非洲猪瘟背景下企业留种三元与二元母猪产仔数的比较研究

中国猪业 ›› 2021, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (1): 46-51.

非洲猪瘟背景下企业留种三元与二元母猪产仔数的比较研究

言莹^1#, 陈小玲^1#, 刘炎¹, 徐学文^1,2,*, 马国剑^1,*

¹华中农业大学/农业动物遗传育种与繁殖教育部重点实验室,湖北武汉 430070;
²华中农业大学/湖北省生猪健康养殖协同创新中心,湖北武汉 430070

收稿日期:2021-02-07 出版日期:2021-02-25 发布日期:2021-03-23
通讯作者: ^*徐学文,博士,副教授,主要从事动物遗传育种与基因组学研究,E-mail：xuewen_xu@mail.hzau.edu.cn;马国剑,博士,高级工程师,主要从事动物遗传育种与繁殖研究,E-mail：maguojian09@163.com
作者简介:言莹(1990-),女,湖北武汉人,硕士研究生,主要从事动物遗传育种与繁殖研究,E-mail：609603451@qq.com;陈小玲(1986-),女,湖北钟祥人,本科生,主要从事动物遗传育种与繁殖研究,E-mail：416185489@qq.com。#二者为共同第一作者
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金重大项目（31790413 &31790414）; 国家自然科学基金（31872326、32072698）; 国家生猪产业技术体系（CARS-35）

Comparison on the Litter Size of Three-way and Two-way Crossbred Sows in an Enterprise in the Circumstance of African Swine Fever

YAN Ying^1#, CHEN Xiaoling^1#, LIU Yan¹, XU Xuewen^1,2,*, MA Guojian^1,*

¹Key Laboratory of Agricultural Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction of Ministry of Education & College of Animal Science and Technology, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China;
²The Cooperative Innovation Center for Sustainable Pig Production in Hubei, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China

Received:2021-02-07 Online:2021-02-25 Published:2021-03-23

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 主要通过比较丹系和加系纯种、二元和三元母猪的窝产健仔数,分析不同遗传背景及胎次的母猪产仔性能差异,为评估三元母猪产仔性能及其替代更新提供参考依据。研究整理了国内某规模化企业2019年5月至2020年8月间猪场的209 963条产仔记录,其中丹系56 016窝,加系153 947窝,通过单因素方差分析及邓肯检验对2个品系的母猪产健仔数进行统计分析。结果表明,丹系种猪平均窝产健仔数〔（12.54±2.61）头,n=56 016〕极显著高于加系种猪〔（11.21±2.89）头,n=153 947〕（P<0.01）。进一步分析品系内二元母猪与三元母猪的产仔性能差异,发现丹系二元母猪平均窝产健仔数〔（12.59±2.69）头,n=43 007〕显著高于丹系三元母猪〔（11.12±2.95）头,n=1 236〕（P<0.05）;加系二元母猪平均窝产健仔数〔（11.55±2.81）头,n=84 374〕显著高于加系三元母猪〔（10.73±2.87）头,n=47 185〕（P<0.05）。研究还对比了胎次对产仔性能的影响,丹系二元母猪第2胎产健仔数〔（13.28±2.32）头,n=9 396〕显著高于其他胎次,加系二元母猪第3胎产健仔数〔（12.11±2.61）头,n=12 208〕显著高于其他胎次。结果说明,三元母猪的产仔性能与二元母猪相比存在明显劣势,大规模使用三元母猪可能对企业的PSY和MSY有较大影响。当有足够二元后备母猪补充群体时,应该将使用过4~5胎的三元母猪主动淘汰,将其对企业的种猪成本及收益不利影响控制在最小范围,降低对企业经济效益的影响。

关键词: 丹系, 加系, 三元母猪, 二元母猪, 窝产健仔数, 胎次

Abstract: The present study analyzed the difference in litter performance of sows with different genetic backgrounds and parities by comparing the number of healthy piglets per litter of purebred, two-way and three-way crossbred sows of Danish and Canadian pigs, which we hope to provide reference for evaluating litter performance of three-way crossbred sows and its replacement strategy. A total of 209 963 litter records including 56 016 litters of Danish pigs and 153 947 litters of Canadian pigs were collected from a large-scale enterprise in China from May 2019 to August 2020. The number of healthy piglets of two lines was analyzed by one-way analysis of variance and Duncan test. The results showed that the number of healthy piglets per litter of Danish pigs〔(12.54±2.61), n=56 016〕 was significantly higher than that of the Canadian pigs〔(11.21±2.89), n=153 947〕 (P<0.01). Further analysis of the litter performance difference between two-way and three-way crossbred sows within the line showed that the number of healthy piglets per litter of two-way crossbred sows of Danish pigs〔(12.59±2.69), n=43 007〕 was significantly higher than that of three-way crossbred sows〔(11.12±2.95), n=1 236〕 (P<0.05); the number of healthy piglets per litter of two-way crossbred sows of Canadian pigs〔(11.55±2.81), n=84 374〕 was significantly higher than that of three-way crossbred sows 〔(10.73±2.87), n=47 185〕 (P<0.05). The study also compared the effects of different parities on litter performance. The number of healthy piglets of the second parity of two-way crossbred sows of Danish pigs〔(13.28±2.32), n=9 396〕 was significantly higher than that of other parities, and the number of healthy piglets of the third parity of two-way crossbred sows of Canadian pigs〔(12.11±2.61), n=12 208〕 was significantly higher than that of other parities. The study shows that the litter performance of three-way crossbred sows was significantly inferior than that of two-way crossbred sows. Wide use of three-way crossbred sows may have obvious negative impacts on PSY and MSY of enterprises. If there were sufficient two-way crossbred gilts to supplement the population, enterprises should take the initiative to eliminate the three-way crossbred sows that have been used 4~5 parities to minimize the adverse impact on the breeding cost and on the economic benefits.

Key words: Danish pigs, Canadian pigs, three-way crossbred sows, two-way crossbred sows, the number of healthy piglets per litter, parity

中图分类号: S828.9

言莹, 陈小玲, 刘炎, 徐学文, 马国剑. 非洲猪瘟背景下企业留种三元与二元母猪产仔数的比较研究[J]. 中国猪业, 2021, 16(1): 46-51.

YAN Ying, CHEN Xiaoling, LIU Yan, XU Xuewen, MA Guojian. Comparison on the Litter Size of Three-way and Two-way Crossbred Sows in an Enterprise in the Circumstance of African Swine Fever[J]. China Swine Industry, 2021, 16(1): 46-51.

参考文献 30

[1]	刘小红, 陈瑶生. 2019年生猪产业发展状况、未来发展趋势与建议[J]. 中国畜牧杂志, 2020, 56(3):126-130.
[2]	燕志宏, 宋高翔, 文艺. 猪三元杂交体系中不同二元母本繁殖性能的研究[J]. 贵州畜牧兽医, 2003, 27(3):9-10.
[3]	杨礼, 杨静, 杨蛟. 三元杂交商品猪技术推广探讨[J]. 畜牧兽医科技信息, 2014(3):80-81.
[4]	郭建凤, 牛月波, 王继英, 等. 不同品种及产仔季节对母猪繁殖性能影响[J]. 养猪, 2017(1):41-46.
[5]	杨杰, 周李生, 刘先先, 等. 莱芜猪与杜长大三元杂交猪肉质性状种质资源比较研究[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2014, 45(11):1752-1759.
[6]	张利娟, 郭宗义, 陈四清, 等. 后非洲猪瘟时期洋三元(DLY)商品母猪作种用的可行性分析及建议[J]. 猪业科学, 2020, 37(10):35-38.
[7]	刘莹, 龙欢, 牛丽珠, 等. 杜陆与杜隆陆猪生长、胴体及肉质性状的比较分析[J]. 畜牧兽医学报, 2018, 49(12):2576-2583.
[8]	刘庆生. 三元母猪种用应注意的问题[J]. 畜禽业, 2020(2):25.
[9]	裴志勤, 汲如芬, 薛喜飞, 等. 三元母猪种用调研及生产建议[J]. 北方牧业, 2020(9):21.
[10]	孙亚楠, 刘双, 黄强, 等. 非洲猪瘟背景下的三元商品母猪养殖策略[J]. 猪业科学, 2020, 37(3):122-124.
[11]	喻传州. 外种猪杂交优势的利用[J]. 中国猪业, 2015,10(7):28-29.
[12]	赵志超, 谭岳华, 江科, 等. 丹系与美丹大白、长白和杜洛克母猪的胎产活仔性能比较[J]. 猪业科学, 2018, 35(11):116-117.
[13]	吴建新. 不同品系大白猪生产性能对比分析[J]. 养猪, 2018(3):52-54.
[14]	杨云, 曾勇庆. 影响母猪产仔性能因素的分析研究[J]. 养猪, 2013(1):33-35.
[15]	刘庆伟, 王春强, 刘兴辉, 等. 不同品种母猪产仔性能的比较研究[J]. 现代畜牧兽医, 2018(10):29-31.
[16]	刘彬, 陈映, 李强, 等. 影响母猪繁殖性能的几种因素研究[J]. 西南农业学报, 2019, 32(8):1950-1955.
[17]	韦景斋, 韦荣显, 韦仕标. 猪杂交优势利用的体会[J]. 畜禽业, 2013(11):53-54.
[18]	周开锋, 侯明权, 王燕男, 等. 当前三元母猪留种饲养繁育情况调查分析[J]. 养猪, 2020(3):79-81.
[19]	陈方钦, 杨有福, 谭辉, 等. 关于三元母猪种用价值和改善措施的探讨[J]. 猪业科学, 2020, 37(2):114-117.
[20]	赵永珠, 翟羽佳. 三元母猪留做繁殖母猪的问题探讨及建议[J]. 猪业科学, 2020, 37(4):108-109.
[21]	赵洋, 张宏, 史济波, 等. 非洲猪瘟下科学利用三元母猪提升复产效率[J]. 中国猪业, 2020, 15(4):28-30.
[22]	胡雄贵, 陈晨, 蔡文杰. 三元商品猪留种做母猪的注意事项[J]. 湖南畜牧兽医, 2019(6):3-5.
[23]	于传军. 三元商品猪留为种用存在的问题与探讨[J]. 中国猪业, 2020, 15(5):47-49.
[24]	陈伟, 曾勇庆. 非洲猪瘟疫情下三元母猪轮回杂交繁育策略分析[J]. 猪业科学, 2020, 37(10):31-34.
[25]	YuzoKoketsu, 林亦孝, 曹丁壬. 论商品群中母猪高繁殖性能的影响因素[J]. 猪业科学, 2017, 34(1):26-29.
[26]	孟庆利, 周海深, 王朝军, 等. 不同胎次对不同品种猪产仔数的影响[J]. 养猪, 2015(3):39-40.
[27]	李沁光, 张力, 方金福, 等. 母猪若干繁殖性状的相关分析[J]. 福建农业大学学报, 1995, 24(4):446-449.
[28]	李文明, 唐凡. 不同胎次、不同首配日龄对新丹系大白母猪产仔性能的影响[J]. 猪业科学, 2017, 34(3):112-114.
[29]	田恩孝,王宏伟,辛玄飞. 三元母猪留作种用初产性能观察[J]. 中国畜牧业, 2020(11):56-57.
[30]	苏建. 不同品种、不同胎次对母猪总产仔数的影响[J]. 今日养猪业, 2019(1):82-83.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed