 18th Ed. to find measures that would estimate the volume of Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem., Arlington, VA. mammary glands and they did not relate any measured Balzani, A., H. J. Cordell, and S. A. Edwards. 2015. Development variables with piglet growth. Such information would be of a methodology to describe udder conformation in sows. very pertinent for producers. Animal 10:432–439. doi:10.1017/S1751731115002347 Current results suggest that it is beneficial for Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC). 2009. CCAC Guidelines on: The care and use of farm animals in research, primiparous sows to have greater BF (i.e., 20 to 26 teaching and testing. CCAC, Ottawa, ON, Canada. mm) at the end of gestation to show optimal mammary Translate basic science to industry innovation Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018 Backfat thickness in late-pregnant gilts 159 Farmer, C., M. Comi, C. R. A. Duarte, M. Vignola, P. Charagu, Kim, J. S., X. Yang, D. Pangeni, and S. K. Baidoo. 2015. and M. F. Palin. 2016a. Differences in body condition of gilts Relationship between backfat thickness of sows during late that are maintained from mating to the end of gestation af- gestation and reproductive efficiency at different parities. fect mammary development. J. Anim. Sci. 94:3206–3214. Acta Agric. Scand. A Anim. Sci. 65:1–8. doi:10.2527/jas.2016-0531 Labarca, C., and K. Paigen. 1980. A simple, rapid, and sensi- Farmer, C., C. R. A. Duarte, M. Vignola, and M. F. Palin. 2016b. tive DNA assay procedure. Anal. Biochem. 102:344–352. Body condition of gilts at the end of gestation affects their doi:10.1016/0003-2697(80)90165-7 mammary development. J. Anim. Sci. 94:1897–1905. Lewis, C. R. G., and K. L. Bunter. 2013. A longitudinal study of weight doi:10.2527/jas.2016-0336 and fatness in sows from selection to parity five, using random re - Farmer, C., M. F. Palin, and Y. Martel-Kennes. 2012a. Impact of gression. J. Anim. Sci. 91:4598–4610. doi:10.2527/jas.2012-6016 diet deprivation and subsequent over-allowance during pre- López-Serrano, M., N. Reinsch, H. Looft, and E. Kalm. 2000. puberty. Part 1. Effects on growth performance, metabolite Genetic correlations of growth, backfat thickness and exterior status, and mammary gland development in gilts. J. Anim. with stayability in large white and landrace sows. Livest. Prod. Sci. 90:863–871. doi:10.2527/jas.2011-4131 Sci. 64:121–131. doi:10.1016/S0301-6226(99)00169-4 Farmer, C., M. F. Palin, and Y. Martel-Kennes. 2014. Impact of Rekiel, A., J. Wiecek, M. Batorska, J. Kulisiewicz, and G. Tokarska. diet deprivation and subsequent over-allowance during ges- 2015. Comparison of changes in fatness of sows in high preg- tation on mammary gland development and lactation perfor- nancy and at weaning and determination of their association with mance. J. Anim. Sci. 92:141–151. doi:10.2527/jas.2013-6558 reproduction results and rearing of piglets. J. Central European Farmer, C., M. F. Palin, P. K. Theil, M. T. Sorensen, and N. Agric. 16:410–422. doi:10.5513/JCEA01/16.4.1646 Devillers. 2012b. Milk production in sows from a teat in sec- Rempel, L. A., J. L. Vallet, C. A. Lents, and D. J. Nonneman. 2015. ond parity is influenced by whether it was suckled in first par - Measurements of body composition during late gestation and lac- ity. J. Anim. Sci. 90:3743–3751. doi:10.2527/jas.2012-5127 tation in first and second parity sows and its relationship to piglet Farmer, C., and D. Petitclerc. 2003. Specific window of prolactin production and post-weaning reproductive performance. Livest. inhibition in late gestation decreases mammary parenchy- Sci. 178:289–295. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2015.05.036 mal tissue development in gilts. J. Anim. Sci. 81:1823–1829. Rozeboom, D. W. 2015. Conditioning of the gilt for optimal reproduc- doi:10.2527/2003.8171823x tive performance. In: C. Farmer, editor, The gestating and lactat- Farmer, C., M. T. Sorensen, and D. Petitclerc. 2000. Inhibition ing sow. chap 1. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, of prolactin in the last trimester of gestation decreases mam- the Netherlands. p. 13–26. doi:10.3920/978-90-8686-803-2_1 mary gland development in gilts. J. Anim. Sci. 78:1303–1309. Rozeboom, D. W., J. E. Pettigrew, R. L. Moser, S. G. Cornelius, and doi:10.2527/2000.7851303x S. M. El Kandelgy. 1996. Influence of gilts age and body com - Head, R. H., N. W. Bruce, and I. H. Williams. 1991. More cells might position at first breeding on sow reproductive performance and lead to more milk. In: E. S. Batterham, editor, Manipulating pig longevity. J. Anim. Sci. 74:138–150. doi:10.2527/1996.741138x production III. Australasian Pig Sci. Assoc., Werribee, VIC. p. 76. Schenkel, A. C., M. L. Bernardi, F. P. Bortolozzo, and I. Wentz. Head, R. H., and I. H. Williams. 1991. Mammogenesis is influenced by 2010. Body reserve mobilization during lactation in first pregnancy nutrition. In: E. S. Batterham, editor, Manipulating pig parity sows and its effect on second litter size. Livest. Sci. production III. Australasian Pig Sci. Assoc., Werribee, VIC. p. 33. 132:165–172. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2010.06.002 Head, R. H., and I. H. Williams. 1995. Potential milk production in gilts. Tarrés, J., J. Tibau, J. Piedrafita, E. Fàbrega, and J. Reixach. 2006. In: D. P. Hennessy and P. D. Cranwell, editors, Manipulating pig Factors affecting longevity in maternal Duroc swine lines. production V. Australasian Pig Sci. Assoc., Werribee, VIC. p. 134. Livest. Sci. 100:121–131. doi:10.1016/j.livprodsci.2005.08.007 Kim, K. H., A. Hosseindoust, S. L. Ingale, S. H. Lee, H. S. Noh, Y. Volkin, E., and W. E. Cohn. 1954. Estimation of nucleic acids. H. Choi, S. M. Jeon, Y. H. Kim, and B. J. Chae. 2016. Effects of Methods Biochem. Anal. 1:287–305. gestational housing on reproductive performance and behavior Yang, H., P. R. Eastham, P. Phillips, and C. T. Whittemore. 1989. of sows with different backfat thickness. Asian-australas. J. Reproductive performance, body weight and body condition of Anim. Sci. 29:142–148. doi:10.5713/ajas.14.0973 breeding sows with differing body fatness at parturition, differ - ing nutrition during lactation and differing litter size. Anim. Prod. 48:181–201. doi:10.1017/S0003356100003901 Translate basic science to industry innovation Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Translational Animal Science Oxford University Press

Comparative study on the relations between backfat thickness in late-pregnant gilts, mammary development and piglet growth

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/comparative-study-on-the-relations-between-backfat-thickness-in-late-WjaUO5GtYi

References (58)

eISSN
2573-2102
DOI
10.2527/tas2017.0018
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Comparative study on the relations between backfat thickness in late-pregnant gilts, mammary development and piglet growth C. Farmer,* J.-P. Martineau,† S. Méthot,* and D. Bussières‡ *Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Sherbrooke R & D Centre, Sherbrooke, QC J1M 0C8, Canada; †Hylife Ltd, La Broquerie, MB R0A 0W0, Canada; and ‡Groupe Cérès, St-Nicolas, QC G7A 3W4, Canada ABSTRACT: The potential relation between body on piglet BW gain (Part 1) or on various mammary condition of gilts in late-pregnancy and litter BW gland characteristics (Part 2) were determined using gain as well as mammary development was studied ANOVA. Litters from HIGH sows tended to have a using 2 sets of data. Gilts either from a commercial greater lactation BW gain than those from LOW sows herd (Part 1, n = 182) or from a series of trials looking (P < 0.10). Sows with HIGH BF had more mammary at mammary development (Part 2, n = 172) were parenchymal tissue and more total protein and total separated in 3 groups according to backfat thickness DNA than MED and LOW sows (P < 0.05), which (BF) on d 110 of gestation. Group categorization led to greater total protein and total DNA contents was similar for Parts 1 and 2 of the study and was: (P < 0.05). There were strong positive correlations low (LOW), 13.6 ± 1.6 mm (mean ± SD); medium (P < 0.0001) between parenchymal weight and total (MED), 17.6 ± 1.0 mm (mean ± SD); and high BF protein, total DNA, and total RNA. Results suggest (HIGH), 21.8 ± 1.8 mm (mean ± SD) for Part 1, and that it is beneficial for primiparous sows to have LOW, 14.2 ± 1.3 mm (mean ± SD); MED, 18.1 ± greater BF (i.e., 20 to 26 mm) at the end of gestation 1.0 mm (mean ± SD), and HIGH 23.4 ± 2.6 mm to achieve optimal mammary development and (mean ± SD) for Part 2. The effects of BF group greater litter BW gain in the subsequent lactation. Key words: backfat thickness, gestation, lactation, mammary development, piglet growth, sow © 2017 American Society of Animal Science. This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Transl. Anim. Sci. 2017.1:154–159 doi:10.2527/tas2017.0018 INTRODUCTION productivity, survival and to lower the incidence of leg problems. A longitudinal study done over 5 parities Sow milk yield is a major determinant for the with sows showing a wide range of BF indicated an growth rate of suckling piglets. It can be affected by advantage in terms of lifetime performance for sows various factors and one that requires more attention is that were genetically fatter (Lewis and Bunter, 2013). body condition of gilts. It is known that conditioning However, the potential relationship between body of gilts can impact lifetime reproductive performances, condition of gilts in late gestation and litter growth hence longevity in the herd (see review by Rozeboom, rate is still not clear. Obesity (BF of 36 mm) has a 2015). Certain authors recommended aiming for negative impact on mammary development (Head a backfat thickness (BF) between 16 and 19 mm and Williams, 1991), which potentially translates into (Tarrés et al., 2006) or between 18 and 20 mm (Yang lower milk yield (Head et al., 1991). Furthermore, et al., 1989) at first parturition to optimize fertility, differences in BF that are seen commercially on d 110 of gestation affect mammary development in gilts (Farmer et al., 2016a,b). However, in all studies looking The authors wish to thank A. Bernier for technical assistance, at mammary development, animals were slaughtered the staff of the Swine Complex from the Sherbrooke R & D Centre and the impact of varying BF on litter performance for care and slaughter of the animals and the staff of the Bonanza could not be evaluated. The use of 2 data sets, 1 from Sow barn for care of the animals and data collection. a commercial herd and the other from studies where Corresponding author: chantal.farmer@agr.gc.ca mammary development was measured, and separation Received February 16, 2017. of these gilts into groups according to BF, could allow Accepted April 27, 2017. Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018 Backfat thickness in late-pregnant gilts 155 to establish the potential relation between body condition BF were obtained by the same person throughout the of gilts in late pregnancy, litter growth rate and various trial after a training period ensuring there was no more mammary development traits. than 1 mm difference in accuracy between readings. The apparatus was calibrated yearly. MATERIALS AND METHODS Within 24 h of birth, cross-fostering was done in litters that did not have a minimum of 6 piglets. All piglets were This study was performed using 2 data sets. One weighed at 24 h and at weaning (20 ± 2 d). No creep feed based on zootechnical data from gestating and lactating was provided to suckling piglets so that their BW gain primiparous sows in a commercial herd, and the other could reflect sow milk yield. Mortalities were recorded. containing more detailed mammary development measures obtained from sows in research trials performed Part 2 – Mammary Development at the Sherbrooke Research and Development Centre of Data from Research Trials Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Animals used in the AAFC trials were purchased from commercial sources. All animals for which data are reported here were cared for according to the national guidelines for the care and use of animals (CCAC, 2009) and procedures were Part 1 – Sow Data from a Commercial Herd approved by the Institutional Animal Care Committee Data from 182 primiparous sows (Landrace × Large of the Sherbrooke Research and Development Centre White) from the Bonanza Sow barn (La Broquerie, MB, of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Gilts (n = 171) Canada) that met the criteria of having 12 ± 2 piglets from 6 studies performed between the years 1997 and after standardization at 24 h postpartum and a lactation 2015 were used (see Table 1 for description). They were length of 20 ± 2 d were used in the current study. These bred with semen from a pool of Duroc boars, housed in sows farrowed between June 2015 and March 2016 and individual stalls (0.6 m × 2.1 m), and slaughtered on d were cared for according to the national guidelines for 110 ± 1 of gestation. Gilts were weighed and had their BF the care and use of animals (CCAC, 2009). Sows had measured ultrasonically at P2 of the last rib (Vetkoplus; been bred with semen from Duroc boars and were kept NOVEKO Int., Lachine, QC, Canada or WED-3000; in individual stalls throughout gestation. They were fed Schenzhen Well D Medical Electronics Co., Guangdong, 2.35 kg/d of a standard gestation diet (2,289 kcal/kg China) on the day before slaughter. Measurements of NE, 0.56% standard ileal digestible lysine) until d 99 of BF were obtained by the same 2 persons throughout a gestation and 3 kg/d of the same diet from d 100 to d 110 project and these were not necessarily the same for all of gestation. They were then moved to farrowing crates projects. They were all trained on site by the same person and were fed 3.2 kg/d of a standard lactation diet (2,367 and readings were taken in duplicates with less than 2 kcal/kg NE, 1.10% standard ileal digestible lysine). On mm difference accepted between readings. The average the first 4 d of lactation feed was provided progressively was used as value. The apparatus was calibrated yearly. with a 1 kg/d increase in 1 daily meal. As of d 5 of At slaughter, mammary glands from both sides of lactation, sows were fed ad libitum. Animals were the abdominal wall were excised. Those from 1 side of weighed and BF was measured ultrasonically at the last the udder were stored at –20°C and once frozen were rib (Vetkoplus; NOVEKO Int., Lachine, QC, Canada) cut into 2-cm slices and stored again at –20°C. Each at 110 d of gestation and at weaning. Measurements of slice was later trimmed of skin and teats and mammary Table 1. Description of the studies from which gilts are included in part 2 of the current trial Reference Number of gilts Breed Description of study Farmer et al., 2000. 15 F1 Yorkshire × Landrace Control gilts from a study where prolactin was inhibited in the last third of gestation Farmer and Petitclerc, 2003. 12 F2 (Yorkshire × Landrace) × Yorkshire Control gilts from a study where prolactin was inhibited in specific periods of late gestation Farmer et al., 2012a. 32 F1 Yorkshire × Landrace Periods of diet deprivation (70% of protein and DE) and diet overallowance (115% of protein and DE) in growing-finishing Farmer et al., 2014. 28 F1 Yorkshire × Landrace Diet deprivation (70% of protein and DE) for 10 wk followed by overallowance (115% of protein and DE) during gestation Farmer et al., 2016b. 39 F1 Yorkshire × Landrace Creating differences in BF at the end of gestation via different feeding levels in gestation Farmer et al., 2016a. 45 F1 Yorkshire × Landrace Maintaining differences in BF from mating to end of gestation via different feeding levels Translate basic science to industry innovation Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018 156 Farmer et al. parenchymal tissue was dissected from surrounding (MED, n = 92), mean = 17.6 mm, SD = 1.0, minimum adipose tissue (i.e., extraparenchymal tissue) at 4°C. = 15.9, maximum = 19.5, and 3) high BF (HIGH, n = 41), Both parenchymal and extraparenchymal tissue mean = 21.8, SD = 1.8, minimum = 19.9, maximum = 26.3. weights from this side of the udder were recorded. There was a group effect ( P < 0.001) on BF loss in Parenchymal tissue from all dissected and sliced lactation and BF at weaning (Table 2), and BW of sows at glands was homogenized and a representative sample weaning was affected by their BF grouping but BW loss was used for determination of composition by chemical in lactation was not altered (P > 0.10, Table 2). There was analysis. The RNA content of parenchymal tissue was no group effect on average piglet BW at 24 h, at weaning, measured by ultra-violet spectrophotometry (Volkin or on average piglet BW gain between 24 h and weaning and Cohn, 1954) and the DNA content of parenchymal (Table 2). However, when looking at the unadjusted mean tissue was evaluated in all samples using a method comparison, there was a tendency (P = 0.08) for average based on fluorescence of a DNA stain (Labarca and piglet BW gain between 24 h and weaning to be greater Paigen, 1980). Dry matter, protein, and lipid contents for HIGH than for LOW sows (Table 2). The correlation were also determined (methods 950.46, 928.08 and between BF on d 110 of gestation and average piglet BW 991.39, respectively; AOAC, 2005) in parenchyma. gain between 24 h and weaning was 0.17 (P > 0.10). Statistical Analyses Part 2 – Mammary Development Data from Research Trials The Pearson correlation coefficient between BF and average litter BW gain was calculated for sows in Part Separation of the sows in 3 groups using the same 1 of the study. Correlation coefficients between BF and categorization as for Part 1 of the study led to the following: numerous mammary gland characteristics for sows in 1) low BF (LOW, n = 59), mean = 14.2 mm, SD = 1.3, Part 2 of the study were also determined. Sows from Part minimum = 10.7, maximum = 16.0, 2) medium BF (MED, 1 of the study were separated in 3 groups according to BF n = 59), mean = 18.1 mm, SD = 1.0, minimum = 16.4, pre-farrowing. This separation was performed with the maximum = 19.9, and 3) high BF (HIGH, n = 53), FASTCLUS procedure of SAS (SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC) mean = 23.4, SD = 2.6, minimum = 20.0, maximum = 32.5. using a disjoint cluster analysis on the basis of distances Table 3 shows mammary gland characteristics for computed between values (k-means clustering). The the 3 BF groups. There was a group effect ( P ≤ 0.01) on all procedure determines the 3 cluster centers (Low, LOW; measured variables except for DNA concentration and Medium, MED; High, HIGH) and assigns animals to total parenchymal RNA (P > 0.10). Extraparenchymal the nearest cluster mean so that the squared distances tissue weight increased with increasing BF (P < 0.05) from the cluster are minimized. Once this categorization from LOW to MED to HIGH sows. Mean comparison was established, the same limits were then used to also showed that HIGH sows had more mammary separate sows from Part 2 of the study. The MIXED procedure of SAS was then used to test for group effects Table 2. Zootechnical data for sows of low (LOW; mean of (with 3 levels). Multiple comparisons were corrected 13.6 mm, n = 49), medium (MED; mean of 17.6 mm, n = with a Tukey adjustment, and the unadjusted probability 92), or high (HIGH; mean of 21.8 mm, n = 41) backfat on d comparing the 2 extreme groups (LOW vs. HIGH) is 110 of gestation and for their litters also presented. For Part 1, the dependent variables were average BW of piglets at 24 h and at weaning, Groups average piglet BW gain, sow BF loss in lactation and Item LOW MED HIGH SEM Birth (24 h postpartum) BF at weaning. For Part 2, dependent variables were a Average piglet BW, kg 1.59 1.58 1.60 0.04 series of mammary development characteristics. Data Weaning in Tables are presented as least squares means ± SEM, Age, d 20.7 20.7 20.9 0.21 except when otherwise mentioned. Average piglet BW, kg 5.17 5.27 5.50 0.15 Average piglet lactation 3.59 3.69 3.90 0.13 RESULTS BW gain, kg a b c Sow BF, mm 12.0 14.9 18.2 0.30 a b c Sow BF lactation loss, mm 1.59 2.69 3.58 0.26 Part 1- Sow Data from a Commercial Herd d e e Sow BW, kg 208.4 216.2 221.8 2.5 Separation of the sows in 3 groups according to Sow BW lactation loss, kg 28.6 29.9 30.6 2.2 their BF on d 110 of gestation led to the following: 1) a–c Means within a row with different superscripts differ ( P < 0.01). low BF (LOW, n = 49), mean = 13.6 mm, SD = 1.6, d,e Means within a row with different superscripts differ ( P < 0.05). minimum = 9.9, maximum = 15.6, 2) medium BF 1 Maximum value. Translate basic science to industry innovation Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018 Backfat thickness in late-pregnant gilts 157 Table 3. Mammary gland composition on d 110 of Table 4. Correlation coefficients between BF on d 110 of gestation for sows with a low (LOW; mean of 14.2 gestation and measured mammary gland characteristics mm, n = 59), medium (MED; mean of 18.1 mm, n = Item Correlation Significance level ( P) 59), or high (HIGH; mean of 23.4 mm, n = 53) backfat Extraparenchymal tissue, g 0.59 < 0.0001 Parenchymal tissue, g 0.29 0.0001 Groups 1 DM, % 0.34 < 0.0001 Item LOW MED HIGH SEM d e f Fat , % 0.15 0.05 Extraparenchymal tissue, g 1125 1287 1709 47 d d e Fat, g 0.44 < 0.001 Parenchymal tissue, g 1257 1325 1533 59 a b b Protein , % –0.18 0.02 DM, % 37.3 39.9 40.9 0.53 2 a b b Protein, g 0.27 0.0004 Fat , % 60.8 64.9 64.8 0.94 a b c DNA , mg/g –0.14 0.06 Fat, g 280.3 338.4 395.4 13.4 2 a b b DNA, g total 0.24 0.001 Protein , % 36.4 32.7 32.4 0.85 d d e Protein/DNA 0.02 0.75 Protein, g 170.2 171.5 203.0 9.2 2 RNA , mg/g –0.29 0.0001 DNA , mg/g 9.55 8.91 9.18 0.33 d d e RNA, g total 0.23 0.003 DNA, g total 4.44 4.63 5.71 0.27 a a b RNA/DNA –0.07 0.38 Protein/DNA 41.2 38.7 35.3 1.4 2 a b b RNA , mg/g 8.74 7.69 7.36 0.20 Expressed on a DM basis. RNA, g total 4.07 4.03 4.53 0.20 d d e RNA/DNA 0.98 0.91 0.80 0.03 a–c relation (P < 0.0001) between total DNA and total Means within a row with different superscripts differ ( P < 0.01). d–f protein (r = 0.85) or total RNA (r = 0.85), as well as Means within a row with different superscripts differ ( P < 0.05). a negative association between percent protein and Maximum value. Expressed on a DM basis. percent fat (r = –0.97, P < 0.0001). DISCUSSION parenchymal tissue and more total protein and total DNA than MED and LOW sows (P < 0.05, Tukey adjusted). Through a comparative study using data sets from Sows with LOW BF had less percent DM, percent fat different populations, current findings provide a first and more percent protein and RNA concentration than look at the potential links between body condition of MED and HIGH sows (P < 0.01). When looking at the primiparous sows at the end of gestation, mammary comparison between the 2 extreme BF groups using the development at that same time and subsequent litter unadjusted probability, all measured mammary gland performance. The effect of body condition on mammary variables differed significantly ( P ≤ 0.01), except for gland development in primiparous sows at the end of total ARN for which there was a tendency (P < 0.10). gestation was previously demonstrated (Farmer et al., Correlations between BF on d 110 of gestation and 2016a,b) but animals were slaughtered and lactation the various mammary characteristics measured are performance could not be determined. The link between shown in Table 4. There were significant correlations body condition and reproductive performance was (P < 0.05) between BF and all measured variables in suggested by many authors (Yang et al., 1989; Tarrés mammary tissue, except for DNA concentration and et al., 2006; Schenkel et al., 2010; Lewis and Bunter, percent parenchymal fat. The greatest correlation was 2013; Rozeboom, 2015) but mammary development observed between BF and extra-parenchymal tissue was not investigated. The only report on the relation weight (P < 0.0001), followed by total parenchymal between body condition, mammary development in fat (P < 0.0001), percent DM (P < 0.0001) and late gestation and subsequent milk yield is that of then parenchymal weight (P = 0.0001). There Head and Williams (1995). However, that study was was a negative correlation between BF and RNA performed with only 7 sows per body condition group, concentration (P = 0.0001; Table 4) but total RNA was which is not adequate to study a factor as variable as positively correlated with BF (P = 0.003). Total DNA piglet growth. Nevertheless, it provided indications was also positively correlated with BF (P = 0.001). that such a line of study would be of interest. When looking at correlations among the mammary The relation between BF in late gestation and piglet gland characteristics on d 110 of gestation (data not growth rate observed in the current study corroborates shown), many variables were related. Of interest were findings of Rempel et al. (2015), who also used a large the strong positive correlations (P < 0.0001) between number of animals. Amdi et al. (2014) also demonstrated parenchymal weight and total protein (r = 0.94), total that maternal body condition at mating has an effect on fat (r = 0.79), total DNA (r = 0.83), and total RNA piglet growth rate; piglets born from gilts with a BF of 19 (r = 0.94) in parenchyma. There was also a positive mm had improved growth compared with piglets from Translate basic science to industry innovation Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018 158 Farmer et al. sows with 12 mm BF. This could have been partly due to development and increased litter BW gain in the the fact that fatter sows had 25% more milk fat than thin subsequent lactation. However, the exact cut-off point sows on d 21 of lactation (Amdi et al., 2013). The greater is not clear and will likely be affected by breed. When extraparenchymal weight reported in the current study a cut-off point of 18 mm BF was used to compare with increased BF was to be expected due to improved lactation performances of primiparous sows, and 20 body condition. The fact that total parenchymal fat also mm was used as cut-off point for multiparous sows, no increased with BF is of interest and this was due both differences in piglet growth rate were reported (Rekiel et to a greater fat percent and to a greater parenchymal al., 2015). However, the sample size was small (10 or 20 weight. To the contrary, the observed effects of BF on sows per group). Kim et al. (2015) compared numerous total protein and total DNA were solely due to greater small ranges of BF on d 109 of gestation and concluded parenchymal weight and not to increased parenchymal that, irrespective of parity, litter weight gain increases concentrations of these variables. In fact, percent protein quadratically with BF to reach an optimal breakpoint decreased with increasing BF. It therefore appears that between 17 and 21 mm, above which there is no further increasing parenchymal weight in late gestation should increase in BW gain. In fact, sows with very high BF be the major goal to improve milk yield and growth of (> 25 mm) had litters with smaller BW gain compared suckling piglets in the subsequent lactation. Yet, it is not with sows having 20 to 24 mm BF. Interestingly, when known if this effect would last in the following parities. using 17.6 mm as cut-off point (MED sows) to compare Rozeboom et al. (1996) showed that body reserves of parenchymal tissue composition, current results show gilts at first breeding impacts BW of mature sows but a greater fat percent and lower protein percent and has no long-term effect on BF. However, it is not known RNA concentrations in sows with greater BF. Previous if changes in mammary development of gilts related and current findings therefore indicate that it is more to their body condition in late gestation would still be detrimental for primiparous sows to be too lean than present in subsequent parities. It was demonstrated too fat at the end of gestation. This is in accordance that non-use of a teat in first lactation will decrease its with the recommendation from Schenkel et al. (2010) milk yield in second lactation (Farmer et al., 2012b) who stated the importance of achieving adequate body but the potential impact of mammary development in condition at parturition. It also corroborates the negative late gestation on lactation performance in subsequent correlation reported between BF around puberty and parities was never investigated. Lewis and Bunter (2013) longevity in sows (López-Serrano et al., 2000). Those suggested a lasting effect of fatness on productivity of last authors attributed this effect to decreased pregnancy sows over 5 parities, and an effect of BF at weaning on rate and greater occurrences of leg weakness syndrome subsequent litter size was also reported (Schenkel et al., but the potential impact on mammary development was 2010). Kim et al. (2016) further reported a long-term not studied. Overall, information from published and effect of BF with multiparous sows having a BF ≥ 20 current results indicate that either too low (< 15 mm) mm on d 107 of gestation showing increased growth of or too high (> 26 mm) a BF in late gestation may lead their piglets until weaning, and this over 2 consecutive to reduced piglet growth rate. Maintaining a moderate parities. Yet, further research is needed to determine if body condition therefore seems to be the best strategy. the effect of BF on mammary development would be present in subsequent parities. LITERATURE CITED The strong positive correlations between parenchymal Amdi, C., L. Giblin, T. Ryan, N. C. Stickland, and P.G. Lawlor. weight and total protein, total DNA and total RNA in 2014. Maternal backfat depth in gestating sows has a greater parenchyma suggest that a measure of parenchymal influence on offspring growth and carcass lean yield than maternal feed allocation during gestation. Animal 8:236–244. weight could be a good estimate of important mammary doi:10.1017/S1751731113002073 composition variables. It would be of interest to develop Amdi, C., L. Giblin, A. A. Hennessy, T. Ryan, C. Stanton, N. C. methods to estimate mammary parenchymal weight Stickland, and P. G. Lawlor. 2013. Feed allowance and mater- in live animals to assess their mammary development. nal backfat levels during gestation influence maternal corti - Balzani et al. (2015) developed a methodology to look sol levels, milk fat composition and offspring growth. J. Nutr. Sci. 2:e1. doi:10.1017/jns.2012.20 at udder conformation in sows but they did not attempt AOAC. 2005. Official Methods of Analysis international. 18th Ed. to find measures that would estimate the volume of Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem., Arlington, VA. mammary glands and they did not relate any measured Balzani, A., H. J. Cordell, and S. A. Edwards. 2015. Development variables with piglet growth. Such information would be of a methodology to describe udder conformation in sows. very pertinent for producers. Animal 10:432–439. doi:10.1017/S1751731115002347 Current results suggest that it is beneficial for Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC). 2009. CCAC Guidelines on: The care and use of farm animals in research, primiparous sows to have greater BF (i.e., 20 to 26 teaching and testing. CCAC, Ottawa, ON, Canada. mm) at the end of gestation to show optimal mammary Translate basic science to industry innovation Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018 Backfat thickness in late-pregnant gilts 159 Farmer, C., M. Comi, C. R. A. Duarte, M. Vignola, P. Charagu, Kim, J. S., X. Yang, D. Pangeni, and S. K. Baidoo. 2015. and M. F. Palin. 2016a. Differences in body condition of gilts Relationship between backfat thickness of sows during late that are maintained from mating to the end of gestation af- gestation and reproductive efficiency at different parities. fect mammary development. J. Anim. Sci. 94:3206–3214. Acta Agric. Scand. A Anim. Sci. 65:1–8. doi:10.2527/jas.2016-0531 Labarca, C., and K. Paigen. 1980. A simple, rapid, and sensi- Farmer, C., C. R. A. Duarte, M. Vignola, and M. F. Palin. 2016b. tive DNA assay procedure. Anal. Biochem. 102:344–352. Body condition of gilts at the end of gestation affects their doi:10.1016/0003-2697(80)90165-7 mammary development. J. Anim. Sci. 94:1897–1905. Lewis, C. R. G., and K. L. Bunter. 2013. A longitudinal study of weight doi:10.2527/jas.2016-0336 and fatness in sows from selection to parity five, using random re - Farmer, C., M. F. Palin, and Y. Martel-Kennes. 2012a. Impact of gression. J. Anim. Sci. 91:4598–4610. doi:10.2527/jas.2012-6016 diet deprivation and subsequent over-allowance during pre- López-Serrano, M., N. Reinsch, H. Looft, and E. Kalm. 2000. puberty. Part 1. Effects on growth performance, metabolite Genetic correlations of growth, backfat thickness and exterior status, and mammary gland development in gilts. J. Anim. with stayability in large white and landrace sows. Livest. Prod. Sci. 90:863–871. doi:10.2527/jas.2011-4131 Sci. 64:121–131. doi:10.1016/S0301-6226(99)00169-4 Farmer, C., M. F. Palin, and Y. Martel-Kennes. 2014. Impact of Rekiel, A., J. Wiecek, M. Batorska, J. Kulisiewicz, and G. Tokarska. diet deprivation and subsequent over-allowance during ges- 2015. Comparison of changes in fatness of sows in high preg- tation on mammary gland development and lactation perfor- nancy and at weaning and determination of their association with mance. J. Anim. Sci. 92:141–151. doi:10.2527/jas.2013-6558 reproduction results and rearing of piglets. J. Central European Farmer, C., M. F. Palin, P. K. Theil, M. T. Sorensen, and N. Agric. 16:410–422. doi:10.5513/JCEA01/16.4.1646 Devillers. 2012b. Milk production in sows from a teat in sec- Rempel, L. A., J. L. Vallet, C. A. Lents, and D. J. Nonneman. 2015. ond parity is influenced by whether it was suckled in first par - Measurements of body composition during late gestation and lac- ity. J. Anim. Sci. 90:3743–3751. doi:10.2527/jas.2012-5127 tation in first and second parity sows and its relationship to piglet Farmer, C., and D. Petitclerc. 2003. Specific window of prolactin production and post-weaning reproductive performance. Livest. inhibition in late gestation decreases mammary parenchy- Sci. 178:289–295. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2015.05.036 mal tissue development in gilts. J. Anim. Sci. 81:1823–1829. Rozeboom, D. W. 2015. Conditioning of the gilt for optimal reproduc- doi:10.2527/2003.8171823x tive performance. In: C. Farmer, editor, The gestating and lactat- Farmer, C., M. T. Sorensen, and D. Petitclerc. 2000. Inhibition ing sow. chap 1. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, of prolactin in the last trimester of gestation decreases mam- the Netherlands. p. 13–26. doi:10.3920/978-90-8686-803-2_1 mary gland development in gilts. J. Anim. Sci. 78:1303–1309. Rozeboom, D. W., J. E. Pettigrew, R. L. Moser, S. G. Cornelius, and doi:10.2527/2000.7851303x S. M. El Kandelgy. 1996. Influence of gilts age and body com - Head, R. H., N. W. Bruce, and I. H. Williams. 1991. More cells might position at first breeding on sow reproductive performance and lead to more milk. In: E. S. Batterham, editor, Manipulating pig longevity. J. Anim. Sci. 74:138–150. doi:10.2527/1996.741138x production III. Australasian Pig Sci. Assoc., Werribee, VIC. p. 76. Schenkel, A. C., M. L. Bernardi, F. P. Bortolozzo, and I. Wentz. Head, R. H., and I. H. Williams. 1991. Mammogenesis is influenced by 2010. Body reserve mobilization during lactation in first pregnancy nutrition. In: E. S. Batterham, editor, Manipulating pig parity sows and its effect on second litter size. Livest. Sci. production III. Australasian Pig Sci. Assoc., Werribee, VIC. p. 33. 132:165–172. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2010.06.002 Head, R. H., and I. H. Williams. 1995. Potential milk production in gilts. Tarrés, J., J. Tibau, J. Piedrafita, E. Fàbrega, and J. Reixach. 2006. In: D. P. Hennessy and P. D. Cranwell, editors, Manipulating pig Factors affecting longevity in maternal Duroc swine lines. production V. Australasian Pig Sci. Assoc., Werribee, VIC. p. 134. Livest. Sci. 100:121–131. doi:10.1016/j.livprodsci.2005.08.007 Kim, K. H., A. Hosseindoust, S. L. Ingale, S. H. Lee, H. S. Noh, Y. Volkin, E., and W. E. Cohn. 1954. Estimation of nucleic acids. H. Choi, S. M. Jeon, Y. H. Kim, and B. J. Chae. 2016. Effects of Methods Biochem. Anal. 1:287–305. gestational housing on reproductive performance and behavior Yang, H., P. R. Eastham, P. Phillips, and C. T. Whittemore. 1989. of sows with different backfat thickness. Asian-australas. J. Reproductive performance, body weight and body condition of Anim. Sci. 29:142–148. doi:10.5713/ajas.14.0973 breeding sows with differing body fatness at parturition, differ - ing nutrition during lactation and differing litter size. Anim. Prod. 48:181–201. doi:10.1017/S0003356100003901 Translate basic science to industry innovation Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/tas/article-abstract/1/2/154/4636612 by Ed 'DeepDyve' Gillespie user on 10 April 2018

Journal

Translational Animal ScienceOxford University Press

Published: Apr 1, 2017

There are no references for this article.