Identifying hypoprolific boars by examining production records

Ting Qing Zhang, William E. Marsh, Vickie L. King, Lance C. Buoen, George R. Ruth, Alvin F. Weber

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Analysis of litter size performance of 4388 boars used in single-boar matings revealed that 191(4.3%) were hypoprolific according to the criteria of Popescu. Boars classified as normal had sired litters with an average liveborn litter size of 9.984 ± 0.016 standard error (SE) piglets compared to 7.762 ± 0.057 SE (P < 0.0001) for the hypoprolific boars (HPB), a mean reduction of 2.22 piglets. Also, the average number of piglets born dead was significantly greater for the hypoprolific boars as compared to the normal boars (1.0236 ± 0.0309 SE versus 0.9138 ± 0.0085 SE; P = 0.0004). Based on our findings we propose an improved definition of hypoprolificacy based on that of Popescu.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)21-24
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of Swine Health and Production
Volume4
Issue number1
StatePublished - Dec 1 1996

Fingerprint

Litter Size
boars
piglets
litter size
litters (young animals)

Cite this

Zhang, T. Q., Marsh, W. E., King, V. L., Buoen, L. C., Ruth, G. R., & Weber, A. F. (1996). Identifying hypoprolific boars by examining production records. Journal of Swine Health and Production, 4(1), 21-24.

Identifying hypoprolific boars by examining production records. / Zhang, Ting Qing; Marsh, William E.; King, Vickie L.; Buoen, Lance C.; Ruth, George R.; Weber, Alvin F.

In: Journal of Swine Health and Production, Vol. 4, No. 1, 01.12.1996, p. 21-24.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Zhang, TQ, Marsh, WE, King, VL, Buoen, LC, Ruth, GR & Weber, AF 1996, 'Identifying hypoprolific boars by examining production records', Journal of Swine Health and Production, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 21-24.
Zhang TQ, Marsh WE, King VL, Buoen LC, Ruth GR, Weber AF. Identifying hypoprolific boars by examining production records. Journal of Swine Health and Production. 1996 Dec 1;4(1):21-24.
Zhang, Ting Qing ; Marsh, William E. ; King, Vickie L. ; Buoen, Lance C. ; Ruth, George R. ; Weber, Alvin F. / Identifying hypoprolific boars by examining production records. In: Journal of Swine Health and Production. 1996 ; Vol. 4, No. 1. pp. 21-24.
@article{5b28e5fb301d41d098b095be8386ae9f,
title = "Identifying hypoprolific boars by examining production records",
abstract = "Analysis of litter size performance of 4388 boars used in single-boar matings revealed that 191(4.3{\%}) were hypoprolific according to the criteria of Popescu. Boars classified as normal had sired litters with an average liveborn litter size of 9.984 ± 0.016 standard error (SE) piglets compared to 7.762 ± 0.057 SE (P < 0.0001) for the hypoprolific boars (HPB), a mean reduction of 2.22 piglets. Also, the average number of piglets born dead was significantly greater for the hypoprolific boars as compared to the normal boars (1.0236 ± 0.0309 SE versus 0.9138 ± 0.0085 SE; P = 0.0004). Based on our findings we propose an improved definition of hypoprolificacy based on that of Popescu.",
author = "Zhang, {Ting Qing} and Marsh, {William E.} and King, {Vickie L.} and Buoen, {Lance C.} and Ruth, {George R.} and Weber, {Alvin F.}",
year = "1996",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "4",
pages = "21--24",
journal = "Journal of Swine Health and Production",
issn = "1537-209X",
publisher = "American Association of Swine Veterinarians",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Identifying hypoprolific boars by examining production records

AU - Zhang, Ting Qing

AU - Marsh, William E.

AU - King, Vickie L.

AU - Buoen, Lance C.

AU - Ruth, George R.

AU - Weber, Alvin F.

PY - 1996/12/1

Y1 - 1996/12/1

N2 - Analysis of litter size performance of 4388 boars used in single-boar matings revealed that 191(4.3%) were hypoprolific according to the criteria of Popescu. Boars classified as normal had sired litters with an average liveborn litter size of 9.984 ± 0.016 standard error (SE) piglets compared to 7.762 ± 0.057 SE (P < 0.0001) for the hypoprolific boars (HPB), a mean reduction of 2.22 piglets. Also, the average number of piglets born dead was significantly greater for the hypoprolific boars as compared to the normal boars (1.0236 ± 0.0309 SE versus 0.9138 ± 0.0085 SE; P = 0.0004). Based on our findings we propose an improved definition of hypoprolificacy based on that of Popescu.

AB - Analysis of litter size performance of 4388 boars used in single-boar matings revealed that 191(4.3%) were hypoprolific according to the criteria of Popescu. Boars classified as normal had sired litters with an average liveborn litter size of 9.984 ± 0.016 standard error (SE) piglets compared to 7.762 ± 0.057 SE (P < 0.0001) for the hypoprolific boars (HPB), a mean reduction of 2.22 piglets. Also, the average number of piglets born dead was significantly greater for the hypoprolific boars as compared to the normal boars (1.0236 ± 0.0309 SE versus 0.9138 ± 0.0085 SE; P = 0.0004). Based on our findings we propose an improved definition of hypoprolificacy based on that of Popescu.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=3142635265&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=3142635265&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 4

SP - 21

EP - 24

JO - Journal of Swine Health and Production

JF - Journal of Swine Health and Production

SN - 1537-209X

IS - 1

ER -