Prevalence and types of birth defects in Ontario swine determined by mail survey

Preweaning mortality in piglets constitutes a major loss to the swine industry. Congenital defects account for a small but significant proportion of these losses. To implement appropriate strategies to reduce such losses, it is necessary to identify the specific causes and their relative importance....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Canadian journal of veterinary research 1993-04, Vol.57 (2), p.67-73
Hauptverfasser: Partlow, G.D, Fischer, K.R.S, Page, P.D, MacMillan, K, Walker, A.F
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 73
container_issue 2
container_start_page 67
container_title Canadian journal of veterinary research
container_volume 57
creator Partlow, G.D
Fischer, K.R.S
Page, P.D
MacMillan, K
Walker, A.F
description Preweaning mortality in piglets constitutes a major loss to the swine industry. Congenital defects account for a small but significant proportion of these losses. To implement appropriate strategies to reduce such losses, it is necessary to identify the specific causes and their relative importance. Consequently, a mail survey of swine production in Ontario was carried out to determine the prevalence and types of birth defects. Statistical comparisons of the prevalence of overall defects were made between accurate and estimate records, breeds (cross vs. purebred), size of operation (number of sows) and geographic location. The mean litter size of 11 pigs born per sow was not significantly different for those with accurate versus estimate records, but the difference in the prevalence of defective pigs (live and dead) was significant (accurate 3.1% vs. estimate 4.1%). Splayleg (spraddleleg) was the most common defect. The next four defects for both groups were belly rupture, other rupture, ridglings and other, but not in the same ranking. Purebred and small farm operations (< 25 sows) had a significantly higher prevalence of birth defects for estimated data only. Geographic location had no effect. Further work is required to determine whether recording prevalence of birth defects in Ontario swine will provide a useful monitor of environmental stress. The study provides a baseline for the prevalence and type of defects in Ontario swine.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1263596</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>75732048</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-f285t-2a84dd86fd0bb207e45e92c0236f8d88f5c70a01068483c289a9814a007335933</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkF1LwzAUhnOhzDn9CWKuvCucJm2a3Agy_AJhA911SJvTLdKPmaST_nsLG6JX54UHngfOGZmD5JAoALgglyF8ArBCMD4jM5kpkKDmZL32eDANdhVS01kaxz0G2te0dD7uqMUaqxio6-iqi8a7noZv1-EEIvp2WpaWI22Na2gY_AHHK3Jemybg9ekuyObp8WP5krytnl-XD29JzWQeE2ZkZq0UtYWyZFBglqNiFTAuammlrPOqAAMpCJlJXjGpjJJpZgAKznPF-YLcH737oWzRVthFbxq99641ftS9cfo_6dxOb_uDTpmYBGIS3J0Evv8aMETdulBh05gO-yHoIi84gym-IDd_S7-J0w8nfnvktem12XoX9OadQcqBCaGUZPwHjeR2Tg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>75732048</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prevalence and types of birth defects in Ontario swine determined by mail survey</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Partlow, G.D ; Fischer, K.R.S ; Page, P.D ; MacMillan, K ; Walker, A.F</creator><creatorcontrib>Partlow, G.D ; Fischer, K.R.S ; Page, P.D ; MacMillan, K ; Walker, A.F</creatorcontrib><description>Preweaning mortality in piglets constitutes a major loss to the swine industry. Congenital defects account for a small but significant proportion of these losses. To implement appropriate strategies to reduce such losses, it is necessary to identify the specific causes and their relative importance. Consequently, a mail survey of swine production in Ontario was carried out to determine the prevalence and types of birth defects. Statistical comparisons of the prevalence of overall defects were made between accurate and estimate records, breeds (cross vs. purebred), size of operation (number of sows) and geographic location. The mean litter size of 11 pigs born per sow was not significantly different for those with accurate versus estimate records, but the difference in the prevalence of defective pigs (live and dead) was significant (accurate 3.1% vs. estimate 4.1%). Splayleg (spraddleleg) was the most common defect. The next four defects for both groups were belly rupture, other rupture, ridglings and other, but not in the same ranking. Purebred and small farm operations (&lt; 25 sows) had a significantly higher prevalence of birth defects for estimated data only. Geographic location had no effect. Further work is required to determine whether recording prevalence of birth defects in Ontario swine will provide a useful monitor of environmental stress. The study provides a baseline for the prevalence and type of defects in Ontario swine.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0830-9000</identifier><identifier>PMID: 8490809</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Canada</publisher><subject>Animal Husbandry ; Animals ; Breeding ; congenital abnormalities ; Congenital Abnormalities - epidemiology ; Congenital Abnormalities - mortality ; Congenital Abnormalities - veterinary ; crossbreds ; epidemiological studies ; estimation ; farm size ; farm surveys ; Female ; frequency ; geographical variation ; Hindlimb - abnormalities ; inbred lines ; literature reviews ; Litter Size ; livestock numbers ; Ontario - epidemiology ; perinatal mortality ; piglets ; Postal Service ; Prevalence ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Swine - abnormalities ; swine breeds</subject><ispartof>Canadian journal of veterinary research, 1993-04, Vol.57 (2), p.67-73</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1263596/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1263596/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8490809$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Partlow, G.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fischer, K.R.S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Page, P.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacMillan, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walker, A.F</creatorcontrib><title>Prevalence and types of birth defects in Ontario swine determined by mail survey</title><title>Canadian journal of veterinary research</title><addtitle>Can J Vet Res</addtitle><description>Preweaning mortality in piglets constitutes a major loss to the swine industry. Congenital defects account for a small but significant proportion of these losses. To implement appropriate strategies to reduce such losses, it is necessary to identify the specific causes and their relative importance. Consequently, a mail survey of swine production in Ontario was carried out to determine the prevalence and types of birth defects. Statistical comparisons of the prevalence of overall defects were made between accurate and estimate records, breeds (cross vs. purebred), size of operation (number of sows) and geographic location. The mean litter size of 11 pigs born per sow was not significantly different for those with accurate versus estimate records, but the difference in the prevalence of defective pigs (live and dead) was significant (accurate 3.1% vs. estimate 4.1%). Splayleg (spraddleleg) was the most common defect. The next four defects for both groups were belly rupture, other rupture, ridglings and other, but not in the same ranking. Purebred and small farm operations (&lt; 25 sows) had a significantly higher prevalence of birth defects for estimated data only. Geographic location had no effect. Further work is required to determine whether recording prevalence of birth defects in Ontario swine will provide a useful monitor of environmental stress. The study provides a baseline for the prevalence and type of defects in Ontario swine.</description><subject>Animal Husbandry</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Breeding</subject><subject>congenital abnormalities</subject><subject>Congenital Abnormalities - epidemiology</subject><subject>Congenital Abnormalities - mortality</subject><subject>Congenital Abnormalities - veterinary</subject><subject>crossbreds</subject><subject>epidemiological studies</subject><subject>estimation</subject><subject>farm size</subject><subject>farm surveys</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>frequency</subject><subject>geographical variation</subject><subject>Hindlimb - abnormalities</subject><subject>inbred lines</subject><subject>literature reviews</subject><subject>Litter Size</subject><subject>livestock numbers</subject><subject>Ontario - epidemiology</subject><subject>perinatal mortality</subject><subject>piglets</subject><subject>Postal Service</subject><subject>Prevalence</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Swine - abnormalities</subject><subject>swine breeds</subject><issn>0830-9000</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1993</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkF1LwzAUhnOhzDn9CWKuvCucJm2a3Agy_AJhA911SJvTLdKPmaST_nsLG6JX54UHngfOGZmD5JAoALgglyF8ArBCMD4jM5kpkKDmZL32eDANdhVS01kaxz0G2te0dD7uqMUaqxio6-iqi8a7noZv1-EEIvp2WpaWI22Na2gY_AHHK3Jemybg9ekuyObp8WP5krytnl-XD29JzWQeE2ZkZq0UtYWyZFBglqNiFTAuammlrPOqAAMpCJlJXjGpjJJpZgAKznPF-YLcH737oWzRVthFbxq99641ftS9cfo_6dxOb_uDTpmYBGIS3J0Evv8aMETdulBh05gO-yHoIi84gym-IDd_S7-J0w8nfnvktem12XoX9OadQcqBCaGUZPwHjeR2Tg</recordid><startdate>19930401</startdate><enddate>19930401</enddate><creator>Partlow, G.D</creator><creator>Fischer, K.R.S</creator><creator>Page, P.D</creator><creator>MacMillan, K</creator><creator>Walker, A.F</creator><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19930401</creationdate><title>Prevalence and types of birth defects in Ontario swine determined by mail survey</title><author>Partlow, G.D ; Fischer, K.R.S ; Page, P.D ; MacMillan, K ; Walker, A.F</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-f285t-2a84dd86fd0bb207e45e92c0236f8d88f5c70a01068483c289a9814a007335933</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1993</creationdate><topic>Animal Husbandry</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Breeding</topic><topic>congenital abnormalities</topic><topic>Congenital Abnormalities - epidemiology</topic><topic>Congenital Abnormalities - mortality</topic><topic>Congenital Abnormalities - veterinary</topic><topic>crossbreds</topic><topic>epidemiological studies</topic><topic>estimation</topic><topic>farm size</topic><topic>farm surveys</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>frequency</topic><topic>geographical variation</topic><topic>Hindlimb - abnormalities</topic><topic>inbred lines</topic><topic>literature reviews</topic><topic>Litter Size</topic><topic>livestock numbers</topic><topic>Ontario - epidemiology</topic><topic>perinatal mortality</topic><topic>piglets</topic><topic>Postal Service</topic><topic>Prevalence</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Swine - abnormalities</topic><topic>swine breeds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Partlow, G.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fischer, K.R.S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Page, P.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacMillan, K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Walker, A.F</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Canadian journal of veterinary research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Partlow, G.D</au><au>Fischer, K.R.S</au><au>Page, P.D</au><au>MacMillan, K</au><au>Walker, A.F</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prevalence and types of birth defects in Ontario swine determined by mail survey</atitle><jtitle>Canadian journal of veterinary research</jtitle><addtitle>Can J Vet Res</addtitle><date>1993-04-01</date><risdate>1993</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>67</spage><epage>73</epage><pages>67-73</pages><issn>0830-9000</issn><abstract>Preweaning mortality in piglets constitutes a major loss to the swine industry. Congenital defects account for a small but significant proportion of these losses. To implement appropriate strategies to reduce such losses, it is necessary to identify the specific causes and their relative importance. Consequently, a mail survey of swine production in Ontario was carried out to determine the prevalence and types of birth defects. Statistical comparisons of the prevalence of overall defects were made between accurate and estimate records, breeds (cross vs. purebred), size of operation (number of sows) and geographic location. The mean litter size of 11 pigs born per sow was not significantly different for those with accurate versus estimate records, but the difference in the prevalence of defective pigs (live and dead) was significant (accurate 3.1% vs. estimate 4.1%). Splayleg (spraddleleg) was the most common defect. The next four defects for both groups were belly rupture, other rupture, ridglings and other, but not in the same ranking. Purebred and small farm operations (&lt; 25 sows) had a significantly higher prevalence of birth defects for estimated data only. Geographic location had no effect. Further work is required to determine whether recording prevalence of birth defects in Ontario swine will provide a useful monitor of environmental stress. The study provides a baseline for the prevalence and type of defects in Ontario swine.</abstract><cop>Canada</cop><pmid>8490809</pmid><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0830-9000
ispartof Canadian journal of veterinary research, 1993-04, Vol.57 (2), p.67-73
issn 0830-9000
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1263596
source MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Animal Husbandry
Animals
Breeding
congenital abnormalities
Congenital Abnormalities - epidemiology
Congenital Abnormalities - mortality
Congenital Abnormalities - veterinary
crossbreds
epidemiological studies
estimation
farm size
farm surveys
Female
frequency
geographical variation
Hindlimb - abnormalities
inbred lines
literature reviews
Litter Size
livestock numbers
Ontario - epidemiology
perinatal mortality
piglets
Postal Service
Prevalence
Surveys and Questionnaires
Swine - abnormalities
swine breeds
title Prevalence and types of birth defects in Ontario swine determined by mail survey
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T14%3A25%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prevalence%20and%20types%20of%20birth%20defects%20in%20Ontario%20swine%20determined%20by%20mail%20survey&rft.jtitle=Canadian%20journal%20of%20veterinary%20research&rft.au=Partlow,%20G.D&rft.date=1993-04-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=67&rft.epage=73&rft.pages=67-73&rft.issn=0830-9000&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E75732048%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=75732048&rft_id=info:pmid/8490809&rfr_iscdi=true