Ron Ketchem - An Overview of Performance Challenges We Are Facing Today

“information solutions” for the swine industry © 2007, all rights reserved
1
“An overview of sow performance-
challenges we are facing today”
Mo Pork Expo 2-11-2020
Presenter: Ron Ketchem
Swine Management Services, LLC

2
What type data makes up the SMS data base?
• Data from most major Genetic Companies
• Farms in US, Canada, Australia, and Latin America
• Started in 2005
• Farms size 125 to 11,000+ sows
• 800+ Farms with 1.6+ million sows (average 1,700+ sows)
• Mostly independent pork producers
• Can use data from 26 different sow record programs
• Genetic Companies with 50+ farms
• Service agreement on privacy of data
• Farm Information sheet with attributes of farm

3
SMS Performance data
52 weeks average-2018
Top
90-100 70-90 All Farms
Bottom
0-30
Number of farms 79 157 785 235
Mated females 177,149 265,378 1,479,565 466,586
Pigs weaned / mf / yr 31.61 29.22 26.48 22.66
Total Born/Mated Female/YR 15.71 15.24 14.80 14.33
Litters / mated female / year 2.45 2.43 2.34 2.20
Wean to 1st service interval 5.43 5.94 6.68 7.71
Percent repeat services % 2.3 3.9 9.8 6.4
Farrowing rate % 89.7 88.1 85.0 80.0
Multiple Matings % 91.1 86.3 85.8 84.7
Gilt Farrowing Rate % 90.2 88.6 79.0 84.3
Replacement Rate % 61.5 56.3 59.9 65.5
Female Death Loss % 8.2 8.4 10.0 12.1
SMS Performance data 52 weeks average
through July 15, 2019

4
SMS Performance data
52 weeks average-2018
Top
90-100 70-90 All Farms
Bottom
0-30
Number of farms 79 157 785 235
Total pigs born / female farrow 177,149 265,378 1,479,565 466,586
P1 Total pigs born / Fe farrow 14.80 14.34 13.86 13.41
P1+ P2+P3 Total born 46.44 45.00 43.80 42.48
Pigs born live / female farrow 14.45 13.85 13.35 12.70
Pigs weaned / female farrow 12.71 12.01 11.29 10.33
Piglet survival % 84.10 80.50 78.30 74.20
Stillborn % 5.40 6.30 6.80 7.90
Pre-weaning Mortality % 10.50 13.20 14.80 18.00
Average gestation length 116.0 115.9 115.9 116.0
Average age at weaning 20.90 20.66 20.92 21.30
Average parity 2.39 2.50 2.59 2.61
SMS Performance data 52 weeks average
through July 15, 2019 Summary

Key numbers to look for?
5
Sow death loss: 1% = 0.25 pigs
Farrowing rate: 1% = 0.34 pigs
Piglet Survival: 1% = 0.36 pigs
If you want to improve pigs weaned / mated female / year by 1
pigs?
-Sow death loss: 4% x 0.25 pigs = 1 pig
-Farrowing rate: 3% = 1.02 pigs
-Piglet survival: 3% = 1.08 pigs

6
14.5 Year Trend line In the SMS Data Set
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Diff
10
%
24.7 25. 7 26.2 26.8 27.3 27.8 28.6 29.3 30.2 30.47 30.8 31.3 31.3 31.1 31.6 +6.34
All 21.3 21.9 22.2 22.9 23.3 23.8 24.3 24.8 25.3 25.2 25.0 25.3 26.4 26.1 26.5 +4.82
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
01/15/0507/15/0501/15/0607/15/0601/15/0707/15/0701/15/0807/15/0801/16/0907/17/0901/22/1007/16/1001/07/1107/02/1112/31/1106/29/1212/22/1206/15/1312/28/1306/21/1401/10/1507/24/1501/30/1607/11/1601/20/1707/08/1701/15/1807/15/1801/15/1907/15/19
Pigs Weaned / Mated Female / Year
Top 10% ALL Linear (Top 10%) Linear (ALL)

“information solutions” for the swine industry © 2014, all rights reserved 7
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Diff
10% 30.8 32.8 32.5 33.4 33.83
3
34.68 35.7 36.2 36.2 36.8 37.5 38.1 38.7 38.4 38.6 +7.7
All 27.9 28.6 28.6 29.5 30.1 30.7 31.5 31.8 32.6 32.9 32.9 33.1 34.4 34.2 34.6 +6.6
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
01/15/0507/15/0501/15/0607/15/0601/15/0707/15/0701/15/0807/15/0801/16/0907/17/0901/22/1007/16/1001/07/1107/02/1112/31/1106/29/1212/22/1206/15/1312/28/1306/21/1401/10/1507/24/1501/30/1607/11/1601/20/1707/08/1701/15/1807/15/1801/15/1907/15/19
Total Born / Mated Female / Year

n8
52 Weeks Distribution in SMS Data Set

Female death loss % & Non-compete
9

10
200
5
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Diff
10
%
NA 5.9 6.6 7.4 7.2 6.9 6.3 5.8 6.1 5.8 5.9 7.0 6.8 8.3 8.1 2.4
All NA 9.2 8.6 7.9 7.6 7.2 7.6 7.7 7.6 7.9 8.6 10.2 9.4 10.0 10.0 0.8
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
11%
12%
01/15/0507/15/0501/15/0607/15/0601/15/0707/15/0701/15/0807/15/0801/16/0907/17/0901/22/1007/16/1001/07/1107/02/1112/31/1106/29/1212/22/1206/15/1312/28/1306/21/1401/10/1507/24/1501/30/1607/11/1601/20/1707/08/1701/15/1807/15/1801/15/1907/15/19
Female Death Loss

11
23% of sow farms had female death loss of 12+%
For each 1% change in female death loss pigs weaned per
mated female changes by 0.25 pigs. Example: 4% = 1
pig per sow

12
Breakout of SMS Data Set by Size of Farms

13
Culling and Death loss % by Parity

14
% of Total Death loss – 37 Farms
Sow Death loss: 30% days 115-123 ( 9 days)

15
Breakout of SMS Data-3 years 17 farms
Reason-
Individual farms
Deaths-55 reasons
8275 hd.
Destroyed-33
reasons
1660 hd.
Combined
Total-9935 hd.
Culls-65
reasons
48,675 hd.
Total-
58,610
hd.
# % # % # % # % %
Other, Unknown 2411 29.1 119 7.17 2530 25.5 911 1.87 5.87
Prolapses 717 8.66 175 10.5 892 8.98 248 0.50 1.95
Downer 1258 15.2 466 30.1 1724 17.4 32 0.07 3.00
Difficult Farrow 1253 15.1 47 2.83 1300 13.1 271 0.56 2.68
Lame/injury 625 7.55 655 39.5 1280 19.3 2896 5.95 7.12
Heart attack 341 4.12 - 0.00 341 3.43 4 0.01 0.59
Retained pig 196 2.37 10 0.60 206 2.07 92 0.19 0.51
Body Condition 117 1.41 72 4.34 189 1.90 910 1.87 1.88
PRRS 167 2.02 35 2.10 202 2.03 1 0.01 0.35
Age 27 0.33 3 0.18 30 0.30 12875 26.5 22.0
Did not conceive 10 0.12 4 0.24 14 0.14 7399 15.2 12.6
No heat 84 1.00 - 0.00 84 0.85 5041 10.4 8.74
Misc(all others) 1080 13.1 74 4.46 1154 11.6 17995 36.9 32.7

n1
6
Toe and Dew Claw Issues

17
Summary Female Death Loss?
No standardization of reasons for female removals so hard to
analyze and compare farms
Top 10% of farms by size have lower female death loss
Sow farms 2000-3999 have higher female culling and death loss
Data shows higher deaths and culls for younger parity
females (0-2)
A high % of females culls and deaths are unknown
Industry seeing increase in prolapses
Data showing increase in females being culled and
euthanized due to feet and leg injury and structural
unsoundness

Gilt Selection and Development

20
Selecting for feet, toe, dew
claws, leg structure, and
underline (functional teats)

Sow functional teat number impacts piglet
performance
NC State University: Wiegert, Earnhardt & Knauer NHF 3-8-2018 59 P2 F1 females:
TB: 13.8 pigs, BW 1.32 kg (2.91 lb). PS: 80.05, TTN: 15.03 + 1.1, SFTN: 14.83 teats.
Sow Functional Teat Number
Trait < 14 15 16 17 P-value
Piglet colostrum intake g (oz) 422(14.8) 452(15.9) 498(17.4) 565(19.9) <0.01
Sow colostrum production kg (lb) 5.1(11.2) 5.5(12.1) 6.3(13.9) 7.2(15.9) <0.01
Piglet survival to weaning % 76.5% 81.0% 84.0% 90.0% <0.05
Number of pigs weaned/litter 10.3 10.3 11.2 12.1 0.10
Average piglet weaning wt, kg (lb) 6.0(13.2) 5.9(13.0) 6.2(12.7) 6.5(14.3) 0.41
Total litter weaning wt, kg (lb) 61.2(135) 61.4(135) 70.1(155) 78.1(172) <0.05

Wean to 1st service is a key driver!

23
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Diff
10% NA 6.01 5.97 6.08 6.31 6.34 6.09 5.63 5.42 5.24 5.33 5.33 5.41 5.59 5.44 -0.42
All NA 6.93 7.01 6.97 7.09 7.06 6.99 6.77 6.71 6.82 6.78 6.92 6.66 6.79 6.68 -0.18
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
01/15/05
07/15/05
01/15/06
07/15/06
01/15/07
07/15/07
01/15/08
07/15/08
01/16/09
07/17/09
01/22/10
07/16/10
01/07/11
07/02/11
12/31/11
06/29/12
12/22/12
06/15/13
12/28/13
06/21/14
01/10/15
07/24/15
01/30/16
07/11/16
01/20/17
07/08/17
01/15/18
07/15/18
01/15/19
07/15/19
Wean 1st Serve Interval

24

25
Wean to 1st Service Interval Sorted by P1
Farms
Total Born
/ Mated
Female /
Year
Parity
1
Parity
2
Parity
3
Parity
4
Parity
5
Parity
6
Parity
7
All
<=5 13 35.00 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.8 4.7 4.4 4.7
<=6 36 34.54 5.6 5.2 5.1 4.9 5.0 4.8 5.0 5.1
<=7 91 33.87 6.6 5.7 5.6 5.3 5.2 5.1 5.1 5.7
<=8 86 33.41 7.4 6.1 5.8 5.7 5.6 5.4 5.3 6.1
<=9 83 32.41 8.6 6.6 6.3 6.2 6.0 6.1 6.1 6.7
<=10 74 31.98 9.5 6.9 6.5 6.3 6.2 5.8 5.6 7.0
<=11 47 32.04 10.5 7.0 6.7 6.3 6.1 6.0 5.8 7.2
>11 83 31.88 13.2 8.1 7.5 7.1 6.9 6.5 6.5 8.5
All 513 32.87 8.8 6.5 6.2 6.0 5.9 5.7 5.7 6.6
NHF WP 2-9-15: 513 Farms 1,011,545 females sorted by Wean 1st service for P1 females
Gilt Performance Dictate Farm Performance

26
Options for feeding in lactation?

Farrowing Rate %
27

28
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Diff
10% 85.9 86.9 88.0 87.9 88.4 88.5 90.2 90.4 90.7 89.7 90.3 91.0 91.1 90.0 89.8 +4.1
All 79.7 81.1 82.5 82.5 83.0 84.0 84.9 85.1 85.5 85.6 85.1 84.6 85.9 84.9 85.0 +5.2
78%
80%
82%
84%
86%
88%
90%
92%
94%
01/15/0507/15/0501/15/0607/15/0601/15/0707/15/0701/15/0807/15/0801/16/0907/17/0901/22/1007/16/1001/07/1107/02/1112/31/1106/29/1212/22/1206/15/1312/28/1306/21/1401/10/1507/24/1501/30/1607/11/1601/20/1707/08/1701/15/1807/15/1801/15/1907/15/19
Farrowing Rate

29

30
Fertility Triangle is a three-part variable!

31
What are Boar Studs doing about low Fertility Boars?
Figure 1 Reproductive technology and its impact on sow productivity: Patterson, Dyck & Foxcroft. Banff 2013: 190 boars
- PR (30 days) - FR

32
Piglet Survival:
Why are farm not saving the extra pigs?

33
14 Year Trend line In the SMS Data Set
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Diff
10% 18.30 18.92 19.14 19.31 19.76 18.77 19.52 19.17 19.88 20.68 20.65 19.95 20.53 20.43 +2.13
All 18.16 18.50 18.79 19.20 19.72 19.73 19.93 20.12 20.37 20.22 20.34 21.04 20.68 20.82 +2.66
17
18
19
20
21
22
01/15/0507/15/0501/15/0607/15/0601/15/0707/15/0701/15/0807/15/0801/16/0907/17/0901/22/1007/16/1001/07/1107/02/1112/31/1106/29/1212/22/1206/15/1312/28/1306/21/1401/10/1507/24/1501/30/1607/11/1601/20/1707/08/1701/15/1807/15/1801/15/19
Weaning Age

34
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Diff
10% 10.0 10.3 10.8 10.8 11.1 11.2 11.4 11.8 12.0 12.2 12.2 12.5 12.4 12.5 12.7 +2.5
All 9.2 9.4 9.6 9.9 10.0 10.2 10.3 10.5 10.7 10.7 10.9 10.9 11.2 11.2 11.3 +2.0
9
10
11
12
13
14
01/15/0507/15/0501/15/0607/15/0601/15/0707/15/0701/15/0807/15/0801/16/0907/17/0901/22/1007/16/1001/07/1107/02/1112/31/1106/29/1212/22/1206/15/1312/28/1306/21/1401/10/1507/24/1501/30/1607/11/1601/20/1707/08/1701/15/1807/15/1801/15/1907/15/19
Pigs Weaned / Female Weaned

35
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Diff
10% 81.8 83.5 84.5 82.8 82.7 82.4 82.3 83.0 85.1 84.4 83.9 84.0 84.2 82.4 83.8 +0.60
All 79.2 79.7 80.2 79.6 79.9 79.7 79.5 79.9 79.1 78.3 79.1 78.8 79.0 78.3 78.3 -0.90
78%
79%
80%
81%
82%
83%
84%
85%
86%
01/15/0507/15/0501/15/0607/15/0601/15/0707/15/0701/15/0807/15/0801/16/0907/17/0901/22/1007/16/1001/07/1107/02/1112/31/1106/29/1212/22/1206/15/1312/28/1306/21/1401/10/1507/24/1501/30/1607/11/1601/20/1707/08/1701/15/1807/15/1801/15/1907/15/19
Piglet Survival

36

37
Example of feeding sows several times per day
before farrowing -4500 sow farm
-March 1, 2018 farm switched from feeding sows 1 time per day at 5-6
pounds in morning to 1-2 days pre-farrowing to feeding 1.5 pounds 4
times per day (6 am, 9 am, 12 pm, & 3 pm). Also continue feeding
until she has farrowed out. Time to farrow out dropped 40% to 2-4
hours. Starting 3-3-19 4 feeding being done 6 am, 10:30 am, 2:30-3
pm and 7:30-8 pm caused more drop. Considering 5 times per day.
Quarters 9/3/17-
12/2/17
12/3/17
-3/3/18
3/4/18-
6/2/18
6/3/18-
9/1/18
9/2/18-
12/1/18
12/2/18-
3/2/19
3/3/19-
6/1/19
6/2/19-
8/31/19
9/1/19-
11/30/19
Total pig
born
16.83 17.32 17.19 17.06 16.40 16.65 16.89 16.68 16.73
Pigs born
live
14.56 15.11 15.70 15.42 14.86 15.24 15.62 15.57 15.46
Stillborns 1.50 1.36 0.67 0.73 0.73 0.69 0.46 0.39 0.37
% stillborns 8.9 7.9 3.9 4.3 4.5 4.1 2.7 2.3 2.2

38
Ways to dry pigs.

39
Oval divider for split suckling piglets
Source of Plastic sheet: Hog Slat
No. 1038 4x8 1/8 in. Washington,
IA 319-863-7124.
Design from HyLife Group, Canada
Size: 6 feet X 1.5 feet bolted together at ends

40
Birth Order on Colostrum Intake

41
Effects of colostrum intake on Piglet Survival
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0-100 100-200 200-300 300-400 400-500 >500
Mortalityrate(%)
Colostrum intake (grams & ounces)
0-3.5 3.5-7 7-10.5 10.5-14 14-17.5 >17.5 ounces

42
Birth Weights and Piglet Survival
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Mortality,%
Birthweight, kg (lb)
1.3 1.8 2.2 2.6 3.1 5.5 4.0 4.4 pounds
Wallgren & Rudstedt, 2012

Nutrition: Is the research staying up with
production?
43
developing gilts on gilt developer diets
transition diets in late gestation (pre-farrowing)
feeding sows based on age and production
flushing before breeding gilts and weaned sow
ad-lib feeding sows in lactation
quality of feed being feed (mycotoxins, etc)
least cost feeding of sows for optimum
production??

44
Aflatoxins:
-carcinogenic
-reduced feed eff.
Zearalenone:
-estrogenic effects
-prolapses
-abortions
Deoxynivalenol
(Don):
-feed refusal
-vomiting
Fumonisin:
-pulmonary edema
-liver damage
Ochratoxin:
-kidney damage
-increased water
consumption
T-2 toxin:
-increased mortality
-poor immunity
Feed Quality monitoring Mycotoxins?

n4
5
What about Molds & Mycotoxins?

46
Managing Sow Housing

Facilities Issues
47
size of farrowing crates
size of gestation crates
sow housing: gestation stall, pen, combination
GDU for growing and developing gilt
sanitation program: washing farrowing and
gestation
routine repair and maintenance

48
What does SMS see is going on with
nursery/finisher data?
• may different programs to collect closeout
information
• accuracy of the data in the closeouts is an issue
• producers not using closeout information
• not enough detailed data collected
• individual carcass information being ignored
• limited analysis of individual closeouts
• need to standardize closeout for comparison
• need a way to sort closeouts

49
SMS Closeout Unfiltered data- Feb. 2008 -2018

50
SMS Benchmarking Summary – Nursery

51

52

53
š Death loss and DOA’s :
š are the right weaned pigs or feeder pigs being moved to the facilities?
š what are the SOP’s for starting pigs, walking pens & treating pigs?
š Culls and Lights:
š is this information recorded separately in records?
š is there a plan to remove cull pigs earlier when they have more value?
š Average Daily Gain:
š do you have enough nursery and or finisher spaces?
š are the facilities right: feeder width / pig / hole. Water flow. Pigs / water, square
footage / pig, environment / temperature, etc?
š Feed Efficiency:
š micron size right, right feed to right pigs, all feed recorded for right closeout.
What is done with feed in the bins at the end of the closeout?

54

55

56

57

58
People: labor, staff, crew, etc!
“Caring Trained People”

What is your policy for?
59
Hiring people?
Training people?
Retaining people?
Rewarding people?
Motivating people?
Understanding people

60
Thank your for your time.
Are there any questions??

61
“information solutions”
Swine Management Services, LLC
1044 W. 23rd St. - Suite B
Fremont, NE 68025
Tel: (402) 727-6600
Website: www.swinems.com
E-mail: Ron.Ketchem@swinems.com
E-mail: Mark.Rix@swinems.com

Ron Ketchem - An Overview of Performance Challenges We Are Facing Today

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à Ron Ketchem - An Overview of Performance Challenges We Are Facing Today

Similaire à Ron Ketchem - An Overview of Performance Challenges We Are Facing Today (20)

Plus de John Blue

Plus de John Blue (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Ron Ketchem - An Overview of Performance Challenges We Are Facing Today