Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-06-07T02:53:37.631Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ‘teat order’ of suckling pigs: 3. Relation to competition within litters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. Fraser ,
B. K. Thompson ,
D. K. Ferguson  and
R. L. Darroch
D. Fraser
Affiliation:
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Fish and Wildlife Research Branch, Box 50, Maple, Ontario LOJ 1E0, Canada
B. K. Thompson
Affiliation:
Statistical Research Section, Engineering and Statistical Research Institute, Agriculture Canada, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5, Canada
D. K. Ferguson
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, Scotland
R. L. Darroch
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, Scotland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Piglets in litters, paired according to farrowing date, were redistributed during the first day after birth according to two schemes. In scheme AC–BD, one sow of the pair received the heaviest and the third heaviest quarters of the combined litters (based on weight post partum), while the other sow received the second heaviest and the lightest quarters. In scheme AB–CD, one sow received the heavier half, and the other the lighter half of the piglets. After 3 weeks under scheme AB–CD, the weight difference between the second and third quarters had become reversed, while under scheme AC–BD the difference was preserved. There was no evidence of a corresponding interaction in the selection of anterior or posterior teats. The rank correlation of the piglets' initial weight and suckling position was low for most sows. No marked differences were observed between fostered and unfostered piglets in the weight measures or suckling position. It is concluded that the growth of the piglets was influenced by the relative size of their litter-mates after redistribution, but that little of the effect could be explained by competition for the anterior teats.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 92 , Issue 2 , April 1979 , pp. 257 - 261
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

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.)

References

Barber, R. S., Braude, R. & Mitchell, K. G. (1955). Studies on milk production of Large White pigs. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 46, 97–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, D. F. & Willham, R. L. (1962). Systematic fostering experiments in swine. Journal of Animal Science 21, 366–368.Google Scholar
Donald, H. P. (1939). The relative importance of sow and litter during the growth of suckling pigs: a comparison of fostered with normally reared pigs. Empire Journal of Experimental Agriculture 7, 32–42.Google Scholar
England, D. C., Bertun, P. L., Chapman, V. M. & Miller, J. C. (1961). Nursing position of baby pigs in relation to birth weight. Journal of Animal Science 20, 682 A.Google Scholar
Fraser, D. (1975). The ‘teat order’ of suckling pigs 2. Fighting during suckling and the effects of clipping the eye teeth. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 84, 393–399.Google Scholar
Fraser, D. & Jones, R. M. (1975). The ‘teat order’ of suckling pigs. 1. Relation to birth weight and subsequent growth. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 84, 387–391.Google Scholar
Lodge, G. A. & Pratt, P. D. (1963). Birth weight and subsequent growth of suckled pigs. Animal Production 5, 225.Google Scholar
McBride, G., James, J. W. & Wyeth, G. S. F. (1965). Social behaviour of domestic animals. VII. Variation in weaning weightin pigs. Animal Production 7, 67–74.Google Scholar
Scheel, D. E., Graves, H. B. & Sherritt, G. W. (1977). Nursing order, social dominance and growth in swine. Journal of Animal Science 45, 219–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, A. A. (1965). Studies of the growth and development of the pig in its immediate post-natal life. Pig Industry Development Authority report.Google Scholar
Wyeth, G. S. F. & McBride, G. (1964). Social behaviour of domestic animals. V. A note on sucking behaviour in young pigs. Animal Production 6, 245–247.Google Scholar