Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42518022›Full record

ArticleTropical animal health and production2026

Cross-fostering with up to two surplus piglets relative to sow functional teats: effects on performance and preweaning survival.

Rodrigo Dalmina Rech, Bernardo Dos Santos Pizzatto, Gabriel Antônio Bona, Pâmela Dos Santos Zanatta, Rafael da Rosa Ulguim, Ana Paula Gonçalves Mellagi, Fernando Pandolfo Bortolozzo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tropical animal health and production, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Rodrigo Dalmina RechDepartment of Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Bernardo Dos Santos PizzattoDepartment of Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Gabriel Antônio BonaDepartment of Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Pâmela Dos Santos ZanattaDepartment of Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Rafael da Rosa UlguimDepartment of Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Ana Paula Gonçalves MellagiDepartment of Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Fernando Pandolfo BortolozzoDepartment of Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. fpbortol@ufrgs.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5302-328X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In modern sows, litter size often exceeds the number of functional teats. Therefore, many farms retain surplus piglets within the litter. The present study evaluated the effect of cross-fostering biological litters with up to two surplus piglets relative to functional teats, allowing piglet replacement until day three of lactation. Females were selected (n = 201) at farrowing and evenly distributed among treatments: +0 (number of piglets equal to functional teats), + 1 (one surplus piglet), and + 2 (two surplus piglets). Biological litters were formed three to 12 h after farrowing (day 0). Piglets that died or were removed (low viability) during the first three days of life were weighed and replaced. Piglets in the + 2 group tended to have lower immunocrit values than those in the + 0 group (P = 0.06). Although the + 2 group exhibited the highest overall piglet loss rate across lactation (P ≤ 0.01), litter sizes in the + 1 and + 2 groups were larger than those in the + 0 group (P < 0.01). Piglets in the + 2 group also had reduced average daily gain compared with piglets in the + 0 and + 1 groups (P < 0.01). Facial and joint injuries were more frequent in the + 1 and + 2 groups on D5 (P < 0.01). No differences among treatments were found in udder injury scores, number of functional teats, sow body condition at weaning, daily milk production, or subsequent reproductive performance (P ≥ 0.10). Cross-fostering litters with up to two surplus piglets increased the number of piglets weaned without impairing sow performance, although individual piglet growth and early lesions were negatively affected.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryLitter SizeMammary Glands, AnimalSus scrofaAnimalsAnimals, NewbornFemaleLactationSwineWeaningWeight GainHyperprolificityPiglet lesionPiglet lossPiglet weightPre-weaning mortalityUdder lesion

Identifiers

PMID42518022
PMCPMC13415662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.