ArticleJournal of animal science2025
Crated sow breeding values for mothering ability reduce piglet mortality in free farrowing pens.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sow behaviour, parturition process and management in free farrowing systems.Porcine health management · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Selecting sows with a high genetic merit for mothering ability to ensure the survival of liveborn piglets may be a promising strategy to reduce piglet mortality in free farrowing (FF) systems. This genetic merit, reflected in the Estimated Breeding Value for Mothering Ability (EBVma), is currently estimated based on information from sows housed in conventional crated farrowing systems. Therefore, the objective of the present study was to assess the predictive ability of crated sow breeding values for mothering ability on early piglet mortality, litter characteristics, and farrowing performance in an FF environment. This was achieved by comparing the performance of sows during early lactation in FF with those that were temporarily crated (TC) for the first five days of lactation. A total of 56 healthy TN70 sows were assigned to either TC (crated from approximately 2 d pre-farrowing to day 5 of lactation, n = 28) or FF (n = 28). Overall, higher EBVma were associated with reduced liveborn piglet mortality within the first 5 d of lactation (P = 0.04). In FF, liveborn piglet mortality was higher in low EBVma sows (14.8%) compared to high EBVma sows (6.1%) (odds ratios [OR]: 3.4, 95% CI: 1.5-7.4, P = 0.003). Additionally, piglet crushing rates were higher in low EBVma sows (9.8%) versus high EBVma sows (3.3%) (OR: 2.9, 95% CI: 1.3-7.6, P = 0.01). In TC, the association was less pronounced for liveborn piglet mortality (OR: 2.4, 95% CI: 0.8-7.0, P = 0.11) but present for piglet crushing (OR: 8.4, 95% CI: 1.5-∞, P = 0.02). Higher EBVma values were also associated with a reduced probability of stillbirths (P = 0.02). However, no significant association was found between EBVma and farrowing duration in either housing system, nor was there an effect of housing system on farrowing duration (FF: 251 ± 48.5 min, TC: 251 ± 51.3 min, P = 0.96). As anticipated, piglet mortality was higher in FF (14.2%) compared to TC (5.9%), with piglet crushing being the predominant cause of piglet mortality in FF (11.8%), while deaths of nonviable piglets were more common in TC (4.2%). This study demonstrates that EBVma retain their predictive value in FF and suggests a stronger association with piglet survival in this environment. The significant association between higher EBVma and lower piglet mortality, particularly due to reduced piglet crushing, highlights the potential of genetic selection to enhance piglet survival in FF systems through selection for maternal influence on survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.