Report on the Agricultural Experiment Stations, 1953 Page: 23
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION AFFECTED BY ANIMAL DISEASES 23
may be required by the sow for optimum reproductive performance.
Adding condensed fish solubles and liver residue to the basal gestation
ration at a 3-percent level resulted in stronger, healthier pigs, a 14percent
lower mortality, and the weaning of larger, heavier litters.
The pigs farrowed by sows receiving the supplement were more thrifty
in appearance and suffered less from digestive upsets. If it is substantiated
by later results, this information should be valuable in improving
the reproductive efficiency of brood sows.
Sows fed a practical farm ration supplemented with B-complex
vitamins or an antibiotic, by the Missouri station, weaned more but
lighter pigs than sows on the basal ration alone. Replacement of
the soybean oil meal with tankage and linseed meal resulted in the
production of smaller litters and the weaning of a higher percentage
of pigs at heavier weights.
A study by the Missouri station (coop. USDA)2 of factors influencing
litter size in inbred and noninbred strains and crosses revealed
that total intrauterine mortality amounted to about 46 percent. Only
65 percent of the ova shed by gilts were represented by normal embryos
at 25 days after breeding. Of the 35 percent of ova that were lost,
5 percent were accounted for by nonfertilization and 30 percent by
nondevelopment or early death of the fertilized eggs. Estimated
embryo mortality between 25th day of gestation and parturition
amounted to 1.38 pigs per gilt, or less than one-third as much as
occurred before the 25th day.
Crossline gilts produced more ova than inbred gilts, which resulted
in 1.85 more pigs per litter at the 25th day of gestation. Sows of
increased age or body weight at time of conception shed more ova
and had a lower litter mortality. Gross abnormalities of the reproductive
tract were found in only 7 percent of the females examined.
Further research is needed to determine the causes of this high incidence
of early mortality, and the means of preventing it.
In 1932 word went out that what appeared to be the dreaded footand-mouth
disease in swine had been found in Orange County, Calif.
Clinically it was indistinguishable from natural and experimental
foot-and-mouth disease or from experimental vesicular stomatitis of
swine. However, by use of test animals it was established in 1934
that this was neither of the two mentioned diseases and it was designated
This is an unpredictable disease as may be gathered from the fact
that it was apparently confined to California for 20 years and then
suddenly, in June 1952, made its appearance in garbage-fed hogs in
Wyoming and by December 1 had been found in 32 States.
Affected swine exhibit vesicles (blisters) of varying size on the
snouts, noses, lips, gums, tongues, on the feet, between the digits,
around the coronary bands, on the balls of the feet, or on the dewclaws.
Lesions on the udders and especially the teats have been observed in
nursing sows. Lameness, as a result of foot lesions, appears in
varying degrees. However, general systemic disturbances are not
usually so severe as those seen in foot-and-mouth disease.
2Hereafter, where the United States Department of Agriculture has given
assistance in a specific field, that cooperation is indicated by the notation "(coop.
Here’s what’s next.
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Office of Experiment Stations. Report on the Agricultural Experiment Stations, 1953, book, 1953; Washington D.C.. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc5989/m1/25/: accessed November 19, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.