Economic Impact of Research in the Swine Industry

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on January 1, 2005 | No Comments

Today’s pork industry is global in nature, and pork producers find themselves always looking for areas of competitive advantage. One significant area of competitive advantage is through the early adoption of research results. Producers who are successful in identifying and implementing new technologies and management strategies create an advantage through lowering their cost of production, or increasing the amount of revenue generated. However, the perceived financial risks and rewards may limit technological action. In order to provide more detail on the economic impact of research, Prairie Swine Centre in conjunction with the George Morris Centre developed an analytical tool to help provide a more detailed analysis of the economic benefit of research conducted at Prairie Swine Centre.

This financial model has the ability to simulate the economic impact and change in cost and revenue structures, by applying Prairie Swine Centre research results to commercial farms of various sizes. Estimating the economic impact of research on the commercial farm is extremely important when adopting new technologies or management strategies. To value the economic impact of research, a number of Prairie Swine Centre experiments between 1999-2004 were analyzed. In total 22 projects were selected for a detailed financial analysis, with the final result being the net benefit of specific research projects. Research projects were then prioritized in terms of net benefit per hog marketed and ease of adoption.

Throughout the 1999-2004 time period, specific research projects generated a range of net financial benefit to pork producers from $0.11 – $8.84 per hog marketed. In addition, approximately 25% of the projects analyzed generated a net benefit of at least $2.00 per hog marketed, while an additional 25% of research projects generated a return in excess of $1.00 per hog marketed. The overall objective of such a analytical tool is quite simply to assist pork producers in identifying ways to minimize costs and maximize revenues through: 1) Identifying those technologies that can be applied on their operation, and 2) Prioritize their implementation in terms of ease of adoption.

Research Results
In order to estimate the impact of research on different types of operations, ‘default’ farms of various size were developed based on industry data. It is very important to note there tends to be greater variability, in per hog costs and revenues, between similar sized operations than across different operation size. This is a function of different cost structures (example, related to age of facility), ability to adopt new technologies, and management styles. Table 1 provides a detailed economic evaluation for each research project, summarizing the range and average value (from default) on net income. Average net returns for all projects varied from $0.14 to $6.23 per hog marketed, while the minimum and maximum range in returns vary from $0.05 to $11.50 per hog marketed, depending on specific research criteria. Net benefit of each project was calculated independently; there was no attempt to look at the additive or competing effect of multiple projects implemented simultaneously.

Ease of Adoption
Pork producers in Canada are recognized as innovative, many could be classified as early adopters of new information. With this in mind, the 22 research projects were evaluated for their ease of adoption, as seen in Table 2. Ease of adoption is defined in terms of the time, labour and capital required to implement the new research information on the commercial farm. Three classifications were created: Easy, Moderate and Difficult. We further describe “Easy” projects as those which can be implemented within 1-3 months, require little labour and little or no capital; “Moderate” can be implemented within 3-12 months, but still require little labour or capital; and “Difficult” projects require greater than 12 months to implement, and is either labour and/or capital intensive. Evaluating this list on the basis of ease of adoption may help to focus efforts on these projects which can provide immediate payback.

Impact on the Industry
Using this three-level description we estimated the extent to which the industry would adopt the research results. Easy projects, such as switching between wheat classes for starter diets, or adjusting water nipples to reduce water wastage, were estimated to be adopted by 80% of the industry. Moderate adoption projects included changing energy levels in the diet, require the specialized services of a nutritionist and perhaps pen reconfiguration. These “Moderate” adoption projects were estimated to be adopted by 40% of the industry. There were very few projects deemed to be Difficult to adopt. For example novel ingredients like mustard meal can be difficult to obtain on a regular basis, or in the case of moving to large group sow housing systems, extensive barn renovation or rebuilding is required to adopt this technology. These “Difficult” adoption projects were estimated to be adopted by 10% of the industry.

Table 3 summarizes the combination of improvement in net returns (over default) as described in Table 1 with the assumed levels of adoption for each research project. This provides an estimate of the value of Prairie Swine Centre research to the western Canadian pork industry. For example, “Effect of Starter Feeding Regime on Variability in Body Weight and Performance in the Nursery”, is adopted on a Moderate basis (by 40% of the industry), and provides a net return benefit of $1.22 per pig marketed, and assuming the annual marketings of 10 million hogs in western Canada, the benefit annually to the industry for this one project is $4.88 million.

The Bottom Line
Research pays big dividends. Applied near market research conducted at Prairie Swine Centre for the pork industry has and continues to provide significant benefit to pork producers and the entire pork industry. All pork producers will not be able to adopt all research results, in addition not all research projects are completely additive. Pork producers would still realize a significant improvement to their bottom line through the incorporation of any number of research results. If only 10% of the benefit was to be adopted it would improve net return over $3.00 per hog marketed. Prairie Swine Centre would like to acknowledge Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food for their funding of this project.

Dr. Denise Beaulieu Awarded U.S. National Pork Board Swine Industry Award for Innovation

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments

Saskatoon, SK., April 6, 2005: Dr. Denise Beaulieu, Research Assistant at Prairie Swine Centre Inc., recently received one of only two awards presented annually by the U.S. National Pork Board at the Midwest Animal Science meetings held in Des Moines, Iowa. The annual National Pork Board award recognizes innovative ideas, scientifically based, that have relevance to the pork industry. The award, based on abstracts submitted to the American Society of Animal Science meetings, Midwest section, was earned for research on the use of phytase enzyme to improve phosphorus utilization from feed and reduce phosphorus in the manure.

Dr. Beaulieu accepted the award on behalf of her research team, which included M.R. Bedford (Zymetrics, UK), and J.F. Patience (Prairie Swine Centre). The winning abstract describes two experiments conducted at Prairie Swine Centre which showed that a novel enzyme developed by Zymetrics, Inc.(UK) decreased phosphorus output in the manure by almost 40% when fed to weanling pigs consuming a soy-barley and corn based diet that was intentionally formulated to be lower than typical levels in total phosphorus. The lower formulation met all requirements for piglet growth due to the increased utilization of the mineral made possible by the phytase enzyme in the diet. Environmentally, the benefits also included a similar magnitude of decrease in inorganic phosphorus in the manure, which is the form of phosphorus most susceptible to leaching through the soil.

Of importance to farmers and nutritionists, it was confirmed that when using the phytase enzyme, the dietary ratio of calcium to phosphorus should be at or below 1.7:1 to realize the full benefit of the enzyme.

Prairie Swine Centre Inc., located in Saskatoon, is a non-profit research corporation affiliated with the University of Saskatchewan, and is recognized globally for its contributions to practical, applied science in pork production in the disciplines of Nutrition, Engineering and Animal Behaviour.

Large Group Housing for Finishing Pigs

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments

Interest in Large Groups
Conventional management of grow/finish pigs until recently has been to keep one or two litters in each pen in order to minimize aggression. In recent years we have moved to sorting pigs by sex (for split sex feeding) or weight (in an unsuccessful attempt to reduce variation at marketing). However we retained small group sizes, usually limited by the number of pigs that could be fed from a 2-4 hole feeder. With larger operations, or those that practice batch farrowing, we are now able to form groups of several hundred pigs of similar age and gender. Large groups of 100-1,000 pigs per pen are being tried on numerous farms throughout North America.

There have always been a few operations that have used large groups. These have generally been seasonal in nature using multi-purpose yards or open front buildings in the summer, or facilities that were inexpensive (hoop structures) or converted from previous use (old barns). In these cases the significant reduction in capital costs meant that productivity could be compromised but the system remain viable. The current interest in large groups relates to intensively managed facilities that require high levels of performance to succeed.

There are a number of reasons to consider large grow-finish groups. Less penning is used and the need for alleys within the room is eliminated, thus reducing some aspect of capital cost. It has been suggested that less floor space per pig is required in large groups. More importantly, large groups allow us to apply new technology, particularly when it comes to sorting animals not only for market but also for phase feeding programs within each group. There is the potential for handling to be improved through the use of facilities designed for large groups, and anecdotal evidence would suggest that pigs from large groups handle and load better at marketing.

Of course, large groups for grow-finish pigs need to work if they are to be adopted by the industry. There were a number of reasons why large groups of pigs were discouraged in the past. Most if not all of these have proven to be invalid. However, a number of producers who have adopted large groups, particularly those using auto-sort technology, have experienced unsatisfactory results. This is common whenever new technology is tried, but solutions need to be found to the problems they are experiencing.

Challenges From the Past
Most of the concerns about large group sizes in the past were related to the stability of the social structure within groups. Small groups of pigs have a very stable social structure. Every pig knows its position relative to every other pig in the pen. Once the social order is established there is no reason for further aggression. Increasing the size of the group made the social structure more complex, with more relationships to be established through aggression and to be remembered. As group size increased, social problems increased, and it was feared that aggression, productivity, and general health of the pigs would deteriorate.

This was true to a certain point, but research in poultry, and now in pigs, indicates that the nature of the social structure among animals changes in very large groups. At some point the benefits of being dominant, or of keeping track of all relationships around you, becomes too costly to maintain and animals change their approach to living together. In our studies we have found that aggression following regrouping is similar, when expressed as minutes per pig, in conventional groups of 10-20 and large groups of over 100. We then examined how readily pigs could move into small and large groups. When pigs are added to a small group there is more fighting than when pigs are added to a large group. They are able to avoid fighting better, but it also appeared that the pigs in the large group were less interested in attacking the newcomers as well. We then conducted tests in small pens in which we placed four pigs from either two small groups or two large groups. In these uniform conditions it was clear that pigs from large groups were less interested in fighting. This has been termed ‘tolerant’ behaviour and is sen in animals living in large aggregations rather than well-defined societies.

A second concern for large groups is the potential for a behavioural vices, such as tail-biting, to be socially ‘facilitated’, that is, increasing rapidly because of the stimulation derived by observing other animals perform the behaviour. Cattle feedlots experience the buller steer syndrome, in which one or more animals within a pen are ridden by several others. This problem increases in frequency when cattle are kept in large groups. Social facilitation seems to be present for this behaviour. Not so for tail biting in pigs. Our experience has been that the level of tail-biting, as a proportion of the animals affected, is similar or reduced in large groups when compared to small.

We do see a reduction in performance in large groups, even in those that do not use auto-sorters. This reduction occurs during the first two weeks on the large pens, and thereafter the pigs grow as fast or faster than those in small groups. It does not appear to be directly related to aggression, as aggression levels and the severity of wounding is similar to small groups. We have seen a difference in eating behaviour whereby the pigs in large groups have more meals, but shorter ones. We attribute this to visiting several feeders during each eating period, but eating less. The net result, over the entire 14-16 week grow-finish period has been an extra 2 days to market. However this highlights the need for good design and management that ensures pigs have optimal access to feed when first placed in large groups.

Auto-Sort Technology
Large groups make the use of auto-sort technology affordable. In such a system pigs are required to pass through a scale that directs them into different areas based on their weight. The scales are usually set up so that pigs pass through them on the way to feed. The pigs can be sorted into groups for market, or directed to different diets according to their weight, or to specific feed additives such as paylean during the appropriate period. Sorters may be programmed to provide management information such as the average weight of the pigs, the weight range, and the distribution of weights, which can be used in feeding and marketing decisions. Auto-sort technology has tremendous potential for managing grow-finish pigs.

Although pigs will generally go to great lengths to obtain food, getting pigs to learn that they need to pass through a scale to get to the feeder is not easy. Most problems associated with auto-sort systems involve pigs refusing to pass through the scale or reluctance to do it several times a day. Several management options have been suggested, tried, and modified. We need a combination of good management programs and dedicated producers who will learn to work the new system.

Two basic options in terms of pen design are the food vs water court concepts. Food courts include both feed and water, but water is generally available in the non-feeding area as well. Pigs must pass through the scale to enter the food court. Water court designs have separate food and water areas, and pigs must pas through the scale to move between them. Animals must pass through the scale on a regular basis to obtain water. Comparative studies of food and water court designs have not been published, and different equipment manufactures recommend different system. Whatever system is used, pigs must learn to pass through the scale.

There are two basic approaches to ‘teaching’ pigs to pass through the sorter. The first approach is to force them through to ensure that all animals have passed through the scale to the food court. This needs to be when the pigs first enter the system and will need to be repeated several times. Pigs learn best when they are not under stress, so move the animals carefully and begin the process before they have gone too long without feed. Gradually closing off the area in front of the scale, and allowing pigs to pass through on their own will reduce the stress involved.

The second approach involves ‘shaping’ the pigs behaviour, from that of eating in an open pen to being willing to walk through the scale to obtain feed. Initially the divider between the food court and loafing area is left very open. Pigs can enter and leave the food court at several points. The penning and gates between the food and loafing areas is then gradually closed off over a period of several days or weeks. Eventually the pigs must pass through the sorter or the area adjacent to the sorter to obtain food. Finally the sorter is the only way into the food court. Up to this point the sorter is typically left ‘open’ and pigs can walk through without waiting for a gate to open. The final step is to set the sorter to operate, closing entrance and exits gates as needed and directing pigs to different sides of the food court. Both training systems need monitoring and pigs that simply refuse to learn need to be pulled before their welfare is compromised. The number of pigs needing to be moved to a small pen seems to be between 2 and 5% (10-25 pigs per group of 500).

The critical issue to ensure good performance in the system is that getting to the feeder must be easy enough that intake is not depressed. We are still at an early stage in developing all of the management criteria for these system, and so it is better to err on the side of the pig rather than attempting to save on equipment and space. To this end it is recommended that more feeder space be provided (8-10 pigs/space rather than 12-14), that movement around the feeders be unrestricted (8 ft between feeders and walls, and frequent wide gaps in lines of feeders), and that sorters work quietly and quickly (3.5 ‘hits’ per pig per day or more). Although many producers are operating sorters with groups of 500 pigs, it is not clear if this is the optimal number in terms of ease of management, animal welfare and productivity.

Other Options
Some producers allow their pigs to have ready access the food court at all times with the exception of a weekly managed sort. During this time the animals are gradually moved through the scale and sorted into appropriate weight groups for the following week. The pigs are never required to move through the sorter on their own.

One of the most frequently asked questions we receive is if large groups can be formed late in the finishing period. Producers would like to add a couple of large group rooms to their finishing barn and to move pigs from small pens into these rooms as they approach market weight. They want to use auto-sorters to facilitate marketing. Two points of caution on this approach. Moving pigs from small to large groups, at any stage, will result in an initial depression in growth. Secondly, it will take several days to train these animals, either by forced training or ‘shaping’, to use the sorter on their own. A managed sort on a weekly basis may be the best approach.

Conclusions
Managing grow-finish pigs in large groups has a great deal of potential, particularly if auto-sorters are use to manage a phase feeding program. Although many of the earlier concerns about large groups appear to be unfounded for groups of this size, there are a considerable numbers of management factors that are not fully understood, particularly in the use of auto-sorters. Producers choosing to go this route should demand a high level of service from their suppliers, and watch for the results of research in the producer press.

Phytase improves P bioavailability in swine diets

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on January 1, 2004 | No Comments

The Bottom Line

The addition of 250 U/kg of phytase to diets fed to growing pigs maintained performance compared to a positive control supplemented with inorganic P (DiCal). Phytase decreased the amount of P excreted into the feces (increased P digestibility) even at the highest increment of phytase used in our study (2000 U/kg). The phytase enzyme is a tool that allows producers to formulate diets with less total P. Phosphorus output in the manure can be minimized without sacrificing performance. New technologies for the production of phytase are being developed, providing the producer with increased flexibility and selection.

Nutritional value of corn and wheat distillers grain and growth performance

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments

Nutritional value of corn, wheat + corn (4:1) and wheat distiller’s grains with solubles (DDGS) for grower-finisher pigs was evaluated. Corn DDGS had the highest digestible energy (DE) and ileal digestible lysine contents but the digestible phosphorus (P) content was similar among DDGS samples. Following characterization of its digestible nutrient profile, DDGS still resulted in reductions in growth performance, suggestion that either the reduced average daily feed intake (ADFI) or other nutritional factors for DDGS deserve further investigation to ensure a successful implementation of DDGS in swine diets.

Social Factors that Affect Injury Levels and the Behaviour of Sows Regrouped into an Electronic Sow Feeder System

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments

Summary
The total number of injuries detectable on sows increased until 28 days after regrouping before declining. First parity sows and post-implantation sows ate later in the feeding cycle, while first parity sows and unfamiliar sows rested in the less optimal areas of the pens. Thus, the behaviour of older, familiar and pre-implantation sows indicates that they are experiencing less stress during regrouping.

Introduction
Regrouping is a stressful time for pigs. When sows are regrouped shortly after breeding, stress may alter behaviours and result in a decrease in farrowing rate. The severity of the stress the sows are experiencing can be reflected in injuries, eating order and resting locations. The goal of this study was to determine the effect that stage of implantation, familiarity with penmates, and parity have on the behaviour.

Effects of wheat quality and xylanase supplementation on weaned pigs

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments

The feed processing procedure xylanase supplementation was tested to reduce the existing variability in wheat quality. Xylanase enzyme supplementation partially reduced the variation in performance of weaned pigs caused by wheat sample.

Tips for Improving Returns

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments

Introduction
The following checklist of cost saving and revenue generating ideas focuses on immediate payback with minimal or no investment in capital improvements. It is understood that changes to breeding herd management, health status and equipment purchases such as wet/dry feeders would add further to the potential savings but because of their longer-term or strategic role in your business are considered fixed for the present discussion.

Feed budgeting
Most feeding programs today are based on a feed budget – or should be. Fundamentally, a feed budget defines the performance expected on a particular farm and builds a feeding program designed to achieve it. In its simplest form, a feed budget defines the quantity of each diet to be fed to each pig and the cost of that diet. A feed budget can therefore be used to monitor actual – as opposed to expected – feed usage. Both functions – feeding program development and monitoring of results – can be extremely valuable to the individual producer.

Typically, certain assumptions have to be made with respect to feed intake, expected performance and variation in performance before specific diets can be formulated. Nonetheless, the development of a feed budget makes the feeding program farm specific and also lays out the basis for expected results. In terms of “surviving tough times,” the feed budget can help out in numerous ways.

A feed budget provides a foundation of expected performance. Actual measures of performance can be measured and compared with the expectations. If there is a shortfall in performance, corrective action can be taken. One might either alter the feed budget to reflect the reality of animal performance, or take action to address the shortfall in performance. Figure 1 illustrates the results of tracking a feed budget in a nursery and determining that insufficient quantities of the Phase 1 starter were being used. When the correction was made, the performance of the pigs, in terms of nursery exit weights, was profound. Nursery exit weight increased from 30.3 kg to 33.2 kg.

Shrinking Windows of Opportunity: Maximizing Packer Returns

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments

Many factors are affecting the swine industry, including record high feed prices, high Canadian dollar, drought, BSE, etc. All of these factors have resulted in a reduction of 5 to $10.00 per hog marketed. In order to find an adequate packer plant for an operation, several things need to be determined. Returns need to be investigated via sending a test load to the packer. This should be a representative load of an operations average or by generating a spreadsheet of settlement grids, bonus structures, and carcass information. With this, producers can model returns that can be seen from various packers. Ultimately, producers can keep an eye on individual marketing results over a prolonged period of time. Taking into account weight and lean yield distribution, loin size, demerits, freight (based on packer location), pool price, time period of study, and long run variations, producers can get a feel for which packer can provide the greatest profit for them.

Practical Application of Enzyme Supplementation in Swine

Posted in: Prairie Swine Centre by admin on | No Comments

Feed ingredients have a range in content of energy-providing macro nutrients. Especially digestibility of the crude fiber fraction has a large range in nutrient digestibility among feed ingredients. The range in fiber digestibility is directly related and inversely related to a range in digestibility of energy, the most expensive nutrient contained in swine diets. Supplemental enzymes may be beneficial to improve energy digestibility. Specific substrates and thus enzymes are beneficial for wheat and barley, but multi-enzyme cocktail were beneficial for diets based on corn and soybean meal as well. By taking the expected uplift in energy digestibility and thus energy content into consideration during least-cost diet formulation can the diet cost be reduced and should supplemental enzymes allow a cost benefit, depending on the price of the enzyme.