Positive trends in livestock production have been declared for Belarus by the country's ministry of statistics and analysis. It indicated a 5.3% growth in pig markets for the first 6 months of this year and it now reports a national inventory of 2 million pigs on 1st July 2008 that would signify an annual increase of 0.8%.

Estonia held a national farm structure survey last year, for which some results have now been issued through Statistics Estonia. These show an average unit size in 2007 of 128 animals per pig farm. Some 90% of all pigs on farms in the country were on sites with 1000 or more pigs. An earlier survey in 2005 had shown 86%.

Romania's National Statistics Institute reports that Romania produced 642,000 tons of pigs for slaughter in 2007, compared with 618,000 tons in 2006. Pork accounted for 42.7% of Romanian meat production last year, a fall of 1.4% from the proportion in 2006.

Bulgaria has been given the all-clear to export pigs and pork to other parts of the European Union. A ban had been in place since an outbreak of classical swine fever (hog cholera) in backyard pigs at a Bulgarian village in November 2006. But a ruling to lift the ban has been made by the European Commission after checking measures taken to control the disease by Bulgaria's national veterinary medical service.

Russia has increased its own pig production so far in 2008, yet still has continued to import significant volumes. Less came from Brazil when comparing current amounts with those for the first half of 2007, but extra supplies were purchased from Denmark and Germany in the European Union and from the USA and Canada in North America.

Ukraine had 6.68 million animals on its pig farms in June 2008, said the state statistics committee. This was 20% fewer than in mid-2007. The Ukrainian region with the most pigs this year was Cherkasy, with 410 900. Ukraine's agriculture minister, Yuriy Melnyk, is quoted by news agency Interfax as saying that the average price of pork imported in the first half of this year was US$1826 per metric ton. The minister added that Ukrainian meat imports in the first 7 months of this year seem likely to reach 200 000 tons, about the same as the total quantity of meat imported in calendar year 2007. He suggested the big increase was linked to a reduction in meat import duties resulting from Ukraine's membership of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Hungary's average pig producer price for slaughter swine in the first 5 months of this year was 13.2% higher than in the equivalent period of 2007, on data from the central statistical office. For Poland, central statistics office reports show May 2008 slaughter pig prices were 4.1% higher than in February and 12% up from May 2007 levels.

----------------------------------------------------------
Google Ads: Blogging Job Board
----------------------------------------------------------

Ascarid worm parasite infestation is a long-known problem that has returned to the headlines because of its impact on the pig's ability to resist other disease challenges

We all know our pigs can be infested by roundworms. This may not seem a worry as long as no complaints are voiced by the slaughterhouse. But it is worthwhile to sound the alarm from time to time and review our anti-parasite procedures, because it is absolutely certain that uncontrolled endoparasitic infestations cost money.

All indications from extensive experience are that the cost in European terms can be as high as €5 per pig slaughtered. The economic damage will hurt especially in these times of high feed costs and low pig market prices. Even in more normal situations a problem with worms is able to decrease the herd's labor income by 10-15%. But when low prices mean less earned per pig while feed costs are higher, the impact may be nearer to 50%. As a research publication in 2007 confirmed, an uncontrolled roundworm infestation will lead to a further decline in the labor income of the pig unit by decreasing the daily growth and increasing the feed conversion rate.

It is always a good idea to refer first to what we know about the life cycle of the parasite before formulating our options for worm control. In the case of the roundworm (Ascaris suis), the cycle is special because the pig serves both as the host and as an intermediate host so there is no need for the parasite to leave the body.

Between the ingestion of the eggs and the development to an adult worm, it takes a minimum of 35 days. After the pig ingests embryo-stage eggs, the larvae will soon be set free to penetrate the gut wall. They can then make use of the blood vessels of the digestive system to reach the liver. Once inside the liver their presence is evident as the so-called milk spots formed by migrating larvae. The next step in the larval migration is from the liver to the lungs, where they also cause damage.

See the full version of this article: Roundworms Threaten Pig Health.

The economics of health control — Section 1

Costings from field experience are now being included in advice to pig producers on the control of respiratory and circovirus infections.

An online mathematical model has helped pig producers and their advisers to customize financial estimates for the cost and benefit of different vaccination strategies at the particular unit under review.

Just a few weeks ago, a pig enterprise in northern Europe was going through an audit. On the basis of an evaluation by veterinary advisers it was told that it could achieve a substantial improvement in its current growth performance and grow-finish mortality rate by making sure it vaccinated against some major respiratory pathogens. In this case, though, the advice was both specific on the changes possible in technical results and on the likely cost-benefit.

A few details can be reported here without revealing the precise farm. For example, it has facilities for some 350 sows and grow-finish places for 3200 pigs. Out of the array of infections that make up the porcine respiratory disease complex or PRDC, neither the swine influenza virus nor the Haemophilus parasuis of Glässer's Disease is considered to play an important role in pig health on this site. It has officially-certified freedom from the causal agents of Aujeszky/pseudorabies or atropic rhinitis. Its problems in respiratory health seem to arise from PRRS, Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae, App and PCV2.

The audit differentiated between these infections in terms of their severity on the particular unit. While none was rated as severe, the circovirus effects received a rating of moderate' and those of PRRS, M. hyo and App as considerable'. Pig farm records indicated their combined impact to have elevated death losses during the grow-finish period to 3.0%. Daily weight gains were down around 720 grams. The feed conversion rate was no better than 2.8. Evidently the unit's results did not reach the standard that might be achieved and the presence and relative severity of the respiratory infections explained at least part of that performance gap.

The advisers also set out the options on vaccination for this unit as being between a trio of combinations. A PRRS virus vaccine would have to be represented, but it could be combined with M. hyo or App or put into an approach covering all 3 infections.

Without any vaccination at all, which means even stopping the M. hyo vaccine currently applied, the outcome calculated for the enterprise was a loss for disease reasons alone that came close to €31 000 per year. Vaccinating the PRRS + M. hyo route would change this around from a negative to a positive, bringing a margin over vaccination costs (including labor) of more than €28 000 per year. PRRS + App vaccination offered an annual €37 000, broadly similar to the advantage from using the full PRRS/M. hyo/App application.

Therefore the enterprise operator could make a more informed decision on the choice of vaccination schemes open to him. Put simply, PRRS + M. hyo was the most logical of the 3 options as addressing the primary problems for the site. The other extreme of triple vaccination was both the most expensive option and the one likely to yield the best technical results. But PRRS + App emerged as the one giving most added value between vaccination cost and improved performance.

Although triple vaccination incurs a higher cost and gives the top technical results in this example, almost an equal annual pig farm income would be obtained by a dual respiratory vaccine application.

Projections for the number of pigs sold annually also allowed a further comparison in terms of cost. This pig farm was reckoned unable to sell more than 7765 pigs per year if it practiced no vaccination of any kind against respiratory threats. Adopting a 2-vaccine regime was projected to raise this output to 8667 pigs/year in the case of PRRS + M. hyo or 8764 pigs/year with PRRS + App, with 8943 pigs produced annually where triple vaccinating was practiced. The increases would change the loss of €2.87 per pig sold per year without vaccination into a financial benefit calculated at €2.39 on a per-pig-sold basis using a PRRS + M. hyo vaccine strategy, €3.11 per pig sold for PRRS + App and €2.75 for the triple vaccination.

While vaccinating on the basis of any of these schemes is clearly a good investment at this site, the operator must still consider the relative importance of the infections in his own pigs. For example, controlling PRRS and Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae on their own will not mean an end to all PRDC problems for the herd in question, because the disease audit showed App was also having a perceived role in its health profile. Good advice to all producers is that they should avoid too narrow a focus on the diseases apparently affecting their enterprise, not least when choosing a vaccination plan. Even if you decide to vaccinate against a single pathogen, keep in mind the others known to be present and the effects they can have.

Costings to advise the European unit outlined above had been prepared with the help of an online auditing tool developed by Intervet/Schering-Plough Animal Health for the analysis of PRDC problems on pig units around the world. Fundamentally, it is a mathematical model. But this one differs by being directed solely at the respiratory health of an enterprise and the changes possible by vaccinating. Most of all for decision-making it takes the current cost of vaccinations for the unit under examination together with the financial implications of changes to its performance, so the enterprise operator is presented with real figures rather than theoretical data or benchmarks.

The idea behind the ResPig model is that determining the right control measures to adopt against PRDC has been made more difficult by the wide variety of pathogens that might be involved in each case. It therefore begins with an audit for the unit that includes a scoring system on the severity of each pathogen audited. In practice the score can be zero (meaning the infection is not present on this site), 1 (meaning moderately influential on farm results), 2 (indicating a considerable impact) or 3 (severe).

At the same time the auditor adds estimates for the effects of the pathogens and how these might be influenced by the use of an appropriate vaccine. The modeling tool then has an Economic Simulator function that converts the inputs into an assessment of the pig costs and likely financial results from each intervention strategy to control or reduce the respiratory infections causing trouble on this farm. Disease and vaccination effects within the economic calculation have been based on scientifically controlled field trials relating to single pathogens of the PRDC complex and on the published research of independent authors.

Other elements in the farm audit look at information on pig health aspects and risk factors for the enterprise in question. These range from clinical signs and data from postmortem examinations to slaughterhouse reports. The answers also are given a score, although not at this stage with reference to any specific diseases. The next step of the disease audit takes it further by linking together the indicators of respiratory health status with the diseases and pathogens under consideration at this site. Additional remarks such as from laboratory tests can also be added.

The final assessment appears as a general audit in which the results are displayed not only in terms of their general score, but also according to each disease entity and each age group on the farm. The ground is therefore laid for an in-depth analysis that can give an overview of specific questions and provide the cost-benefit of different vaccination strategies against single pathogens or multiple agents.

We find in practice that the online model is being used by veterinary advisers to show to clients how the pig costs alter with different vaccination approaches for the control of respiratory problems. What is more, it has helped them demonstrate that PRDC is not a single disease with one solution, but is instead of a wide-ranging complex for which different control measures need to be according to the health status assessed for that enterprise.

A recent study confirms the benefits of using an early-intervention strategy for applying treatments against respiratory infections.

Veterinary practitioner Dr Karen Lehe, who carried out this trial in the USA, comments that she was not surprised to find that early intervention improved weaning weight. "That has been a consistent finding over time and it was true in this study."

Two accepted facts stand out when pig health discussions come round to respiratory disease in the nursery. First, respiratory disease is the Number-One cause of nursery mortality. Second, a pig that is healthier and heavier leaving the nursery is likely to be also healthier all through grow-finish so it shows a better growth rate to market weight.

While these facts are understood within the pig industry, the timing of treatment for respiratory disease is still an oft-debated topic. When to treat? Producers and veterinarians alike look for answers to this question. It is complex and may have multiple solutions.

In many cases, action plans are implemented too late to capture the full value that would have been achieved by earlier intervention. The impact of a fairly new approach to treating respiratory disease early has been examined in a new study, results for which were presented at the 2008 annual meeting of the American Association of Swine Veterinarians.

Conducted by Dr Karen Lehe of Round Grove Veterinary Services in Indiana, USA, the study looked at treating pigs in the nursery as well as at the sow herd. Its results offer some supporting evidence to veterinary practitioners who believe that you can expect sustainable benefits from early treatment.

The work was done at a commercial pig farm in Illinois, USA, which had 'significant' respiratory challenges — involving among others the pathogens Pasteurella multocida, Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae, circovirus and PRRS virus. To reduce the pathogen impact of respiratory disease in the sow herd, tilmicosin was utilised in the lactation diet. The treatment in this phase of production involved sows with nearly 3000 progeny, tracked through from weaning to market for both health observations and performance metrics.

One of the many objectives for Dr Lehe was to determine which respiratory pathogens were being carried from the sow herd to the nursery and whether this transfer could be minimized. The accompanying charts illustrate some key findings of benefits due to improved sow respiratory health. Pigs weaned from sows fed tilmicosin in lactation were 0.27kg heavier at weaning than others in the control group. Mortality rate in the nursery was better for pigs weaned from the treatment group of sows (1.7%) than those in the non-treatment group (2.8%).

Previous papers such as one of the 2006 International Pig Veterinary Society Congress have shown intervention in sows with a confirmed respiratory disease challenge as being able to improve health and performance in the nursery. While confirming the value of early intervention in the sow and in the nursery, Karen Lehe's study also has found significant results from using 200ppm of tilmicosin, a lower dosage than reported in the IPVS paper of 2 years ago.

Unlike grower and finisher pigs that are coughing and visibly dying from respiratory disease, sows do not necessarily have the same clinical signs. It is rare to find an overwhelming amount of respiratory disease as a primary cause of death or culling in the sow herd, Dr Lehe says. Most respiratory diseases originate in the piglet. But they can still pose a threat to the sow's health and pig production efficiency.

The threat continues through the production process because a respiratory challenge affecting the sow herd can be expected to show up in the pig flow as well. Dr Doug Powers runs Swine Veterinary Care and Consultation in Indiana, USA. He says that the effects of respiratory issues in sows transfer to their pigs in the form of greater pre-weaning mortality, lower average daily weight gain and poorer feed efficiency.

Dr Lehe notes that other factors for sows, such as reproductive failure and lameness, typically grab more attention. "So people are wondering whether a respiratory product is going to help them in the breeding herd. I cannot answer that for sure, but I do know that sows consistently have improved weaning results and reduced wean-to-service interval when they exit the barn" after early intervention. "That tells me there is strong evidence we are improving the health of the sow during the lactation period."

Because the sow often appears healthy, even when she is not, some pig producers resist the notion of intervention until reproduction results are affected. That is a potentially profit-robbing decision, Dr Lehe warns. "You are probably passing pathogens from the sow to the pig and they develop into the problems we have to deal with later in larger respiratory outbreaks in the flow," she says.

Even then there is the obvious question: Can you actually intervene in the sow diet and expect to have this effect on pigs throughout the nursery and finishing phases of production? "The answer is yes," she says. "We are seeing repeated results that show intervening in the sow diet has a very positive effect in the flow."

Even nursery pigs sometimes deceive. Maybe a healthy-looking pig at weaning has pneumonia already, Dr Lehe remarks. Sow herds with respiratory disease challenges have reduced performance and can transfer those detrimental pathogens to their weaned offspring, resulting in reduced nursery performance.

Dr Lehe advises identifying sick pigs earlier in the nursery. Too often, she says, a pig producer waits until an animal clearly needs treatment and then reaches for the least-cost injectable. Taking a closer look at individual animals — and possibly intervening when the pig first becomes sick — is a better course of action, even though it requires having people in the barns who are adequately trained to catch disease early. Additionally, the fact that producers wean groups of pigs and not single animals means recognition of the first sign of illness and timely intervention have the chance to stop any nursery respiratory infection transferring from animal to animal.

According to Dr Lehe, herd operators need to look beyond the cost of treating a sow in lactation and also take account of the return on investment. Quite simply, treatment should mean more weight moved out of the nursery and more pork marketed. When Dr Doug Powers in Indiana also looked at respiratory treatment from an economic standpoint, in one situation he found a return on investment of US$3.50 per litter based on the improved pre-weaning mortality alone.