Water Quality and Pig Performance
The quality of surface and groundwater for all livestock is affected by the water cycle and by the nature of the aquifer supplying the water. The Water Cycle describes the events by which water is circulated between atmosphere, land and oceans. Some water from the water table will eventually filter back into oceans, streams and rivers. Surface Water quality is affected by materials in run-off from rain and from materials in the water table. Groundwater quality depends on the type of aquifer supplying the well with water; thus water from aquifers in limestone bedrock will likely contain high levels of calcium and magnesium. Bacterial analysis of water is done by inoculating nutrient plates with water samples and incubating the plates for a period of time. The number of fecal coliform counts in water which will affect pig performance is unknown; however, since fecal coliform bacteria indicate a pollution problem, all contaminated drinking water should be disinfected and the source of the pollution stopped. You can have your water tested free of charge only if your water may contain organisms which could be a threat to human or animal health: the Health Unit will not do routine bacterial testing. The amount of materials in water which can be consumed by pigs without harm depends on: the amount of the same materials in feeds; the pigs’ daily water requirement; the length of time the pigs are given the water; the pig’s age and condition and the presence of interactive materials in both feeds and water. Surface water often contains less than 300 mg/l of TDS. Some Ontario groundwater and industrial waters contain high levels of TDS. TDS should not exceed 3000 mg/l according to Canadian guidelines. The resulting reduction in water volume supplied to the pig can decrease performance. Greater concentrations may be tolerated depending on pig age, presence of other stresses, and the type of sulfate salt in the water. Pig performance may be affected by high-sulfate waters. The recommended maximum nitrate and nitrite levels of water are conservative since several studies have shown that pigs can tolerate 1320 mg/l nitrates and 165 mg/l nitrites without loss of health, growth rate or reproductive performance. If the water quality problem is known to be a natural characteristic of the aquifer, the producer may be referred to a private lab or treatment consultant.
How to Manage Difficult Farrowings
How to …. manage difficult farrowings. Difficult farrowings are not very common in present swine production systems. The sow will need help in less than 1% of all farrowings. Sows about to farrow should be observed approximately every 30 to 60 minutes. Move sows to farrowing quarters from 1 to 5 days prior to the expected farrowing date. The first pig is born About half of the pigs are presented head first and about half are presented tail first. The sow may exhibit mild straining More pigs are born approximately 15 minutes apart The total time for the delivery of the entire litter varies with litter size but the process usally takes less than 2.5 hours. The placenta, membranes surrounding the fetus, is usually delivered 2-4 hours after the last pig; however portions of the placenta may be delivered during the farrowing period You should not observe large volumes of discharge. Gestation exceeding 116 days Off feed Blood tinged fluid and meconium are discharged without signs of straining Straining without delivery of pigs The time between the birth of pigs exceeds one hour, and the sow still has a full abdomen Foul smelling, brown /gray discharge Reddening of the sow’s eyes Exhaustion after prolonged labor Sow distress: rapid breathing, weakness, inability to rise. Familiarize yourself with the basic anatomy of the reproductive tract Thoroughly clean the sow’s rectal and vaginal area The manager’s fingernails should be cut short The manager’s arm should be washed with soap and water, gloved, and lubricated The hand should be cupped in the shape of a cone, the lips of the vulva are parted, and the hand gently inserted into the birth canal If the sow is not ready to farrow the forward part of the canal will be closed The bony pelvis can be felt below and at the side of the hand The hand can be moved forward through the pelvis and into the uterus which slopes downward and divides into 2 sides. The birth canal should be examined for evidence of damage The causes of delayed farrowing should be determined and corrected if possible. Manual intervention: be certain that the sow is dilated and nothing is blocking the birth canal. Deliver any pigs within reach- grasp the pig by the snout or use a snare. Manual intervention: Grasp head, lower jaw, or feet to deliver one pig at a time. Remove pigs until sow is quiet and finished farrowing.
Effect of dietary inclusion of zeolite on performance and carcass quality of grower-finisher pigs
Effect of dietary inclusion of zeolite on performance and carcass quality of grower-finisher pigs H F Defang and A A Nikishov* Faculty of Agronomy and Agricultural Sciences, Department of Animal Production – University of Dschang P.O. Box 222, Dcshang – Cameroon* Russian Peoples’ Friendship University. Some researchers have observed no response on growth or an adverse effect when using zeolite as feed additive. T0 – control diet without zeolite, T1, T2, T3 – experimental diets with 3, 4 and 5% zeolite respectively. Zeolite supplementation had some beneficial effect on the studied parameters. The exact functions of the zeolite in dietary phenomena have not been well understood and await serious biological and chemical investigation. According to the increase in body weight and improved FCR in zeolite fed animals is due to the ability of zeolite to bound free ammonia in the gastro-intestinal track of the animal, thereby preventing its build-up to toxic level in the system. The discrepancies in carcass quality and growth performance could be related to zeolite purity, geographical source, particle size, supplementation levels used in the diets, health status and range of the treated animals. Further, the dietary and environmental conditions under which zeolite is administered to the animals are factors which can contribute to variation in observed result as explained by Mumpton and Fishman, Pond and Yen and Pond et al. Pigs supplemented 3, 4 and 5% zeolite diet had less but comparable lean and abdominal fat compared to the control. Zeolite supplementation had a lower effect on fat buildup in the body of growing pigs. From the feed trial investigated, it can be concluded that supplementing standard grower-finisher pig diets with Russian zeolite at the 4% inclusion level shows some potential for improving nutrient utilization in swine with significant carcass yield thus making zeolite a suitable feed additive for nutrient reduction. The effect of different levels of zeolite on the performance of growing pigs: in Occurrence, propertied and utilixation of natural zeolites. Effect of synthetic zeolite and natural zeolite on laying hens. Pearson G, Smith W C and Fox J M 1985 Influence of dietary zeolite on pig performance over the liveweight range 25-87 kg. Effect of dietary inclusion of zeolite on performance and protein metabolism of young pigs.