Brazilian panorama of pig breeding sector: a cross-sectional study about specific aspects of biosecurity, facilities, management, feeding, and performance

Abstract

The objective of this study was to identify the degree of adoption of different production factors in commercial pig breeding farms in Brazil. Data were collected from 150 farms, totaling 135,168 sows, including general information, labor, genetics, biosecurity, facilities, management, feeding and productive performance for the year 2015. The farms were located in the South (42%), Southeast (45.3%) and Midwest (12.7%) of Brazil. The amplitude of the herds varied between 100 and 6,360 productive sows, with an average of 901. Their predominant profile was independent production with hired labor, an average of 88 sows per employee, facilities with more than 15 years and no reform in the last decade, and located less than 5 km from other units. Animal replacement was performed mainly by purchase and without adoption of a quarantine period. Predominated farms housed the sows in crates in the pre-mating period and in pens or crates/pens during gestation. Both solid and slatted floors were used in these phases, predominantly using concrete as material; the use of slatted floors (either concrete, metal, or plastic) predominated in the farrowing facilities. Gutter-type feeders that also operated as water drinkers were predominant in the pre-mating and gestation periods; in farrowing facilities wet-dry feeders were widespread. Two-thirds of the farms did not have a cooling system in farrowing facilities. For the piglets, the heating system above the animal (lamps and bell rings) prevailed to the detriment of heat floors. More than 60% of farms make their own feed and feed gestating sows once a day. Only 29.33% of the farms perform echography for diagnosis of gestation. Birth attendance was routine; however, one-third of the farms did not have attendance through the night. Batch weaning was practiced by 15.44% of the farms. More than half of the farms reported that they did not intervene in the colostrum supply of piglets born weak or small, but 95.33% piglets were transferred among litters considering their size and quantity. Teeth resection, tail docking, and surgical castration procedures were routine. The performance indexes were consistent with what is perceived by national surveys.