 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
Bradley Wolter(l) and
Dr. Mike Ellis |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
Wean-to-Finish Update: Sorting Out Double-Filling
Does it make sense to overfill wean-to-finish
pens early in the feeding period? The obvious benefits of extra
throughput and lower facility cost are enticing. The practice may
also help smooth out pig flow and lower nursery phase overhead,
according to experienced advisors like Dr. Tim Loula and his colleagues
at the Swine Vet Center in St. Peter, MN. But double-filling is
not without challenges because more labor is needed and it can be
difficult to spot problems and treat sick animals. Furthermore,
two recent research studies point out that performance may not be
equal between double-filled and single-filled barns.
Research conducted in 2000 at the University of
Nebraska demonstrated that double-stocked pigs in wean-to-finish
pens (3.75 sq. ft./pig (.325 sq. m/pig) were roughly four pounds
lighter at eight weeks than pigs fed in single-stocked (7.5 sq.
ft./pig (.650 sq. m/pig) wean-to-finish pens. See Chart
A.
Recent research at the University of Illinois
also found a significant performance difference. This study demonstrated
that double-filled pigs weighed about 6.5 pounds (2.9 kg) less at
ten weeks and had lower average daily gains, than their single-filled
counterparts. See Charts B and
C.
The Nebraska and the Illinois studies suggest
there are no differences in performance between the groups after
half the pigs are moved. In the Illinois study, pigs that were double-stocked
arrived at a market weight of 250 pounds (114 kg) about two days
later (including the half that stayed in the same pen and the half
that moved) than the single-stocked pigs. "They didn't grow any
faster (after being moved)," says Dr. Mike Ellis, the lead researcher
in the project. "The double-stocked pigs improved slightly in feed
efficiency," says Dr. Ellis, but adds further research will be needed
to determine whether the feed efficiency change is due to chance
or a real effect. See Chart D.
Consulting veterinarian Dr. Joe Connor, who has
been advising producers on managing wean-to-finish systems since
the mid-1990s, says he recommends producers stick with single-filling
unless traditional finishers are available for placing pigs into
after the first eight weeks. Dr. Connor, of the Carthage (IL) Veterinary
Service, Ltd., indicates that death loss during the first eight
weeks past entry in double-filled, wean-to-finish buildings is twice
what it is in single-filled buildings.
As a compromise, Dr. Connor often advises overfilling
at 150 percent capacity. "If producers are normally populating at
a rate of 25 pigs per pen, increase to 37 pigs," says Dr. Connor.
He recommends starting pigs by feeding them multiple times per day
on feed mats as well as in the feeder. Increase the warm zone by
placing heat lamps higher than usual or installing additional lamps.
Dr. Connor says producers should expect a reduction in performance
when pigs reach the size that space is limiting.
Swine veterinary consultants Drs. Tim Loula, Paul
Yeske and Ross Kiehne at the Swine Vet Center have many clients
who double-fill into wean-to-finish facilities. The consultants
say the first ten days following entry are critical for getting
pigs started in over-filled barns. They suggest using two mats or
one oversized mat for hand-feeding.
Perhaps the greatest benefit of double-filling
wean-to-finish barns is that it offers producers more options for
pig flow. The Swine Vet Center consultants say producers can play
a bit with timing of when to move pigs out of the overfilled pens,
which can help in tight flow patterns. In addition, pens can be
filled at various capacities (any increment between 100 and 200
percent) to match pig source inventories.
But there may be some flow problems that are exacerbated
by overfilling. "It may take longer to fill the site, or it may
require more sources to fill the site quickly," offers Drs. Loula,
Yeske and Kiehne. Another worry is that some of the advantage of
a wean-to-finish system gets diminished when some pigs are moved
during the feeding period. They say groups and socialization are
usually disrupted because of the necessary regrouping to even out
pig size within the pens.
Dekalb, IL, producer Bob Johnson has found a solution
to concerns about disrupting group integrity. Two years ago he and
his partner, Dr. Steve Pate, designed a wean-to-finish barn for
double-filling without the need for mixing up or dividing groups.
The design created rooms that hold either 500 weaned pigs or 250
finisher pigs. When the rooms are filled, weaned pigs are sorted
by sex into alternate pens. After 8 to 12 weeks, pigs in every other
pen are moved (all the gilts or all the barrows) into another room.
"The remaining groups are allowed access to neighboring pens by
opening a divider gate," says Bob. "They have double the space with
no mixing of groups." The system has worked well, according to Johnson,
who says he and Pate are convinced that mixing of groups is something
to be avoided to maintain health and so not to disturb the social
environment. He says the divider gates also help when working with
pigs after they are single-stocked.
Another recent Illinois study looked at whether
adding feeder space in double-stocked pens increases pig performance.
Dr. Ellis' graduate student research assistant, Bradley Wolter,
presented those findings along with the stocking rate findings at
this past summer's annual meeting of the American Society of Animal
Scientists. The researchers set up the trial with two treatment
groups of double-stocked pigs. The "control" group of pigs had one
six-hole Farmweld dry feeder that provided .79 inches (2 cm) trough
space/pig and the "double" group had two six-hole Farmweld feeders
or 1.57 inches (4 cm) trough space/pig. Group size for all pens
was 108 pigs with a space allotment of 3.75 sq. feet (.30 sq. m)
/pig.
The Illinois researchers found feeder space did
impact performance of double-filled pigs during the first eight
weeks after weaning. While limited feeder space did not lower performance
during the first six weeks of the trial, it did during weeks seven
and eight. During those weeks, pigs that had increased feeder space
had a five percent increase in growth. See Chart
E.
The practice of double-stocking wean-to-finish
barns is something people will continue to watch closely. Thanks
to researchers such as those at the University of Illinois and the
University of Nebraska, plus the experience of consultants such
as veterinarians and others, producers will be better able to determine
if the practice benefits their particular system.
|
KEY TO ALL CHARTS
|
|
DS = Double-Stocked
SS = Single-Stocked
DS-S = Double-Stocked, wean-to-finish.
Pigs remaining in same pen
throughout trial.
DS-M = Double-Stocked, wean-to-finish.
Pigs moved to new pen.
CV = Co-efficient of variation of
pig bodyweight within a pen.
|
CHART A
IMPACT OF WEAN-TO-FINISH REGIMEN ON PIG PERFORMANCE
| |
SS
|
DS
|
|
| No.
pens |
12
|
12
|
|
| Weaning
wt. lb. |
11.2
(5.1 kg)
|
11.2
(5.1 kg)
|
|
| 56
day wt. lb. |
63.1
(28.7 kg)
|
59.2
(26.9 kg)
|
|
| Avg.
Daily Gain, lb. |
.92
(.42 kg)
|
.86
(.39 kg)
|
|
| Avg.
Daily Intake, lb. |
1.53
(.70 kg)
|
1.42
(.65 kg)
|
|
| Feed:Gain |
1.66
|
1.66
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
SS
|
DS-S
|
DS-M
|
Avg. weight when first pigs were
sold @250 lbs. (113.6 kg) |
224.8
(102.2 kg)
|
217.3
(98.8 kg)
|
220.5
(100.23 kg)
|
| Ave.
Daily Gain |
1.88
(.85 kg)
|
1.88
(.85 kg)
|
1.85
(.84 kg)
|
| Ave.
Daily Feed |
4.91
(2.23 kg)
|
4.88
(2.22 kg)
|
4.88
(2.22 kg)
|
| Feed:Gain |
2.61
|
2.61
|
2.60
|
| University of Nebraska,
2000 |
|
CHART B
EFFECT OF STOCKING RATE ON BODYWEIGHT
AT START OF TEST AND END OF 10 WEEKS
| |
STOCKING RATE
|
| ITEM |
SS |
DS |
| WEIGHT (lb.) |
|
|
| Start of Test |
12.76
(5.8 kg) |
12.98
(5.9 kg) |
| End of Week 10a |
93.72
(42.6 kg) |
87.34
(39.7 kg) |
| CV % |
|
|
| Start of Test |
13 |
12.9 |
| End of Week 10a |
11.5 |
12.3 |
| aSignificant
difference between stocking rate treatments (p<0.01). |
| University of Illinois,
2001 |
|
CHART C
EFFECT OF STOCKING RATE ON PIG PERFORMANCE
FROM START OF TEST TO END OF 10 WEEKS
| |
STOCKING RATE
|
| ITEM |
SS |
DS |
| GROWTH
PERFORMANCE |
| ADG, lba |
1.20
(545 g) |
1.11
(503 g) |
| ADFI, lba |
2.08
(942 g) |
1.94
(878 g) |
| Feed:gain |
1.75 |
1.72 |
| aSignificant
difference between stocking rate treatments (p<0.01). |
| University of Illinois,
2001 |
|
CHART D
EFFECT OF STOCKING RATE ON PIG PERFORMANCE
FROM WEEK 11 TO END OF TEST
| |
STOCKING RATE/SUBSEQUENT PEN LOCATION
|
| ITEM |
SS |
DS-S |
DS-M |
| GROWTH PERFORMANCE |
|
|
|
| ADG, lb |
1.75
(792 g) |
1.79
(810 g) |
1.76
(799 g) |
| ADFI, lb |
5.07
(2300 g) |
5.04
(2285 g) |
4.95
(2246 g) |
| Feed:gaina |
2.94 |
2.94 |
2.78 |
| Days on testa |
157 |
159 |
159 |
| aSignificant
difference between stocking rate treatments (p<0.01). |
| University of Illinois,
2001 |
|
CHART E
EFFECT OF FEEDER TROUGH SPACE ON PIG PERFORMANCE
| |
FEEDER
TROUGH SPACE |
| |
CONTROL |
DOUBLE |
| ITEM |
.79 inches (2 cm)/pig) |
1.57 inches (4 cm)/pig |
| WEIGHT (lb.) |
|
|
| Start of Test |
11.9
(5.4 kg) |
11.9
(5.4 kg) |
| End of 8 Weeksa |
68.1
(30.9 kg) |
69.9
(31.7 kg) |
| ADG (lb.) |
|
|
| Start through 6 weeks |
.87
(395 g) |
.88
(398 g) |
| Weeks 7 and 8a |
1.40
(633 g) |
1.48
(669 g) |
| FEED:GAIN |
|
|
| Start through 6 weeks |
1.72 |
1.67 |
| Weeks 7 and 8 |
1.92 |
1.89 |
| aSignificant
difference between feeder space treatments (p<0.01). |
| University of Illinois,
2001 |
|
|