Measuring changes in physical size and predicting weight of sows during gestation

Animal

Volumn 1, Issue 9, 2007, Pages 1335-1343

  O'Connell, M K ^a   Lynch, P B ^a   Bertholot, S ^b   Verlait, F ^b   Lawlor, P G ^a  

^a TEAGASC   (Ireland)

^b ENITA de Bordeaux   (France)

Author keywords

Gestation; Morphometry; Size; Sows; Weight

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BODY SIZE; BODY WEIGHT; CONTROLLED STUDY; GESTATION PERIOD; MORPHOMETRICS; NONHUMAN; PARITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOW (SWINE); ULTRASOUND;

EID: 34948879634     PISSN: 17517311     EISSN: 1751732X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1751731107000559     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Anil L, Anil SS and Deen J 2002. Evaluation of the relationship between injuries and size of gestation stalls relative to size of sows. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 221, 834-836.
2. Anil L, Bhend KMG, Baidoo SK, Morrison R and Deen J 2003. Comparison of injuries in sows housed in gestation stalls v. group pens with electronic sow feeders. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 223, 1334-1338.
3. Baxter S 1984. Space and place. In Intensive pig production: environmental management and design (ed. S Baxter), pp. 210-254. Granada Publishing Ltd, London.
4. Doeschl-Wilson AB, Whittemore CT, Knap PW and Schofield CP 2004. Using visual image analysis to describe pig growth in terms of size and shape. Animal Science 79, 415-427.
5. European Community 2003. Welfare of Calves and Pigs, Regulations 2003 (SI No 48 of 2003). Retrieved May 9, 2007, from http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ ZZSI48Y2003.html
6. Harris MJ, Pajor EA, Sorrells AD, Eicher SD, Richert BT and Marchant-Forde JN 2006. Effects of stall or small group gestation housing on the production, health and behaviour of gilts. Livestock Science 102, 171-179.
7. Iwasawa T, Young MG, Keegan TP, Tokach MD, Dritz SS, Goodband RD, DeRouchey JM and Nelssen JL 2004. Comparison of hearth girth or flank-to-flank measurements for predicting sow weight. Swine Day 2004 Proceedings, Kansas State University, pp. 17-22.
8. McGlone JJ, Vines B, Rudine AC and DuBois P 2004. The physical size of gestating sows. Journal of Animal Science 82, 2421-2427.
9. Noblet J, Dourmad JY and Etienne M 1990. Energy utilization in pregnant and lactating sows: modelling of energy requirements. Journal of Animal Science 68, 562-572.
10. Petherick JC 1983. A note on allometric relationships in Large White x Landrace pigs. Animal Production 36, 497-500.
11. Petherick JC and Baxter SH 1981. Modelling the static spatial requirements of livestock. In Proceedings of the CIGR section II seminar: modelling, design and evaluation of agricultural buildings (ed. JAD MacCormack), pp. 75-82. Scottish Farm Buildings Investigation Unit, Bucksburn, Aberdeen.
12. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute 2006. User's guide, version 9.1: statistics. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.
13. Verstegen MWA, Vergahen JMF and Den Hartog LA 1987. Energy requirements of pigs during pregnancy: a review. Livestock Production Science 16, 75-89.
14. Young M and Aherne F 2005. Monitoring and maintaining sow condition. Advances in Pork Production 16, 299-313.
15. Young MG, Tokach MD, Aherne FX, Main RG, Dritz SS, Goodband RD and Nelssen JL 2005. Effect of sow parity and weight at service on target maternal weight and energy for gain in gestation. Journal of Animal Science 83, 255-261.
16. Zurbrigg K 2006. Sow shoulder lesions: risk factors and treatment effects on an Ontario farm. Journal of Animal Science 84, 2509-2514.