Producing what the processor wants • Zoonotic diseases of

PORCUS
October 2010 Vol 28 no 6
• Producing what the
processor wants
• A review of feeder designs for pigs
• Zoonotic diseases of pigs
Inhoud
Inhoud/Contents
SAVPO
PORCUS
October 2010 Vol 28 no
6
Aktueel
Happy birthday Charles Street!
A hundred chicks and counting
Aktueel
Farmers and vets: What about me? THE PIG
Uitvoermoontlikhede . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Is a farmer’s wife also his employee?
Gesamentlike kongres goeie idee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Optimising production efficiency is the key
US’s PQA Plus programme reaches 50 000 milestone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Pig production in ten years from now
CSVC farmer’s day . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Coccidiosis
Ons hou makietie inIsPretoria
. . . . . .silently
. . . . . . .wasting
. . . . . . . your
. . . . .products?
. . . . . . . 13
Zoonotic diseases Swine
of pigs .flu
. . .hoax
. . . . .“falling
. . . . . . apart
. . . . . .at. .the
. . . seams”
. . . . . . . . 14
Nuwe aanstelling by
TOPIGS SA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
International
The absolute top inTo
pigtaste
genetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
NEMA, NEMWA, NWA ... and what more? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Mistral reduces pre-weaning mortality and improves p
Effective control of salmonella by means of diformates . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Batch system ideal for increased, healthy production
Dankie aan ons uitstallers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
A review of feeder designs for pigs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Rubrieke
A.I. equals genetic improvement, says Schippers expert . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Try this cider-glazedStatistical
pork chopsReview
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Trace mineral nutrition
for sow
lifetime performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Sappo
News
Getting what you paid for? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Pondering Points
Rubrieke
Market conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Pondering Points . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
PORCUS is die amptelike tydskrif
van die Suid-Afrikaanse
Varkvleisprodusente-organisasie (SAVPO).
Redaksionele Komitee
James Jenkinson (voorsitter: SAVPO),
PORCUS
is die
amptelike tydskrif
Peter Mockford
(vise-voorsitter:
SAVPO), Simon Streicher (hoofbestuurvan
die Suid-Afrikaanse
der: SAVPO)
Varkvleisprodusente-organisasie
Redaksie
Derick van der Walt (redakteur),
(SAVPO).
Tel: (012) 332 1589 of 082 770 5111
E-pos: [email protected]
Salomé Schutte. Tel:
(012) 329 3764
Redaksionele
Komitee
SAPPO
P
N
James
Jenkinson (voorsitter:
Advertensies
Doreen Jonker, Millerstraat 3, Pierre
SAVPO),
van RyneveldPeter
0157.Mockford (viseTel (012) 662SAVPO),
1006.
voositter,
Simon Streicher
Faks (012) 662 1006
(hoofbestuurder: SAVPO)
Porcus October 2010
Redaksie
Reproduksie
Mandi Repro en Print
Gedruk deur
Business Print Centre, Pretoria.
Uitgegee deur die Suid-Afrikaanse
Varkvleisprodusente-organisasie,
Salomé Schutte. Tel: (012) 3293764
Posbus 36207, Menlo Park 0102.
Tel: (012) 361-3920.
Faks:
(012) 361-4069
Advertensies
E-mail: [email protected]
Doreen Jonker,
Millerstraat 3, Pierre
Web-bladsy:
www.sapork.com
van Ryneveld 0157.
SAVPO aanvaar nie verantwoordelikheid
enige662
aanspraak
in
Tel vir
(012)
1006 wat
of 0721236695
advertensies en artikels gemaak
Faks
1006 in artikels
word
nie. (012)
Menings662
uitgespreek
word
nie
noodwendig
deur SAVPO
E-pos:[email protected]
onderskryf nie.
Opinions expressed in articles are
not necessarily endorsed by SAPPO.
Reproduksie: Mandi Repro en Print,
Gedruk deur Business Print3Centre,
Pretoria.
NUTRITION
Market conditions
Information supplied by the Bureau of Food and Agricultural Policy (BFAP)
T
he pork to maize price ratio for both PP and BP has declined from its levels in June to September, mainly due to
the increase in yellow maize prices from June. The ratios
for PP and BP have declined from an average of 13.26 in June
to 11.63 and 10.90 respectively.
The maize price increased almost R250/ton from its lowest
level in June to September 2010 and averaged R1 360/ton
in September. There was a slight increase in the price for PP
from June to July and thereafter it remained constant. The price
movement for the last mentioned period was from R14.72/kg in
June to R15.81/kg in September 2010.
Farm level analysis
Figure 3: Pork price and YM SAFEX price
Figure 1: Index for requisites and auction prices
The latest update from the BFAP pork industry index analysis
in October includes the projection for 2010 based on the BFAP
2010 model. Current prices and input trends indicate that the
indices could decline even further since our last estimate. The
requisite index is 8.58% lower than the actual level in 2009 and
the auction price index is 10.61% lower than the same value
in 2009. The maize price, largest driver in the requisites index,
is currently recovering from its lowest levels in June as can be
seen below.
The higher maize price in August and September has resulted
in a decline of 13.9% in the pork to maize price ratio. The price
for BP remained relatively constant for the period June to September averaging R14.82/kg.
In the sample of the pork producers that were analysed the
upward trend in sow numbers came to an end in July 2010 at a
value of 31 038 and declined slightly towards August to 31 010.
The upward trend in sales is still continuing and has reached
its second highest level since March 2009. The total number of
sales was 53 498 in August.
Figure 4: Sow numbers vs sales1
Figure 2: Pork to maize price ratio
4
The number of services remained relatively constant from June
to August and the upward trend evened out in August, reaching
a level of 7 222. The upward trend for piglets born since February 2010 has reached its peak in July with 66 171 piglets born.
From July to August the amount born declined with 4.17% and
averaged 64 887 in August 2010.
Porcus Oktober 2010
Market conditions
Figure 5: Services vs piglets born2
Abattoir level analysis
The abattoir analysis focuses on two aspects, namely the
number of pigs, sheep and cattle slaughtered and the abattoir
prices.
Figure 7: Average slaughter quantities
Average weekly prices for various classes of pork experienced
significant volatility since April 2010. The actual weekly prices
for PP quality pork have increased from R14.65/kg for the
week of 25 June to R15.69/kg for the week of 25 September
2010. BP prices remained constant for the period from June to
September and prices for BP products traded at R14.55/kg for
the week of 25 September. The retail prices for BP products
did not follow the constant trend similar to abattoir prices as will
be seen later in the report. The weekly average prices for other
classes experienced a slight increase towards the middle of
September. For instance, BR products increased from R13.33/
kg at the end of June to R14.26 /kg in the week of 17 September 2010.
Figure 6: Total numbers slaughtered (price reporting
abattoirs)
The total number of animals slaughtered (price reporting by
abattoirs) showed a positive trend for the period June to July,
but declined slightly towards August. The moving average value
has reached a level of 17 971 during the week of 25 July and
then decreased to 17 373 slaughtering for the week of 25 August. The numbers in August 2010 were more or less the same
as the numbers in August 2009. Total animals slaughtered3, as
reported to the levy administration, seems to have remained
relatively constant, with the exception of sheep and the ongoing
effect of rift valley fever. The actual number of sheep slaughterings for August was 297 072, 10.84% lower than slaughterings
in August 2009. The average slaughterings for cattle and pigs
for August was 183 060 and 189 255 respectively.
Figure 8: Average price for various classes4
Wholesale and retail price analysis
The margin between porker products has declined significantly
from June to September. The index margin for porker products
have declined from 111% in June to 80% in September, a de-
Continued on p. 6
Porcus October 2010
5
NUTRITION
Market conditions
Market conditions continued from p. 5
cline of 38.3%. The opposite was realised for baconer products. Significant price increases for selective baconer products
was the main contributor towards the rise in the index margin.
The index margin for baconer products have increased from
138% in June to reach a high in September of 155%. Wholesale prices for class P porker and class BP baconer was 20.5
and 17.50 per kg respectively.
Figure 9: Margin analysis for porkers and baconers,
October, February, April and June 2010
Import analysis
Imports for July and August were lower than imports in May
and June. Pork imports for June and August was relatively the
same at an average of 1 343 tonnes for the two months. The
decrease from June towards August was 32%. Total imports of
pork meat in August 2010 reached 1 354 tonnes.
Uitvoermoontlikhede
In 2008, tydens die IPVS-kongres in Durban, is my
verbeelding aangegryp deur die spreker Tim Laula. Hy
het ‘n toekomsoorsig gegee van die proteïenbehoeftes
van die wêreld.
Teen die jaar 2020 moet die wêreld se proteïenvoorsiening
verdubbel. Hy het in sy aanbieding gekyk na proteïenbronne,
spesifieke vark, en waar in die wêreld dit geproduseer word. Wat
opvallend was, was die feit dat Afrika as kontinent glad nie ‘n rol
speel en ‘n bydrae lewer tot proteïenverskaffing in die wêreld nie.
Dit maak ’n mens bewus van en opgewonde oor die geleentheid wat ons aan die Suidpunt van Afrika het om iewers
‘n bydrae te kan lewer in hierdie groeiende wêreldaanvraag na
proteïen. Evalueer ‘n mens die Suid-Afrikaanse varkbedryf, weet
‘n mens dat ons kompeterend met gewaarborgde kwaliteit aan
hierdie groeiende wêreldmark kan deelneem.
Dis met hierdie benadering dat ek die inisiatief van die
uitvoerkommitee van PPP ondersteun. (Daar is ook baie ander
motiverings vir die inisiatief). Die PPP se verslag oor uitvoere wat
nou beskikbaar is, wys op hierdie geleentheid, potensiaal en
lewensvatbaarheid. Dit is meer as net ‘n droom vir die varkbedryf.
Sonder om op detail in die verslag te fokus, staan twee aspekte
baie duidelik uit, naamlik die uitvoervolume (tans) wat volgens
hierdie verslag, Namibië uitgesluit, onder een persent van SAproduksie is. Invoer is ± agt persent van SA-produksie.
Sou dit moontlik wees om die agt persent invoere te verminder en die uitvoer te vergroot, is ‘n 20 persent potensiaal vir
groei in die bedryf moontlik. Haalbaarheid sal afhang van sterk
vennootskappe tussen die bedryf, produsente en regeringsondersteuning. Mag ons as bedryf met planne en genade
drome waar laat word. (Eugene Pienaar, PPP)
Gesamentlike
kongres goeie idee
Die afgelope gesamentlike kongres van die Premier Varkvleisprodusente (PPP) en SAVPO wat naby
Krugersdorp gehou is, was ‘n groot sukses en dit
was ‘n uitstekende idee om dit saam aan te bied, sê
SAVPO se voorsitter, James Jenkinson.
Figure 10: Imports of pork to South Africa
SAPPO pork producers form survey (2010/11)
SAPPO Pork producers form survey (2010)
3
Data from the levy administration – no update available at time
of publication (www.levyadmin.co.za)
4
May price data has been estimated and may not be completely representative.
1
2
6
Hy sê daar was ’n baie goeie opkoms en die sprekers se voorleggings was besonder interessant. Vir hom gaan dit egter meer
oor die produsente, en hy is baie ingenome met die positiewe
terugvoer wat van hulle ontvang is.
Iets waarvan hy besonder baie gehou het, is die geriewe van
die konferensiesentrum waar die kongres en algemene jaarvergaderings van PPP en SAVPO aangebied is. Die lokaal was so
geleë dat alle kongresgangers verplig was om deur die borge se
uitstalarea te loop, en laasgenoemde het daarom goeie blootstelling en dus waarde vir hul geld gekry.
Die borge het dit ook waardeer dat die twee geleenthede
saam aangebied is, aangesien dit in terme van logistiek en
kostes groot besparings vir hulle meegebring het.
Jenkinson sê daar is nog nie besluit of SAVPO se kongres
volgende jaar weer saam met PPP sal plaasvind nie, aangesien
dit in Bloemfontein gehou gaan word, en afstand dus ’n rol sal
speel. Dit sal vir PPP se lede ver wees om soontoe te reis. ’n
Finale besluit moet egter nog geneem word.
Porcus Oktober 2010
International
US’s PQA Plus Programme
reaches 50 000 milestone
Pork Quality Assurance Plus (PQA
Plus), the US pork industry’s programme to assure the world that
producers are delivering a safe
and wholesome product and that
they are caring for their animals
in a socially responsible manner,
reached a significant milestone
in October this year when the
number of producers achieving
PQA Plus certification reached
50 000.
“All pork producers should be especially
proud about reaching this milestone,”
said Gene Nemechek, a swine veterinarian and the president of the National
Pork Board. “Producing safe food and
providing high-quality care for our
animals are two of the
ethical principles that
form the foundation of
What is really important
the pork industry’s We
though, is that our customCare initiative.
ers can have confidence in
But it’s one thing
the safety of pork and in the
to talk about ethical
animal handling practices
principles and another
that producers employ as
when we walk the talk,”
they care for their animals.
Nemechek said. “This
demonstrates that
producers are walking
Additionally, to achieve site status, a
the talk.”
pork operation must have an on-farm
Since its introduction in 1989, PQA
assessment of its animal handling prachas been the pork industry’s flagship
tices by a certified PQA Plus advisor.
educational and continuous improve“Getting to the 50 000 certification
ment programme. Created through the
mark has been a significant undertaking
Pork Checkoff to promote food safety
by both pork producers and extenand residue avoidance on the farm, the
sion educators and veterinarians who
programme was expanded in 2007 to
conduct the certifications,” said Stacy
include animal handling practices and
Revels, manager of certification prorenamed PQA Plus.
grammes for the Pork Checkoff. “The
To attain certification a producer
National Pork Board in 2009 set a goal
must meet with a trained advisor once
of having all pork producers certified by
every three years to review the 10 Good
2010. And while we’re not quite there
Production Practices that promote pork
yet, this milestone demonstrates the
safety and animal well-being practices.
commitment of pork producers to doing
Porcus October 2010
the right thing.”
“When you consider that prior to
2007 the industry had 30 000 producers certified, you begin to appreciate
the success of PQA Plus,” Nemechek
said. “Now, every time we certify a new
producer we set a new record.
Revels noted that the board also has
set a goal of having all operations siteassessed by the end of 2010. “Right
now, we have assessed operations that
represent more than 60 percent of all
the pigs in the country. We continue to
assess new operations each week and
are making great progress on our goal,”
she said. PigProgress
7
CSVC Farmer’s day
Charles Street
Veterinary Consultants (CSVC) held
its annual farmers’
day at Hartbeespoort. Some of the
highlights appear
on the next pages.
“P
roducers cannot produce
quality carcasses if they
do not get feedback.
To guide and encourage improvement in pork lean quality, carcasses
should therefore be evaluated for
overall quality at slaughter,” said
Dr Annie Labuscagne from Charles
Street Veterinary Consultants (CSVC)
at the CSVC farmers’ day on the
topic of “How to produce what the
processor wants”.
She said with this information, producers can have the opportunity to make
breeding decisions, which include a lean
quality component, and to be financially
rewarded for producing pigs with both
acceptable lean quality and high carcass
lean yields.
Dr Labuscagne advised farmers to
ascertain in which market their processor
is. It can be processed products, fresh
carcasses or delicacies. They all have
different needs.
Another important issue is that of a
Producing what the
processor want
quality carcass. What farmers think of
as quality might be completely different
from what processors regard as quality,
because the producer’s end-product is
a pig, while the processor’s end-product
is meat.
“Most farmers know very little about
meat quality, because their main concern
is to market kilograms of healthy, lean,
live pigs.”
To processors, a quality carcass is
carcasses of the same size, with good
marbling, acceptable colour, acceptable
flavour, no bruising and no condemnations.
Processors have a problem with carcass variation because many abattoirs
are semi- to fully automated, and their
machines are therefore set for a certain
size of pig. Too big or too small carcasses have a negative impact on the quality
of the cuts.
Dr Labuscagne said it is important to
remember that the processor’s needs
are determined by the needs of the
housewife. She wants tasty, tender
meat, but she thinks meat is inferior in
terms of nutritional value if there is too
much marbling and visible fat.
“Marbling refers to the amount of
intramuscular fat visible. Higher levels
of intramuscular fat or marbling in pork
have been shown to positively influence
the juiciness, tenderness and flavour of
pork. In recent years, marbling levels
dropped below one percent, but for
an optimal eating experience, marbling
should be between 2 and 2.5%.”
Marbling is influenced by diet and
age, but certain breeds of pigs have
more marbling than other breeds. The
inclusion of Duroc genes have a very
positive effect on juiciness, tenderness
and flavour.
As far as colour is concerned, most
consumers prefer a bright, reddish-pink
colour in fresh pork.
Colour variations can be attributed to:
• Pale, soft exudative (PSE)
• Red soft, exudative (RSE)
• Normal (RFN)
• Dark, firm, dry (DFD).
PSE and RSE meat
PSE lean is not only abnormally pale in
colour, but is more susceptible to developing gray or greenish-gray discolouration during display. The pale condition
primarily affects the loin and outer ham
muscles, resulting in a two-toned appearance in some cuts. PSE muscle’s
soft texture gives a “mushy,” less attractive appearance, and affected muscle
usually contains little marbling. PSE and
RSE muscles readily give up moisture
The pig supplier must understand
the clients’ needs
“The pig supplier has to understand
the processor’s business, the retailer’s requirements and what the consumer wants before he or she can
deliver what the processor wants,”
said Arnold Prinsloo of Eskort at the
CSVC farmers’ day.
He said processors would like to have a
long-term relationship with their suppliers. They also needs a consistent supply
of pigs of a good carcass quality.
Other needs include a carcass weight
8
of 75kg, no boar taint, no bruising,
competitive prices, compliance to animal
welfare regulations and compliance to
good environmental practices.
Prinsloo said retailers require Hasard
Analysis and Critical Control Points
(HACCP), a system used in food plants
to ensure food safety, from all food
suppliers. Hazards can be identified as
microbial contamination or chemical
hazards.
Retailers further require a retailer
specific audit, Consumer Protection Act
compliance, labeling legislation compliance, good environmental practices,
competitive prices and world class
manufacturing practices.
The consumer requires an acceptable appearance of the product, taste
and tenderness, nutritional value, as
well as honest labeling of each product.
“Today’s consumer also needs healthy
products of convenience, reputable
suppliers, compliance to animal welfare
legislation and good value for money.”
he said.
Porcus Oktober 2010
CSVC Farmer’s day
due to reduced water-holding ability of
muscle proteins. In fresh PSE or RSE
pork this pink fluid accumulates within
retail packages, and leads to less juicy
pork after cooking. Hams produced from
PSE and RSE muscles may have five to
ten percent lower processing yields, and
may lack a uniform cured color.
indication of meat from older animals, or
lacking in freshness. DFD lean is more
susceptible to microbial spoilage because of its higher pH (less acidity) which
favours bacteria growth. All muscles of
the pork carcass are subject to the DFD
condition, Dr Labuscagne said.
Acceptable flavour
DFD meat
DFD muscle has exceptional water-holding ability and excels in tenderness. Its
dark colour is less appealing to consumers, who often interpret it as an
“Acceptable flavour is more difficult to
achieve because of the problem of boar
taint. Boar taint is the offensive odour
or taste that can be evident during
the cooking or eating of pork or pork
products derived from non-castrated
male pigs once they reach puberty. Most
South African farmers do not castrate
their boars and as much as ten to 15
percent of the entire male pigs produced
for pork, has boar taint when cooked.
“It is the responsibility of the producer
to ensure that boars are sent to the
market in time.
“Bruising is a big problem for processors. If there is bruising, they must
remove it. It can be caused by mixing of
pigs before loading, transport, mixing at
abattoirs and injection sites, she said.
Simon Streicher (SAVPO), Manfred and Etienne Süllwald (both Hester and Jonathan Gill (Giltford Piggeries) with Roelie and
from Bela-Bela)
Reghard Feenstra (Feenstra Farming)
Romi and Marius Coetzee (Schutte Farming) and Saartjie du
Toit (No 2 Piggeries, Welkom)
Gerhard Oberholzer, Nicolene Burger (both from CK Oberholzer
Farming) and Johan Smit (Schurveberg)
Santie Burger and Lizette Swart (both from Charles Street
Veterinary Consultants) with Carina Theron (Ede Farming)
Willem de Chavonnes (Curly Wee), Francois du Toit (TOPIGS SA)
and Chris Beghin (MG2Mix)
Porcus October 2010
9
STUDIEGROEPE
10
Porcus Junie/Julie 2010
CSVC Farmer’s day
Born alive can be too high
“When does your born alive becomes too high?” This was one of
the topics discussed at the Leman
Congress 2010, which Dr Andrew
Tucker of CSVC attended in Minnesota, USA.
In an overview of the congress, presented at the CSVC farmers’ day, Dr Tucker
said the hyperprolific sow, a modern sow
with abnormally high born alive, are presenting problems to breeders because
her uterus can’t provide enough when
the litter is too big.
Breeders in other countries are starting
to select differently to ensure that they
have a sow with a stronger uterus. The
trend is to select for the amount of piglets which is actually possible to wean.
Genetic selection and segregation are
the two factors which producers need
to manage to ensure litters of a good
quality. Segregation means that the sow
in the farrowing house must be managed
differently. It is also important to manage
low birth weight litters differently. Segregration should be applied in the weaner
and grower house, which includes different feed, Dr Tucker said.
The issue of genetic uniformity was
also discussed during the congress.
Artificial insemination (A.I.) is a vital part
of this. A.I. is not only supposed to deliver reduced labour inputs at breeding,
improved occupational health, a reduced
risk of disease and an easier working
environment, it also provides more consistent production, greater genetic gain
and the rapid integration of new genes.
It was concluded that in order to
achieve genetic uniformity, the dam
line should be fairly uniform, except in
the case of older sows. Sire line poses
certain questions. Fewer boars lead to
less genetic variation, and the cloning
of boars were mentioned as the golden
answer to the problem.
However, for the immediate future the
options are to select boars with superior
fertility, as well as A.I. techniques that
use less sperm per litter born.
Superior fertility includes the use of single-sire A.I. to characterise boar fertility.
Boars with limited production capacity
Hannes Piek (Kitso-Khumo), Arnold
Dr Pieter Vervoort (CSVC), Jonathan Gill
Prinsloo (Eskort) and Dr Annie Labuscagne (Giltford Piggeries, who received the
(CSVC)
price for the farm who had the highest
weaning figures in 2009) and Dr Peter
Evans (CSVC)
must be eliminated in favour of boars
with good fertility at lower sperm.
Two A.I. techniques, which use less
sperm per litter born, are intra-uterine
insemination and a single fixed-time A.I.
In future, genetic uniformity will be
achieved with the more efficient use of
elite boars in production systems. This
will entail a refined post servical technique with a reduced sperm number and
volume of doses. The use of a single
fixed-time A.I. should be evaluated, Dr
Tucker said.
Summer infertility also came under
the spotlight, and it was concluded that
breeding the right sow is the result of
quality mating. To this end, the paradigm
must be changed from hitting breeding
target to hitting litter target.
Management and production practices
are driven by environmental factors.
Semen quality during summer must be
ensured by correct packing and transporting procedures. The sow’s comfort
can be monitored by the monitoring of
her respiratory rates. It is also important
to monitor lactation feed efficiency.
Dr Andrew Tucker (CSVC) with Kobus
Raath (Walt Landgoed, who received an
award for its contribution to the CSVC
owl project)
Quality equals quantity
“The South African pork producer
has to produce good quality pork,
and lots of it,” said Dr Pieter
Vervoort of CSVC during the CSVC
farmers’ day on the topic, “Quality
versus quantity - throughout the
chain”.
He said quality and quantity are not
mutually exclusive and both should be
achieved.
Every farmer has to define his output
and determine who his consumer is; the
Porcus October 2010
processor or the housewife. He needs
control of the whole chain, because
quality starts at the very beginning. For
example poor feed and genetics cannot
be made into a great consumer product.
The producer has to make this mindshift and think like an intergrator. He
must take control and set the standards.
If he can’t do this, he will be forced out
of the system.
The quality chain begins with the soil
quality of the animal’s feed and ends in
the consumer’s mouth. Quality has to be
defined in all stages; inputs, production
stages, slaughter, processing, sale and
customer satisfaction.
Success is measured in terms of the
customers’ votes; and they vote with
their pocket.
Successful, involved farmers should
be the drivers of quality and quantity, by
driving the industry’s systems, organised
change in terms of approach, research
and the consumer, Dr Vervoort said.
11
VOORGROND
Ons hou makietie in Pretoria
Porcus en SAVPO se elektroniese nuusbrief, SAPPOInfo het die publikasies
se adverteerders buite Pretoria onthaal, om dankie te sê vir hulle ondersteuning gedurende 2010. Die foto’s is by die geleentheid geneem.
Jakes Smith (Protein Feeds), Sally Bosman (SAVPO), Yolandé van Zyl
(Greenpepper Communication) en Tomas Pienaar (Protein Feeds)
Hannes Croukamp (Instavet), Salomé Schutte
(Porcus) en Pierre Smith (Virbac)
George Myburgh (Boehringer Ingelheim), Francois du Toit (TOPIGS SA),
James Jenkinson (SAVPO) en Tippie Marais (Instavet)
Wessel Whitehead (Addcon Africa) Melanie Leppan
(Boehringer Ingelheim) en Johan van Niekerk (Addcon
Africa)
SAPPO not officially supporting
GLOBALGAP
Dr Greg Celliers (Intervet-Shering Plough), Doreen Jonker (Porcus), Elize
Kruger (Intervet-Shering Plough), en Bets en Simon Streicher (SAVPO)
Porcus October 2010
Although SAPPO supports every effort to encourage
good agricultural practices, the organisation is not officially supporting the GLOBALGAP model, says Simon
Streicher, CEO of SAPPO in reaction to enquiries by
some readers. (See article on GLOBALGAP in Porcus
August/September 2010.)
“We however believe that Porcus, as mouthpiece of
SAPPO, should provide a platform for various points of
view, although SAPPO not necessarily endorses all opinions expressed in the publication,” Streicher says.
“The PPP Quality Assurance Scheme is the vehicle
that our members will use in future to encourage producers to produce pork that will assure consumers of a
safe product that meets the highest standards possible,”
Streicher says.
13
ANIMAL HEALTH
Zoonotic
diseases
of pigs
By Dr Marijke Henton, Iddexx
on behalf of the Pig Veterinary
Society
This is the second article on Zoonoses that affect pigs and humans.
This article will cover the bacteria
involved.
A
ll living animals are afflicted by
disease. Some diseases are specific to one type of animal, others
affect groups of related animals, such as
rinderpest, which only affects cattle and
related wildlife, and yet others affect all
animals, even fish and birds.
Diseases that are transferred from
animals to man are called zoonotic
diseases. The zoonotic disease can
affect man directly, or be foodborne.
Pork is not often implicated as a cause
of foodborne disease, as the injunction
“cook pork well” has been taken to heart
by most cooks.
However, if all the causes of foodborne
disease are analysed, pigs and pork
could theoretically be implicated in over
40% of cases. The CDC (Center for
Disease Control) in 2003, found that in
America, Salmonella caused 26% of all
food poisoning cases (Fig 1). Salmonella
is commonly found in the intestine of
pigs. The other causes of foodborne disease that pigs might carry, as illustrated
in Figure 1, are Clostridium perfringens
(4%), E. coli (6%) and Campylobacter
(4%). These last three are also common
in the intestine of pigs.
People vary in their susceptibility to
disease. Healthy young adults, on a
good diet, are far more resistant to most
diseases than the very old and the very
young. Pregnant women might be more
susceptible to certain diseases, and
certain genetic groups are far more susceptible to some diseases. People who
are immuno-incompetent are naturally
14
(Part 2)
also far more susceptible to most diseases. Immuno-incompetence includes
AIDS, of course, but people who are on
cortisone, those on cancer treatment,
people with transplants, those who have
had their spleens removed, and alcoholics are also immuno-incompetent.
Zoonotic diseases caused by pigs
can therefore affect the farm workers,
pig handlers, abattoir workers, those
who consume pork and anyone else
who comes into contact with any part
of a pig. Improved bio-security and
hygiene are crucial in controlling zoonotic
diseases, ensuring that farm workers
are protected and that pork is a safe
product.
The most important zoonotic diseases
in South Africa are discussed in more
detail below. Immuno-incompetent people would be susceptible to far more infections than these, and there are a few,
such as ringworm and anthrax, which
are so rare in South African pigs, that
they have not been discussed further.
Causes of Foodborne disease
CDC, 2003
Norovirus
Salmonella
C. perfringens
E. coli
Campylobacter
Staph. aureus
Salmonella
The decrease in the number of pigs
positive for Salmonella during the last 15
to 20 years is remarkable. Salmonella is
a good benchmark bacterium to use for
disease control schemes. As it is found
in the intestine, together with E. coli,
Clostridium perfringens and Campylobacter, decreasing Salmonella also leads
to decreases in the other bacteria and
viruses carried in the gut. It is therefore
no surprise that Salmonella is the target
organism of many hygiene programmes.
There are about 2 500 serotypes of
Salmonella, and they are very variable
in pathogenicity, which means they vary
in their ability to cause disease. Some
strains of Salmonella are of very low viru-
lence, and have never been implicated
in any disease in any animal. The tests
demanded by international bodies are for
the whole group of Salmonella, and there
is no leniency if an environmental strain
instead of a pathogenic one is isolated.
To pass the tests, no Salmonella may be
present. This makes the test so much
more severe, but the benefits are also
greater. By controlling Salmonella on
your farm, you are also diminishing all
the other diarrhoea causing bacteria,
viruses, worms, and so forth.
Salmonella causes both enteritis and
systemic disease. Some serotypes are
specific for one species of animal, such
as Salmonella Choleraesuis, which only
Porcus Oktober 2010
ANIMAL HEALTH
affects pigs, and Salmonella Dublin,
which only affects cattle. Such strains
are not considered to be zoonotic, but all
the others are.
The most common pathogenic Salmonella in South Africa in all farm animals,
including pigs, is Salmonella Typhimurium, and Salmonella Typhimurium is the
second most common Salmonella in
man. This is because it is carried by rats
and mice, and seldom causes disease in
the rodents. The carriers spread the infection via the feed. Rodents are attracted to feed at all stages of processing.
Salmonella contamination could affect
the primary feed ingredients, the feed
mill, food stored on the farm and also
spilled feed in the pens. Pelleted food
is free of Salmonella, but pellets could
become contaminated after processing.
As rodents consume the feed, they leave
their faecal pellets containing the infecting Salmonella scattered about the food.
Rodents may carry any of the 2 500
serotypes of Salmonella, and not necessarily the pathogenic Salmonella Typhimurium. Other sources may be insects
such as flies and cockroaches, birds and
man. Insects and birds can visit a large
number of feed troughs, moving from
pen to pen, in a short time.
Man can become infected directly, by
coming into contact with diseased or carrier pigs, being in contact with their dung,
or via poorly cooked, unhygienic pork.
Salmonella can multiply in the environment, requiring warmth and moisture.
The numbers change dramatically if
there are climate changes, or if the
cleaning cycle is interrupted. The most
common route of infection is the faecal/oral route, meaning that Salmonella
which may be present in the intestine
of any animal, including a littermate, is
eaten by another pig.
Salmonella is also a survivor in the
environment. It can live for ten months
in anaerobic lagoons, a year in dust,
and two years in dry feed. It survives for
56 days in clean water. Salmonella lives
twice as long in the winter than in the
summer.
E. coli and Clostridium perfringens
These two are similar to Salmonella in
that they are also found in the intestine. There are many different types of
each, and they are also resistant in the
environment. E. coli causes diarrhoea
in infants and toddlers, and is also the
cause of traveller’s diarrhoea. Clostridium
Porcus October 2010
perfringens produces toxins which cause
enteritis, and it can also be associated
with gangrene.
A common food poisoning strain, E.
coli 0157, which is usually carried by cattle, is definitely present in pigs in South
Africa. Virulence factors which affect
man, such as Stx toxins, verocytotoxins
and enterotoxins, are all common in pig
E. coli strains isolated in South Africa.
Campylobacter jejuni and Campylobacter coli
Both are commonly found in the intestine
of pigs. Pigs are relatively resistant to the
effects of Campylobacter, but people
easily become ill, showing diarrhoea
after only consuming a very few bacteria.
Young adults are particularly susceptible.
Campylobacter jejuni has been associated with Guillain-Barré syndrome, where
the person becomes paralysed, as well
as with reactive arthritis.
Yersinia enterocolitica
Yersinia enterocolitica is common in pigs,
rodents and dogs. Pigs are asymptomatic carriers, and carry Yersinia in the
throat, without showing any symptoms.
Even though pigs carry relatively more
pathogenic strains than harmless strains,
disease in pigs is rare. Yersinia occurs
Great strides have
been made in recent
years by farmers determined to improve
hygiene and bio-security on their farms.
more frequently in cold climates, as it
can multiply at 4°C as well as at higher
temperatures. Yersinia causes enteritis,
liver damage and can be associated with
systemic infections.
Brachyspira pilosicoli
Brachyspira pilosicoli is less virulent for
pigs than the well-known Brachyspira
(Treponema) hyodysenteriae, which
causes swine dysentery. Brachyspira
pilosicoli infects a broad range of animals, including pigs, man, mice, rats,
dogs and chickens, causing dysentery.
It is definitely present in South Africa.
The dysentery in pigs is milder than that
caused by B. hyodysenteriae, and the
infection may be misdiagnosed in pigs.
Leptospira
Leptospira is associated with water and
wet conditions. It commonly causes
abortions in pigs, but it can also cause
a wide range of infections. There are a
number of different Leptospira serovars
or serotypes.
These are quite species specific,
which means that certain serotypes have
specific hosts. The hosts are divided into
maintenance hosts and accidental hosts.
A maintenance host is easily infected by
the specific serotype, only a low dose of
bacteria is necessary to cause disease,
and the animal shows mild or no symptoms. Accidental hosts are resistant to
infection, and require high numbers of
bacteria before they become ill. Once
they are infected, disease is severe.
Infected people can show such severe
disease, that a haemorrhagic disease
such as Congo Fever can be confused
with it.
Streptococcus suis
Streptococcus suis is very common in
pigs in South Africa. Most pigs carry it in
their tonsils. Only young pigs are usually
affected, and it causes various purulent
infections, such as septicaemia, meningitis, arthritis and pneumonia. It causes
meningitis and septicaemia in man, usually only in people, especially the young,
who are in close association with pigs,
such as farmers and butchers.
Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae
This is the cause of Diamond Skin
disease in pigs. It is also resistant in
the environment in the same way that
Salmonella is, and can also multiply at
environmental temperatures. It causes
erysipeloid in man, which is a specific
type of wound infection. The erysipeloid
infection, usually limited to the skin, may
spread to the local lymph nodes and
joints. Healing is slow, and recurrence of
the infection is common in man.
Brucella suis
Brucella suis does not occur in South Africa, but it is common in South America
and South East Asia. It has been report-
Continued on p. 38
15
PROMOTION
Nuwe aanstelling by TOPIGS SA
Die direksie van TOPIGS SA (Edms.)
Bpk. het aangekondig dat Stefan
Vermaak van 1 Januarie 2011 die
nuwe besturende direkteur van die
maatskappy is.
Stefan het tien jaar ondervinding in die
hoenderbedryf. Hy is tans die hoof operasionele beampte by Early Bird Farm
by Olifantsfontein. Hy was ook drie jaar
lank algemene bestuurder van Eskort
Bpk. op Heidelberg.
TOPIGS SA verwelkom Stefan in sy
pos en is vol vertroue dat sy ervaring,
passie en kennis van landboubestuur
van uitsonderlike waarde vir die maatskappy en sy klante sal wees.
The absolute top in pig genetics
The genetic progress of the
TOPIGS pig is powered by an
intensive research and development programme. Researchers are
continuously working on improved
breeding techniques, A.I. and
the development of new genetic
products. All of this research is
conducted in partnership with
leading universities and research
institutes around the world.
instrument.
TOPIGS has two approaches to improving the genetic value of its animals, firstly,
through traditional breeding techniques
and secondly, by developing and implementing new breeding techniques such
as genomics. The second approach
also includes searching for new traits for
selection. These new breeding techniques accelerate the genetic progress.
Examples of new traits implemented in
the breeding goals are mothering abilities,
sow longevity, vitality, and carcass and meat quality.
Traits such as reducing post-slaughter
and quality-lowering aspects will also be
part of the breeding goal.
All TOPIGS breeding value calculations
are performed with the help of Pigbase,
the largest, most sophisticated database
of its kind in the world. Pigbase contains
current data from more than 250 000
sows in production and their progeny. It
also contains historical data from more
than 13 million sows. The data stored
TOPIGS studies the genes that are important for pork quality characteristics, ranging
in Pigbase covers the entire production
from meat colour and drip loss to loin yield.
chain, making it a powerful monitoring
Porcus October 2010
17
LEGISLATION
NEMA, NEMWA, NWA
… and what more?
By Pieter van der Merwe, Rock
Environmental Consulting
Environmental legislation has
gained the reputation of frequently
changing and of becoming somewhat complicated. On the one
hand, the complex challenges
South Africa is facing in protecting
its environment is acknowledged.
But on the other hand, the pig
farming community and environmental assessment practitioners
feel at times that they are in the
middle of a storm and the ship’s
compass has fallen over-board.
T
he fact is that government has its
eye on pollution of scarce resources with water as one of the main
elements focussed upon. Truly so, the
ship of the pork production industry experiences new kinds of waves, crashing
on the bow at new angles and at times
at a formidable force and height. These
waves contain requirements which may
seem complicated and somewhat murky
at first glance. One of my lawyer friends
admits that under the current set of
legislations, there is always a risk that
one of the three parties, namely the pig
farmer, the government and even the
environmental practitioner, can falter.
One has to prevent the scenario of the
ship running aground on the rocks of
legislation.
Before mid 2008, the pig farmer had to
adhere to mainly two sets of legislation,
the National Environmental Management
Act of 1998, (NEMA, which was an addition to the Environmental Conservation
Act of 1989) and the National Water Act
of 1998. However, to deal more carefully
and strict with pollution issues in South
Africa, the state blew a new legislative wave in the direction of the ships of
industry. Among those ships is the pork
production industry with all its components. This represents the NEMWA wave,
alias the National Environmental Management Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008). Fortunately, one can start at one question and
work one’s way through the thresholds to
determine what the requirements are and
what needs to be done.
18
Dealing with compliance to the National Water Act (NWA) (Act 36 of 1998)
and subsequently the issue of water use
licensing and bore hole registration, is a
subject that will be covered on another
day.
When dealing with farmers in the pork
production industry, it is observed that
their general attitude is to adhere to legislation. This is positive for the industry
but, at a first glance of what it entails,
often makes the farmers down-hearted
saying: “I want to comply but I don’t
know where to start and how it will influence my budget”.
Application
To make it simple, the first question is
whether the farmer wants to start a new
piggery or extend his operations on the
existing piggery. In both cases, an application for authorisation will be required.
The application will be based on and will
be according to the National Environmental Management Act or NEMA (Act
107 of 1998) and the National Environmental Waste Management Act or
NEMWA (Act 59 of 2008). The farmer
knows his farming practice inside-out
and therefore he can easily assess the
thresholds provided in the legislation and
secondly, the operational detail on his
farm in terms of square meters per pig or
the number of pigs per facility planned.
Thirdly, the volumes of waste water or
slurry containing the manure that will
have to be stored, treated in some way
or processed, can be assessed. The
cleaning of the facility involves the adding of water into the system, which will
generate slurry or effluent to be stored or
treated.
The threshold, above which the farmer
has to apply for authorisation in terms
of NEMA, is 8m2/pig or more than 250
pigs per facility, excluding piglets not
yet weaned. The application for authorisation will be in the form of a Basic
Environmental Impact Assessment (basic
EIA) compiled by a suitably qualified environmental assessment practitioner, or
nowadays abbreviated as an EAP. This
process takes about nine months from
date of commencement of the applica-
tion, until an approval (record of decision)
is issued.
Turning the focus on the waste generation and the treatment thereof, the
farmer has to calculate the volumes of
waste water or effluent to be stored (even
temporarily) or treated on the farm, as
measured on a yearly basis or referred
to as an annual waste throughput. If the
throughput is 2 000 to 15 000 cubic
metres per year, which is 2 000 000 to
15 000 000 litres per year, an application
for a waste license is needed in terms of
NEMWA. Secondly, if the storage treatment and processing of animal manure is
in access of one ton per day -- which will
be roughly one cubic metres of slurry per
day -- a basic EIA is needed.
Again the time frame to conduct the
basic EIA will take in the order of nine
months from start to approval by government.
In conventional practice the slurry is
drained either to effluent dams or to a
deep collection pit for storage before being applied as fertiliser onto the fields.
These are the critical volumes to be
calculated on the farm to determine
whether an application for authorisation is needed or not. If the volumes are
above 15 000 cubic metre per year, a
full EIA is needed in terms of NEMWA.
This process takes 12 months from
commencement of the application to
approval.
New piggery development
In the event of a new piggery to be developed or if an extension of a piggery is
planned, the application for authorisation
in terms of NEMA and the application for
a waste license in terms of NEMWA, are
done simultaneously.
In the midst of higher energy costs
and future power delivery uncertainties,
Porcus Oktober 2010
LEGISLATION
biogas digesters for energy generation
on the farm are one of the new elements of the agricultural industry. Biogas
digesters for energy production have
also been included in the NEMWA. This
indeed needs waste licence in the form
of a basic EIA.
Questions pose to government
In the case of expansion of the piggery, an interesting question arises - a
question to pose to government. If the
piggery expands and the expansion
represents a facility housing more than
one pig per eight square metres, a basic
EIA is required. That is fine. But if the
increased effluent volume generated
from the expansion of the piggery flows
into an effluent dam which has been in
operation before 1996, when the first
EIA regulations were published, does the
farmer has to lodge a waste license application in terms of NEMWA, especially
if no new dam(s) is to be constructed for
this purpose?
Pig farming has the burden of constant
dealing with large volumes of waste water, effluent dams and odours. But this
is a blessing in disguise as it provides the
opportunity to take the lead in complying to environmental legislation in all their
actions as an example to the agricultural
industry in general. The positive attitude
towards environmental awareness in
the pork production industry is definitely
growing. It just needs assistance from
specialists in this field and more open
positive discussions among members of
the industry.
Therefore, in the words of Richard
Branson: “Think yes, not no” and in the
word of Mia Hamm: “Celebrate what
you’ve accomplished, but raise the bar a
little higher each time you succeed”.
For more information, contact
Pieter van der Merwe at Rock Environmental Consulting (Pty) Ltd at
012 997 4747 or 082 412 7571.
Effective control of salmonella
by means of diformates
By Christian Lückstädt
Salmonella control has a high priority in European pork and poultry production. It is a significant
cause of human salmonellosis and
causes major economic losses in
the pork/poultry production chain,
through reduced productivity,
increased veterinary and hygiene
control costs.
Preventing the spread of salmonella to
the consumer requires special control
measures during slaughter and processing. The extra cost of these controls is
increasingly being transferred back to
the producer in the form of financial penalties or the loss of the market for contaminated pigs and birds. Gut health is
increasingly being shown to be effective
against intestinal pathogens, a strategy
that has only really been made possible
through the removal of antibiotic growth
promoters in feed. Creating and maintaining a healthy intestinal environment
has become essential to productivity and
food safety programmes alike.
While biosecurity and hygiene in the
feed mill and on farm are essential, the
acidification of feed ingredients or finished feeds with organic acids and their
salts also offers considerable benefits to
salmonella control. Feed acidification is
not only effective within the feed; possibly its biggest benefit occurs within the
Porcus October 2010
animal itself.
A rather new and successful concept
is the application of salts or double salts
of the formic acid (diformate) into both
industries. Such trials will be reviewed.
Introduction
Organic acids have long been used to
counteract gram-negative pathogenic
bacteria in animal feed, mainly in pig production. This approach is currently being
further investigated for poultry nutrition
– especially to combat salmonella.
Contamination with pathogenic bacteria like salmonella creates an enormous
social and economic burden world-wide.
The annual cost of salmonella to the UK
economy, for instance, exceeds 76 million USD; and is estimated to be around
4.1 billion USD across the Europian
Union. Human cases of salmonellosis
have been widely reported. The latest
figures from the EU (2007) mention that
152 000 people were directly affected by
salmonella in that year.
Combating salmonella is therefore a
matter of some urgency, with management and dietary strategies in pig and
poultry production.
The potential of single organic acids
in feed preservation lies in their ability to
protect feed from microbial and fungal
destruction. Their effects on stomach pH
and gut flora have also been known for
decades and proven in many laboratory
and field trials (Eidelsburger et al., 1992;
Eidelsburger and Kirchgessner, 1994;
Freitag, 2007). Acidifiers act as performance promoters by lowering the pH in
the gut (mainly upper intestinal tract),
inhibiting the proliferation of unfavourable microorganisms. Gut acidification
stimulates ensyme activity and thus
optimises digestion and the absorption
of nutrients and minerals. Un-dissociated
forms of organic acids penetrate the lipid
membrane of bacterial cells and dissociate into anions and protons.
After entering the neutral pH of the
cell’s cytoplasm, organic acids inhibit
bacterial growth by interrupting oxidative
phosphorylation and inhibiting adenosine triphosphate-inorganic phosphate
interactions.
Improving hygienic conditions in pig
and poultry with the aid of organic acids
has been reported by many sources.
An important limitation, however, is that
organic acids are rapidly metabolised
in the fore-gut (till stomach) of animals,
which will reduce their impact on bacterial inhibition. ADDCON’s patented double-salt technology (diformate) has been
proven to be effective against pathogenic bacteria along the whole gastrointestinal tract, including salmonella and
Campylobacter.
Continued on p. 29
19
SAVPO
Dankie aan ons uitstallers
SAVPO se nasionale algemene jaarvergadering sou nie kon plaasvind sonder die steun
van die varkbedryf se uitstallers en borge nie.
Baie dankie. Julle is staatmakers.
20
Porcus Oktober 2010
SAVPO
Porcus October 2010
21
FEEDING
A review of feeder
designs for pigs
By Tracy Meyer, technical manager, MG2Mix
Successful pig production relies
on the correct implementation of
various inputs on the farm. Holistically the equation P = G + E
(Phenotype = Genetics + Environment) can be used as a reference
to ensure that all genetic and environmental aspects are covered so
as to produce the best phenotype.
We tend to spend a lot of time
focusing on the genetic aspect
as well as the nutritional aspect,
sometimes forgetting about the
other environmental factors which
may play a significant role in the
optimum growth of a pig.
M
anagement decisions concerning feeders and pen design are
not made on a frequent basis,
but both affect the capital cost and the
operating expenses of a farm (Gonyou,
1999). Brumm and Carlson (1985) found
that variation in body weight within a pen
of pigs increased when feeder-trough
space was reduced from 5.2 to 1.7 cm
per pig from weaning (28 d of age) to the
end of week five post weaning. Rate of
growth was shown to be specific to the
ranked social order within a pen when
growing pigs were provided with limited
feeding space (Hansen et al. 1982).
Post-weaning reduction in feed
intake is commonly observed resulting
in a “growth check” (O’Connell et al.,
2002). Feeder trough space, feeder
design, form of diet and body weight
of pigs evaluated, all conflict with each
other when trying to evaluate the effects
on pig performance (Gonyou and Lou,
2000). This is in turn conflicted by the
fact that pigs will adapt by altering usual
patterns of feeding when trough space
per pig is decreased; thus, pig growth
performance may not be affected (Laitat
et al., 1999; Hyun and Ellis, 2002). But
the most serious concern of all relates
to the amount of feed that is wasted
when a badly designed feeder is used.
Feed wastages of between four and
25%, between one and 20% and up
to 33% have been reported (Baxter,
1991), with significant reductions in this
22
amount when a well designed feeder is
used. Wastage of this amount of feed
is obviously highly counterproductive
and uneconomical, and would make an
enormous difference to the profitability of
the enterprise if prevented. Much research
has, as a result, been conducted on feeder
design features and feeder-trough space
allowance as a means of reducing feed
wastage, encouraging feed intake and
minimising confrontation at the feeder.
Eating behaviour
Growing/finishing pigs generally consume between ten and 20 meals per
day (Gonyou and Lou, 1998). When the
number of pigs is increased relative to
the feeder space, the number of meals is
reduced. Older feeder designs resulted
in pigs spending more than two hours
per day eating. Newer designs allow
more pigs to eat from a single space,
which results in less time spent eating.
That said, it has been found that more
important than the time taken to eat, is
the amount of feed consumed (Gonyou
and Lou, 1998), as this determines the
growth rate of the pig.
Feeder design
The design of any feeding system must
consider both the physical and social
requirements of the pig as well as the
management objectives of the enterprise. The objective when choosing a
design, or when designing a feeder, is to
maximise food intake and minimise food
wastage. The space required for an individual pig to feed comfortably needs to
be described in terms of the size of the
animal and its posture during feeding.
With group-feeding, the space required
between pigs to minimise aggression
also needs to be considered (Baxter,
1991).
A number of feeder designs exist.
Patterson and Walker (1989) recommended “wet and dry” single space
feeders for growing and finishing pigs.
In 2002, O’Connell et al. evaluated the
influence of five different feeder types
on pig performance and behaviour.
The feeder types were two multi-space
designs (“dry” and “wet and dry”), two
feeders with communal troughs (“communal-rectangular” and “communal-circular”) and a single-space feeder. It was
found that feed disappearance was higher and food conversion was poorer with
“wet and dry” multi-space feeders than
with all other feeder types (P <0.05).
There was however, no significant effect
of feeder type on growth rate. From the
experiment, it was concluded, regarding performance as well as welfare, that
the “dry” multi-space feeder was the
optimum feeder type for weaned pigs.
Magowan et al. (2006) evaluated
this statement and found it to be true.
When comparing the change in feeder
type from a ‘dry’ multi space feeder to
a ‘wet and dry’ single space feeder,
although not significant, it seemed that
feed intake was stimulated throughout
the finishing period resulting in improved
production performance (Magowan et
al. 2006). The optimum feeder regime
for pigs from wean to finish was offering
feed from a “dry” multi-space feeder in
the post-weaning period and a “wet and
dry” single space feeder in the finishing
period.
This allowed for an average daily gain
from four weeks of age to finish of 724
g/day Magowan et al. (2006). Experiments conducted by Kansas State University and presented at Swine Day 2008
concluded that the growth performance
in finishing pigs was improved with a
wet-dry feeder when compared with a
conventional dry feeder (Bergstrom et al.
2008). Following carcass analysis however, pigs fed from the wet-dry feeder
had a lower meat yield and higher fat
content. This is certainly indicative of the
necessity for further research into feeder
design and the influence on feed intake
and ultimately, economic returns.
Gonyou (1999) conducted experiments comparing single vs. multi space
feeders. They found that pigs fed from
single-space feeders consumed their
feed faster than those fed from twospace feeders, and spent a greater
proportion of the day at the feeders. The
pigs from the single space feeders were
able to maintain the same levels of feed
intake and growth as pigs on the multispace feeders, even though they spent
less time feeding (Table 1).
Porcus Oktober 2010
FEEDING
The advantages of single-space feeders
are noteable. The pigs are forced to
eat from one particular space, thereby
keeping it clean and functional. The
placement of the single-space feeders in
a pen is more flexible than multi-space
feeders (Gonyou, 1999).
A variation and/or addition to the
single / multi-space feeder is dry vs. wet/
dry feeders. Gonyou (1999) compared
feeders designed to be used dry, with
feeders designed to be used wet/dry
(Table 2).
As can be seen from the results, pigs
spent less time eating at the wet/dry
feeders. Because water was continuously available at the wet/dry feeders, the
occupancy rate of the feeder was lower
– at the dry feeder, pigs would leave to
drink water and then return to continue
eating. In this particular experiment, pigs
on the wet/dry feeder system reached
market weight nearly a week before the
pigs on the dry feeders (Gonyou, 1999).
A major advantage of the wet/dry feeder
is the reduced water use – estimated to
be in the range of 30 to 40 % reduction. Cleanliness and functionality can
be seen as disadvantages of the wet/dry
feeder. It has been determined that
wet/dry feeders work best when there
are enough pigs in the pen to keep the
feeder occupied (Gonyou, 1999).
Feed spillage estimates from feeders
range from 2-5.8% (Gonyou, 1999). Pig
size has a major influence on the level of
spillage. Smaller pigs wasted more feed
than larger pigs (4.4 % for 40 kg pigs
vs. 2.4 % for 80 kg pigs). The space
available in a feeder should be adequate
for a market size pig. This results in
more space available for the pig when
it is younger. More space results in two
pigs able to feed at a single space when
they weigh 25 kg. Young pigs often fight,
resulting in feed spillage. It is therefore
very important that the feeder space is
not wider than recommended as this will
result in more younger pigs being able
to access a single space in the feeder
and therefore more potential fighting and
feed spillage.
Feeder depth is also important and
has been reviewed in terms of the significance in influencing the better performance of a wet/dry feeder vs. dry feeder,
i.e. does the depth of the feeder prevent
less feed wastage. Amornthewaphat et
al. (2000) compared the conventional
wet/dry feeder and a shelf feeder (dry or
wet/dry). The results indicated that wet/
dry shelf-feeders had the greater ADG
Porcus October 2010
and lower water consumption compared
to the pigs from the dry shelf-feeders.
Their conclusion was that the wet/dry
feeder design is of more benefit than the
depth of the feeder. The feeder depth will
influence feed wastage especially when
the pigs are still small. Gonyou (1999)
found that a depth of 25 to 30 cm is
adequate.
Feeder design will also determine
how many pigs are able to be fed.
Gonyou (1999) estimated the number of
pigs that would keep the feeder occupied for 80% of the time. These data can
be seen in Table 3. The data are based
on mash feed, and it must be noted that
pellet feed would be eaten faster and
more pigs would eat from the feeder. It
is very important that the characteristics
of the feeder should be known before
predicting its stocking rate potential.
Item
Total duration of eating
(min/day)
Occupancy rate of feeder
(% of time)
Average daily feed intake
(kg/day)
Average daily gain (g/day)
Some important principles in
feeder design (Baxter, 1991)
Adequate trough space per pig, equivalent to 1.1 x shoulder width, should be
provided when food intake is rationed.
The variability in individual intakes, feed
wastage and aggressive behavior can
be reduced by the inclusion of trough
barriers, such as those illustrated in
4.4.5. It has been shown that 65% of all
observed aggression is displayed by the
pig actively eating at the trough, and the
remainder (35%) by pigs feeding simultaneously; the approaching pig does not
show aggression. Therefore, defence of
Continued on p. 24
Single Space
84.0
Multi Space
97.6
71.5
50.3
2.69
2.77
885
905
Table 1. Feeding behavior and growth rate of pigs fed from single or multi-space feeders. (Gonyou, 1999)
Item
Total duration of eating (min/day)
Occupancy rate of feeder (% of
time)
Average daily feed intake (kg/day)
Average daily gain (g/day)
Dry Feeders
104.1
60.1
Wet/Dry Feeders
86.3
36.7
2.66
873
2.82
917
Table 2. Feeding behaviour and growth rate of pigs fed from dry and wet/dry feeders.
(Gonyou, 1999)
Feeder description
Single-space, dry
Single-space, dry
Two-space, dry
Two-space, dry
Single-space, wet/dry
Single-space, wet/dry
Single-space, wet/dry
Two-space, wet/dry
Two-space, wet/dry
Two-space, wet/dry
Total duration of
eating (min/day
per pig)
92
98
99
101
73
75
81
79
98
110
Estimated stocking rate
(pigs/feeder)
12
11
22
22
15
15
14
28
22
20
Table 3. Time spent eating by pigs and estimates of acceptable stocking rates for ten
commercial feeders. (Gonyou, 1999)
23
FEEDING
A review ... Continued from p. 22
the feeding place is the trigger for such
aggression, and if the face of the pig at
the trough is hidden inside the feeder
then this aggression is reduced.
Mild competition, by limiting the
number of feeding places, may increase
food intake when pigs are fed ad libitum
due to social facilitation. Most animals
are stimulated to eat, even when satiated, when they observe another animal
eating.
Providing a trough profile closely fitted
to the shape of the pig should allow the
pig to feed comfortably and to reach
the food in a preferred feeding posture.
A high lip at the front of the feeder and
barriers between the feeding positions
would minimise feed wastage.
A number of commercially available
feeder designs are described in the
following pages. It is useful to bear the
above principles in mind when comparing these designs as not all of them conform to the design principles that have
been shown to be best for increasing
food intake and reducing feed wastage.
Feeders on the market
4.1 MS Schippers (http://www.
msschippers.com).
4.1.1 Maxi Feeder
This is a large feeder suitable for pellets
and meal. The feed dosage is easily adjustable and there is no waste ring and
partitions. It is made of durable, strong
plastic and stainless steel and is secured
to any slatted floor by means of a quicklock system. If need be, a special extra
rim can be added to extend the feeder
with 30cm. This feeder accommodates
25-30 pigs at a body weight of 6 to
18kg. There are ten feeding places with
a pan capacity of 9 litres. The hopper
capacity is 21 litres, the height is 68 cm
and the diameter is 42.5 cm.
4.1.2 Agra Wet Feeder – fattening
pigs
These feeders are made of plastic and
stainless steel. A regulator allows for
adjustable flow. A stainless steel dividing
plate is available should it be required.
The water supply is contained inside the
wet feeder. The hopper can hold up to
40kg of feed. The trough is made of
hard-wearing plastic and has rounded
edges.
4.1.2 Agra Wet Feeder – piglets
These feeders are made of plastic and
stainless steel. A regulator allows for
adjustable flow. A stainless steel dividing
plate is available should it be required.
The water supply is contained inside
the wet feeder. The hopper can hold up
to 20kg of feed. The trough is made of
hard-wearing plastic and has rounded
edges.
4.2 Cawi (www.cawi.nl)
4.2.1 Cawi Feeder
The Cawi wet dry feeder is suitable for
12 to 15 pigs. It is constructed from
robust PVC and stainless steel materials.
The feed output has seven adjustments,
including closed. According to tests this
feeder has been shown to give a return
on investment within six months compared to a conventional box feeder.
24
4.3 Tigsa (www.tigsa.com)
4.3.1 Ecofood – single place
feeder
The Sanifood and Ecofood single place
wet dry feeder is suitable for fatteners
with a maximum of 12 to 15 pigs per
feeder. These feeders have been shown
to be the cheapest wet dry feeder per
pig on the market. The capacity of
hopper is 47 litres. The feed regulating
mechanism is easy to operate and has
quick position readings. The feed flow
is adjustable over ten positions and can
be instantaneously shut. The hopper has
no angles/corners, which removes the
possibility of accumulation of feed. There
is also a meal agitator thereby reducing the negative effects of bridging. The
feed delivery is operated by a push-button which is unbreakable and is able to
be removed without tools. The nipple
drinker is constructed of PVC piping and
also has a push-button control mechanism. The rim of the feed trough is
stainless steel and cannot be damaged
by pig bites.
4.3.2 Bifood
This feeder provides the option of dry or
wet feeding to the pig. The tank has a
large capacity which allows for easy filling, manually or automatically. There are
23 exact dosing positions.
Porcus Oktober 2010
FEEDING
Plastic hopper with a slope which guarentees
perfect flowing of the feed. Capacity 120 litres
Adaptable structure to any type of wall.
Inox protection: prevents the entry of humidity and
the market. This feeder is combined with
a fully automated feed delivery system,
providing the advantage of a completely
closed feeding system. The feed is protected from foreign matter contamination
and the aroma and taste are preserved.
The tube is transparent allowing for
easy inspection and vertical to prevent
bridging of the feed. This model is largely
maintenance-free and easy to clean.
resists pig attacks.
Oscillating dosing system: simple and effective.
The pigs don’t play with the feed. Exact and
steady quantity of feed delivered.
Double water supply. Pigs cannot push accidentally.
Trough without sharp angles. Designed to avoid
feed waste. Different designs depending on age.
Provided with Inox protection.
4.4 Egebjerg (www.egebjerg.com)
4.4.1 Tube-O-Mat VIP
Tube-O-Mat feeders comprise two
drinker bowls which provide the pigs
with fresh water. The adjustment system
allows for fine-tuning of the feed dosage.
The adjuster is ideal for weaners, with
low feed intake, and for finishers with
high feed intake capacities. The hopper
has a large capacity with a user-friendly
lid. The hopper is designed to prevent
feed bridging and is at the optimum
height (130cm) to allow for manual filling.
The connection between the hopper
and the pipe, as well as the lid, is tight,
and therefore the feeder can be washed
with feed inside. A low trough edge and
large feeding pan offers all the pigs easy
4.4.3 Tube-O-Mat TOP
The Tube-O-Mat TOP has the same features as the Tube-O-Mat VIP, however,
the Tube-O-Mat TOP is designed with
a special deep drawn trough with an
additional platform (or top) in the centre
of the feed tube. This prevents the water
from moistening the feed in the dispenser tube. There is also an indentation surrounding the platform which prevents the
feed from contaminating the water bowl.
The pigs can choose whether they want
moistened feed or dry feed.
access to feed and water. In terms of return on investment the benefits are high
feed intake from the first day, good FCR,
low feed wastage, good hygiene, high
durability, low maintenance costs and
constant growth. The hopper capacity for a single feeder is 100 litres/65 kg
and for a jumbo feeder, 190 litres/130lg.
At a weaner level the single trough can
accommodate 40 to 45 pigs, and the
jumbo trough 60 to 70 pigs. At a finisher
level the single trough can accommodate 30 to 40 pigs and the jumbo trough
50 to 60 pigs.
4.4.2 Tube-O-Mat Tube
This is, according to Egebjerg, the most
simple and efficient automated feeder in
4.4.4 Tube-O-Mat Jumbo
The Tubo-O-Mat JUMBO has two tubes/
hoppers and a double trough with three
drinking bowls. This provides extra eating and drinking areas. It is perfect for
double wean-to-finish or weaner productions, with more than 25 pigs per pen.
Continued on p. 26
Porcus October 2010
25
FEEDING
A review ... Continued from p. 25
4.4.5 Dry Feeders
These dry feeders have been on the
market for more than 20 years. They are
stainless steel with powder coated nose
barriers. One is able to adjust the opening in the feeder by two vertical bars
with the exact setting visible from the
alley. The feed is regulated by a shutter
mounted on the outside of the feeder.
The pigs push the shutter with their
nose, causing a vibration which prevents
bridging. The edges of the trough are
strong and back folded, eliminating the
accumulation of feed residues.
ing spaces and is made entirely from
stainless steel.
4.5.2 PigNic and PigNic-Jumbo
PigNic supplies feed to a maximum of
40 pigs with a minimum weaning weight
of 8kg. PigNic-Jumbo can supply up to
70 to 80 pigs with feed. The hopper is
transparent and holds 80 litres (PigNic)
and 150 litres (PigNic-Jumbo) of feed
at any one time. Feed and water are
separated from each other, but the pigs
are still able to moisten their feed if they
desire. There are two or three drinking
nipples. The dosing mechanism pivots
on a 360° axis, ensuring that the feed
does not bridge/clump and also allows
the pigs to easily operate the feeder. The
amount of feed dispensed at any one
time can be easily adjusted.
4.5.3 PigNic-EW
This feeder accommodates up to 40
weaners with a minimum weaning weight
of 6kg. The feed trough has a divider
which separates the feed and water to
prevent contamination. There are two
bowls on either side of the feed trough to
ensure the pigs receive ample water. The
special dosing mechanism is easily operated by the piglets. PigNic-EW Jumbo
can be used for 70 to 80 piglets.
4.5 Big Dutchman (www.bigdutchman.de)
4.5.1 MultiPorc
MultiPorc allows for ad lib dry feeding
of weaners from 6kg to 30kg. It can be
supplied with five or ten individual feed-
26
Porcus Oktober 2010
FEEDING
A ball valve is supplied as standard feature; max 2 bar
water pressure is recommended.
4.5.4 Swing
This feeder accommodates up to 40
weaners with a minimum weaning weight
of 6kg. The hopper has a capacity of 90
litres and is specially designed to prevent
feed bridging. The feed trough is round
thereby maximising the eating space and
has the offset of feed not accumulating in the corners as may happen in a
square/rectangle design.
Transparent storage tank = simple monitoring of the feed
level
The feed quantity, dispensed by the metering unit, can
be easily adjusted
LEAN MACHINE can be easily integrated into the pen
partition
Available in stainless steel or galvanized
Openings for cleaning the feeder
Two integrated drinking nipples are touch-activated by
the trough pan = the animals cannot transfer humidity to
the stored feed while eating
The round trough shape ensures optimum use of the
eating area with no traps and crevices for dirt
Trough pan is raised off the ground, allowing easy cleaning underneath
4.5.5 MultiMax
This is an automatic feeder for dry feed,
specifically designed for finishing pigs
fed ad lib. There are four or eight feeding
spaces, and it is made of plastic with a
stainless steel edge. The amount of feed
can be adjusted according to the feed
intake requirements. The feeder is also
equipped with vibrators which aid in the
prevention of bridging of feed.
4.5.6 Lean Machine
The Lean Machine has a 80 litre hopper
and can supply feed to a maximum of
40 pigs. The system can be automatic or
manually operated. The water is supplied
by two integrated inlets and can be easily operated by the pigs. Feed allowance
can be adjusted via the easily accessible
dosing mechanism. The round trough
maximises the eating space and eliminates the possibility of dirty corners.
4.5.7 SinglePorc IV and SinglePorc VI
These are automatic individual feeders. One feeder supplies up to 12 pigs
Porcus October 2010
with an approximate weight of 25 kg.
The trough dispensers are integrated to
moisten the feed. The trough pan has
a stainless steel edge which increases
the service life. The feeders are made
of recyclable plastic and stainless steel.
The SinglePorc IV has a 60 litre hopper
with an easily accessible dosing lever al-
lowing for feed adjustment in eight steps.
The SinglePorc VI has a 50 litre hopper
with the feed adjustment performed in
ten steps.
Conclusion
There is a wide variety of feeders available for use on the pig farm. When
determining which to use one should
take account of the principles outlined
above regarding the behaviour of pigs at
the feeder, the benefits and drawbacks
of wet vs. dry feeding, the cost of the
equipment, its durability, access to feed
from weaning to maturity, the potential
for feed wastage to occur, etc. The information given in this review should assist
pig producers to make a more informed
decision, which would be to the benefit
of the farming enterprise.
References
Baxter, M.R., 1991. The design of the feeding
environment for pigs. In: E.S. Batterham (Ed)
Manipulating Pig Production III, Australasian Pig
Science Association.
Brumm, M.C. & Carlson, D., 1985. Nursery feeder
space — how much? Nebraska Swine Report EC
85-219, University of Nebraska Coop. Ext., Lincoln,
p 17.
Hansen, L.L., Hagels, A.M. & Madsen, A., 1982.
Behavior results and performance of bacon pigs
fed “ad libitum” from one or several hoppers. Appl.
Anim. Ethology 8:307–334.
Laitat, M., Vandenheede, M., Desiron, A., Canart, B.
& Nicks, B., 1999. Comparison of feeding behavior
and performance of weaned pigs given food in two
types of dry feeders with integrated drinkers. Anim.
Sci. 68:35–42.
O’Connell, N.E., Beattie, V.E. & Weatherup, R.N.
2002. Livestock Production Science 74: 13-17.
Patterson, D.C. & Walker, N. 1989. Observations
of voluntary feed intake and wastage from various
types of self feed hoppers. In: J.M. Forbes, M.A.
Varley and T.L.J. Lawrence (Editors) The Voluntary
Food Intake of Pigs. British Society of Animal Production 13: 114-116.
Gonyou, H.W. & Lou, Z. 2000. Effects of eating
space and availability of water in feeders on productivity and eating behavior of grower/finisher pigs. J
Anim Sci. 78:865-870.
Gonyou, H. 1999. Feeder and pen design to
increase efficiency. Adv Pork Prod. 10:103-113.
Hyun, Y. & Ellis, M. 2002. Effect of group size and
feeder type on growth performance and feeding patterns in finishing pigs. J Anim Sci. 80:568-574.
Magowan, E., McCann, M.E.E. & O’Connell, N.E.
2006. The effect of feeder type and change on
growing and finishing pig performance and behaviour. Livestock production Science (submitted).
Bergstrom, J.R., Tokach, M.D., Dritz, S.S., Nelssen,
J.L., DeRouchey, J.M. & Goodband, R.D. 2008.
Effects of feeder design on growth performance and
carcass characteristics of finishing pigs. Swine Day.
Gonyou, H.W., & Lou, Z. 1998. Grower/Finisher
Feeders: Design, Behaviour and Performance.
Prairie Swine Centre Monograph 97-01. Saskatoon,
Saskatchewan. pp 77.
Amornthewaphat, N., Hancock, J.D., Behnke,
K.C., McKinney, L.J., Starkey, C.W., Lee, D.J.,
Jones, C.L., Park, J.C. & Dean, D.W. 2000. Effects
of feeder design (conventional dry feeder, dry shelffeeder, and wet/dry shelf-feeder) on finishing pigs.
Swine Day.
27
ANIMAL HEALTH
Performance Enhancement through
effective Bacterial Sterilization of Feed
tere
regis
nted
ate
d&p
Studies with FORMI show:
For more informations please contact:
ADDCON Africa Feed & Grain Additives (Pty) Ltd.
PO - Box 4193, Dainfern 2055, South Africa
Phone: 011 - 460 4002 / 3, Fax: 011 - 460 4000
Cell-No: 083 - 675 3141 (Klaus Oster)
eMail: [email protected]
28
www.addcon-africa.net
• improved FCR by 4,2 % (Rosen, 2008)
• increased ADWG of 8,7 % (Mellor, 2008)
• ROI of 5 (Eidelsburger, 2007)
• Effective control of Salmonella (Visscher 2008)
• Significant effects against E.coli (Overland et al. 2000)
Porcus Oktober 2010
ANIMAL HEALTH
Effective control continued from p. 19
Diformate in pig
Gut health is increasingly being shown to
be effective against intestinal pathogens,
a strategy that has only really been made
possible through the removal of antibiotic
growth promoters in feed. On the other
hand, pathogens are still widely found in
pig units.
S. enteritica typhimurium is the predominant serotype found in pig carcasses in Europe, accounting for around 71%
of cases. Several serotypes are resistant
to antibiotics, putting increasing pressure
on producers to prevent contamination.
While salmonella cannot be eradicated in
pig units, it can be controlled to minimise
the risk to consumers. Biosecurity plays
a significant role in salmonella control. In
feed compounding, although heat treatment is effective in reducing contamination of feed leaving the feed mill, this
effect does not persist during transport,
storage and subsequent outfeeding.
When conditions within the feed are less
conducive to bacterial infection, salmonella contamination can be reduced. The
next critical control point is within the
pig’s gut itself, where conditions for bacterial growth may once again be optimal.
Salmonella growth requires warmth (35
to 37°C is optimal), a moisture content
greater than 12% and a pH between 4.5
and 9.0. It is no coincidence that the pig
gut can provide Salmonella with everything it needs to thrive.
While biosecurity and hygiene in the
feed mill and on farm are essential,
the acidification of feed ingredients or
finished feeds with organic acids also offers considerable benefits to salmonella
control. Feed acidification is not only
effective within the feed; possibly its biggest benefit occurs within the pig itself.
Research trials in the UK, France and
Ireland with 0.6% potassium diformate
(KDF) feed additive, showed significantly
reduced salmonella count in the feed as
well as in the gut of pigs. This effect is
particularly well illustrated by data collected on 12 farms in Ireland (Lynch et
al., 2007).
The main objective of this investigation was to evaluate the efficacy of
salmonella control measures on highly
infected farms. Salmonella control has
been compulsory under Irish law since
2002 and farm status is categorised
by the percentage of positive pigs in
a herd according to the Danish mixPorcus October 2010
ELISA test. Category 3 (>50% positive)
farrow-to-finish farms and their associated fattening units were selected for
the study. All the farms that were treated
with KDF alone; or a combination of KDF
with improved hygiene and biosecurity
measures had notable improvements
in both bacteriological and serological
prevalence of salmonella spp. All but one
farm in which KDF was used ended the
trial with a much improved salmonella
status, with bacteriological prevalence
also low on most farms. Using improved
hygiene and biosecurity measures alone
also improved salmonella status, but
to a much lesser extent. The reduction
in prevalence obtained by KDF alone,
compared to the two farms which also
implemented additional hygiene and
biosecurity, demonstrates the additive’s
efficacy (Table 1).
These findings are not unique, however. Studies by Dennis and Blanchard
(2004) in the UK as well as most recently
in France (Correge et al. 2010; Table 2)
concluded potassium diformate, to be
an effective tool in a salmonella control
strategy in commercial farms, reducing
the percentage of salmonella positive
pigs by 50% and in pork meat juice
ELISA scores by 46%, respectively in
grower finisher pigs.
The UK trial also showed an improvement in daily gain of 7.7%, reduced
mortality and a reduction in medicinal
intervention compared to the rolling average for that unit. The economic benefit
of implementing salmonella control was
also evaluated.
Conclusion
The results prove irrefutably how both
a healthy gut with inhibited growth of
pathogens and food safety can be
achieved by dietary means. Additionally,
a balanced acidifier, such as diformate,
increases the performance of broiler and
pigs and is furthermore a sustainable option for maintaining or improving animal
growth and efficiency, without resorting
to supplementation with an AGP.
References available on request.
Table 1: Bacteriological and serological prevalence of Salmonella spp. in finishing pigs
on seven farms highly infected with Salmonella spp. before implementation of control
measures and following implementation of control measures for approximately 24
months (Percentages are given in brackets)
Farm and
Group1
Salmonella status before controls
Salmonella status after the use of
0.6% potassium diformate
Bacteriological
prevalence
Serological
prevalence
Bacteriological
prevalence
Serological
prevalence
Farm F
12/12 (100)
21/24 (88)
0/20 (0)
12/24 (50)
Farm G
27/35 (77)
26/70 (63)
1/30 (3)
0/24 (0)
Farm H
8/25 (32)
4/24 (17)
1/31 (3)
1/24 (4)
Farm I
25/35 (71)
13/24 (54)
1/27 (4)
1/24 (4)
Farm J
6/40 (15)
10/24 (42)
7/48 (15)
0/24 (0)
Farm K
11/30 (37)
23/24 (96)
3/24 (14)
1/24 (4)
Farm L
2/45 (4)
23/24 (96)
0/39 (0)
0/24 (0)
Table 2: Serological prevalence of Salmonella spp. in five commercial farms (fattening
pigs) highly infected with Salmonella spp. - before and after implementation of control
measures (potassium diformate KDF at 6 kg/t) during a period of seven months (in
percent)
Before KDF
During KDF
After KDF
P-level
Farm 1
25.7
8.0
27.3
0.001
Farm 2
18.7
6.2
2.3
0.001
Farm 3
53.7
15.8
7.6
0.0001
Farm 4
21.9
17.1
20.0
n.s.
Farm 5
40.8
29.2
1.9
0.0001
29
GENETICS
A.I. equals genetic improvement,
says Schippers expert
Artificial insemination (A.I.) equals
genetic improvement. This was the
message from Ron IJpelaar from
Schippers BV at the PPP’s annual
general meeting in September.
H
e said in the Netherlands, 99,9%
of sow insemination is done
artificially, with good technical
results.
Successful A.I. depends on several
factors, of which the treatment of gilts
30
is the most important one. Acclimatisation, pen space (1,5 – 2.0 m2/animal),
group size (six to eight animals per pen),
flooring (dry/non-slip floor) and lightning (minimum of 100 to 150 LUX) and
nutrition all play an important role in the
treatment of gilts.
As far as nutrition is concerned, the
gilt needs enough calcium and phosphor.
Nutrition should consist of 2,3 to 3 energy
values per day. Fourteen days before A.I.,
feed should be increased to 3,9 to 3,5
energy values per day. This means that
the sow’s feed should be increased so
that she can have more energy.
The ideal weight for a gilt at the time
of insemination, is approximately 135 to
150kg. A gilt should be 285 days old at
first insemination and weight at farrowing
should approximately be between 180
and 190kg. A minimum backfat of 15mm
should be allowed, as too much backfat
means lower feed intake during lactation.
In the last seven days of gestation,
space must be created in the abdomen
of the animals to make farrowing easier.
If not, the farrowing process will take too
long, the piglets will develop insufficiently
during the last week of gestation and
there will be insufficient colostrums and
milk yield during and after farrowing.
If the gilt has extra space in her abdomen,
there are less stillborns, increased piglet
vitality, increased colostrums and milk
production, higher feed intake after farrowing and lower pre-weaning mortality.
Heat control is the key to success
in artificial insemination. A number of
steps can be implemented to stimulate
heat. The feed level of the gilt must be
reduced at the end of weaning, but she
must have enough water. There should
be no boar contact, but thereafter, twice
a day. There should also be no flushing at this stage, but the sow must eat
enough high energy feed. The animals
must be kept active.
It is important to add extra energy to
the feed because the sow needs a fast
and high insulin boost, as well as fertility
vitamins and digestible trace elements.
Porcus Oktober 2010
RECIPE
Ingredients
2 tablespoons all-purpose flour
¼ teaspoon freshly-ground black pepper
4 boneless loin pork chops, trimmed
2 teaspoons olive oil
For the Sauce
1/3 cup apple cider
1/3 cup water
2 tablespoons balsamic or red wine
vinegar
2 teaspoons cornstarch
½ teaspoon ground sage
Try this cider-glazed
pork chops
Directions
• On a sheet of waxed paper, combine
flour and pepper. Mix well.
• To prepare sauce, in a small bowl,
combine cider, water, vinegar, cornstarch,
and sage. Mix well. Set aside.
• Dredge pork chops in flour mixture,
tapping off excess and turning to coat. In
a large skillet, heat oil over medium heat.
• Add pork chops and cook, turning
once, until no longer pink, about 15 minutes. Transfer chops to a serving plate;
cover with foil to keep warm.
• Add cider mixture to skillet, stirring
constantly, until mixture thickens, about
2 minutes. Spoon cider glaze on pork
chops. Serve immediately.
Serves 4
If fresh cider is not available, substitute
apple juice instead.
Porcus October 2010
31
PROMOTION
Trace mineral nutrition for sow
lifetime performance
W H Close, Close Consultancy,
Wokingham, UK
Understanding mineral
requirements
Compared with the requirements for
energy and amino acids, those for
minerals, and indeed vitamins, are
poorly defined despite their importance
to overall herd health and productivity.
Requirements for minerals are hard to
establish and most estimates are based
on the minimum level required to overcome a deficiency and not necessarily to
optimise productivity, or indeed enhance
immunity. It is for this reason that industry levels of inclusion for sows are several
times greater than those published requirements (Table 1) and recent studies
have shown that at these higher levels of
minerals reproductive performance may
be impaired (Mahan and Peters, 2006).
Table 1. Recent estimates of trace
mineral requirements of breeding sows,
compared with the levels currently used
in practice (mg/kg)
Figure 1: No. of references cited for trace minerals in NRC requirements for breeding
sows
(Lindemann and Kim, 2006)
If dietary mineral supply is inadequate,
then performance is likely to be affected and there is every possibility
that mobilisation from body tissues and
skeletal structures will occur to attempt
to meet metabolic needs. This has been
elegantly demonstrated by the work
of Mahan and Newton (1995), which
NRC (1998)
BSAS (2003) GfE (2006)
Industry*
Iron
80
80
80 - 90
80 - 150
Zinc
50
80
50
80 - 125
Copper
5
6
8 - 10
6 - 20
Manganese
20
20
20 - 25
40 - 60
Selenium
0.15
0.20 - 0.25
0.15 - 0.20
0.2 - 0.4
Iodine
0.14
0.20
0.6
0.5-1.0
Mineral
NRC = National Research Council
BSAS = British Society of Animal Science
GfE = German Society for Nutrition Physiology
*Whittemore et al (2002)
Most of the work carried out to establish
mineral requirements and trace minerals
in particular, has been carried out pre1980, and may not therefore be appropriate to the modern hyper-prolific sow.
Indeed, for several micro-minerals there
is an extreme lack of information and
Table 2 shows the number of citations
on which the various NRC recommendations for breeding sows have been
made. Some estimates for sows do not
have a single cited study, or are based
on very few studies.
32
showed that the body mineral content of
sows at the end of their third parity was
considerably lower than that of non-bred
litter sisters of similar age when fed diets
of similar mineral content. In addition,
the higher the level of productivity, that is
litter weaning weight at 21 days of age,
the greater the degree of depletion of
minerals from the body.
Mineral requirements are based on a
per kg of feed basis and take no account
of the body weight of the animal, its
level of production, changing metabolic
needs during both gestation and lactation or indeed parity. Richards (1999) has
shown that already in late gestation, the
sow has to rely on her liver iron reserves
to meet foetal demands and this depletion of minerals from the body is further
exacerbated during lactation. This continuous drain on body reserves results
in reduced mineral status, as shown by
Damgaard Poulsen (1993).
Calculation of the daily mineral intake
of a first parity sow with that of a mature
sow in its third or fouth parity, shows that
there is a reduction in mineral intake of
between 15 and 23%, based on a body
weight or metabolic body weight basis,
respectively (Table 3). This may help to
explain why the average sow lifetime in
many countries is only 3 to 4 parities
instead of the anticipated 5 to 6 parities.
Form follows function
Customarily, inorganic salts - such as
sulphates, carbonates, chlorides and
oxides - are added to the diet to provide
the correct levels to meet the animal’s
needs. These salts are then broken
down in the digestive tract to form free
ions and are absorbed. However, free
ions are very reactive and can form
complexes with other dietary molecules
which are then difficult to absorb. The
availability of the trace mineral to the
animal therefore varies considerably
- and under extreme conditions may
be unavailable for absorption - and so
are of little benefit to the animal. Large
quantities of undigested minerals are
then excreted causing environmental
Porcus Oktober 2010
PROMOTION
Table 2: Trace mineral intake in relation to body weight and parity
Recommended1
per kg diet
Parity 3+ (240 kg)
Intake3
Parity 1 (160 kg)
Intake2
Difference4
mg/day
mg/kg
BW
mg/kg0.75
mg/day
mg/kg
BW
mg/
kg0.75
(1)
(2)
Fe (mg)
100
272
1.70
6.04
312
1.30
5.11
23
15
Zn (mg)
100
272
1.70
6.04
312
1.30
5.11
23
15
Cu (mg)
15
41
0.25
0.91
47
0.19
0.77
23
15
Mn (mg)
40
108
0.68
2.40
125
0.52
2.05
23
15
Se (mg)
0.25
0.68
0.0043
0.015
0.78
0.0033
0.0125
23
16
BPEX: 2004
Feed 2.3 kg/day in gestation and 5.0 kg/day over a 21 day lactation
3)
Feed 2.6 kg/day in gestation and 6.0 kg/day over a 21 day lactation
4)
(1) per kg BW (2) per kg0.75
1)
2)
pollution. It is also known that minerals in
inorganic form interfere with each other,
and excesses of one can result in the
reduced absorption of others.
For this reason there is growing
interest in organic, that is proteinated
or chelated minerals. In this form, the
trace elements are chemically bound
to a chelating agent or ligand, usually a
mixture of amino acids or small peptides.
This makes them more bio-available and
bioactive and provides the animal with a
metabolic advantage that often results in
improved performance.
The response to organic iron, or a
combination of organic trace minerals,
will serve well to illustrate the effects that
organic minerals have on sow productivity.
Improving sow mineral status for
optimum piglet performance
The piglet is born with limited iron
reserves and needs supplemental iron
after birth to prevent anaemia. Uteroferrin, an iron-binding protein, is the major
mechanism by which the transfer of iron
from the sow to the developing foetus
occurs (Roberts et al, 1986). However,
increased dietary inorganic iron has
minimal effect on foetal iron uptake by
the uteroferrin pathway. In contrast,
organic iron has been shown to increase
iron transfer across the placenta to the
developing foetus (Ashmead and Graff,
1982).
A series of commercial trials were
therefore carried out in which sows were
fed either a control diet containing 60
to 80 mg/kg inorganic iron or a test diet
providing an additional 90 mg Fe/kg from
an organic source (Bioplex® Iron, Alltech
Inc). The organic Fe was provided some
Porcus October 2010
two to three weeks before farrowing and
throughout the 16 to 28 day lactation
period.
The results showed that there was no
difference in feed intake during lactation
or the birth weight of the piglets. However, across all trials, the weaning weight
of the piglets was increased from 6.17 (±
0.9) to 6.48 (± 0.9) kg (Table 4). Mortality of suckling piglets was reduced from
10.8% (range 9.6-13.0) to 6.8% (range
4.4-9.0). There was also a reduction in
the proportion of lightweight piglets at
weaning from 25.5 to 9.2% and an increase in the proportion of heavy-weight
piglets from 45.2 to 55.3% (Table 3).
These results suggest that piglets
from sows fed additional organic Fe had
an improved neo-natal Fe status, possibly through an increased placental trans-
fer of uteroferrin. This makes for a more
active and stronger piglet at birth, with
greater viability and suckling stimulus. It
is hypothesised that colostrum and milk
intake is increased, resulting in reduced
pre-weaning mortality and enhanced
growth rate. Weaning weight is therefore
increased and this has a lasting effect on
subsequent growth rate and development of the pig through to slaughter.
Sow longevity and the role of trace
minerals
Different trace minerals impact at different
periods of the reproductive life of the sow
and it is likely that the greatest impact on
sow productivity will be from combinations of minerals (Figure 2, p. 35).
Continued on p. 35
Table 3:
Organic Fe: Effects on sow and piglet performance (Close and Taylor-Pickard, 2005)
Study/
Country
Sow feed
intake
(kg/day)
Piglet
weaning wt
(kg)
Piglet
mortality
(%)
% small
piglets
% heavy
piglets
Ireland
4.69 -- 4.84
7.86 -- 8.15
-
-
-
UK (1)
-
-
11.0 -- 9.5
13 -- 5
55 -- 65
UK (2)
-
6.47 -- 7.04
-
-
-
Australia
-
6.24 -- 6.51
-
21 -- 6
34 -- 41
Vietnam
4.76 -- 4.86
4.72 -- 4.93
13.0 -- 8.4
-
-
Chile
(90 ppm)
5.84 -- 6.06
9.6 -- 5.0
24 -- 17
46 -- 50
(150 ppm)
5.84 -- 6.49
9.6 -- 4.4
24 -- 9
46 -- 65
4.59 -- 4.66
6.22 -- 6.22
23.1 -- 13.4*
-
-
USA
*includes stillborn piglets
33
PRODUCTION
International
34
Porcus August/September 2010
PROMOTION
Trace mineral... Continued from p. 33
Figure 2: Role of minerals in sow reproduction (Close, 1999)
Figure 3: Proportion of sows in trial
Figure 4: Effect of Bioplex® Sow-Pak on litter size (Close, 2007)
With this in mind, Fehse and Close
(2000) supplemented the diet of sows
with a special combination of organic
minerals (Bioplex® Sow-Pak: Se, Fe, Zn,
Cu, Mn and Cr, Alltech Inc) and reported
an extra 0.5 piglets weaned per litter for
sows weaning 26.5 piglets per sow per
year. Sow longevity was also increased
as illustrated in Figure 3. The proportion
of the sows fed Bioplex Sow-Pak was
maintained at 50 t 57% through parities 4 to 8, relative to 100% in parity 1,
whereas for the control sows, it decreased from 52% in parity 4 to approximately 20% in parity 6.
Since this original trial, a number of
commercial and field trials have been
conducted in which Bioplex Sow-Pak
(with or without Cr) partially replaced
or was added on top of the standard
inorganic mineral supplement in the diet
of the sow during gestation and lactation. Performance was measured over
a single or multiple parities for sows
of different breeds in several countries
throughout the world (Figure 4).
Supplementation of the diet with Bioplex® Sow-Pak increased the number
of piglets weaned by 0.52 ±0.14 (n=15),
with the response varying between 0.3
and 0.8 extra piglets per litter. Assuming
2.3 litters per sow per year, this equates
to an extra 1.2 weaned piglets per sow
per year. It was interesting to observe
that the size of the litter had no effect on
the number of additional piglets weaned.
The response was very cost-effective
with a calculated ROI value of 4.5:1.
Conclusions
Trace mineral nutrition has been a
neglected area of pig science and
modern hyper-prolific sows have different requirements than those currently
recommended. However, it is not just
a question of quantity, but very much a
question of the source and bio-availability of the mineral. In this respect, organic
minerals may play an increasing role in
sow reproduction, since they have been
shown to increase sow productivity, not
only in terms of piglets weaned per litter,
but also in prolonging lifetime performance. Ongoing research will better define
the optimum organic mineral provision to
meet the metabolic needs of the modern
hyperprolific sow.
References are available on request.
Porcus October 2010
35
POINT OF VIEW
Getting what you paid for?
By George Myburgh, Boehringer
Ingelheim
Producing pork will become more
competitive in the near future.
Managing the cost of production
therefore should be one of high
priority. When walking into a shopping centre, one would expect that
you (the customer) will receive the
attention, dedication and support
from the salesperson as soon as
the deal is signed. I find myself in
this situation daily, as customer
support in general is slowly disappearing in South-Africa.
We don’t have trained salespersons
on the spot, taking you, the customer,
through the joyful experience of buying
your required needs, picking up your
dropped parcel, or telling you to enjoy
your day! It has now been turned into
telephone calls: “Excuse me sir, may
I have five minutes of your time?” and
we all know what we do with the phone
36
question to myself, so as to remind me,
what I can do, to turn this reality into
an “adding value” experience, when it
comes to product support and making
the farmer’s purchase a joyful one?
Let’s say a farmer is using a certain
product A for five years now, administered to piglets 21 days of age. Product B is manufactured by a different
company.
Inflation is based on ten percent, and
surely one would consider using product
B with the benefit of saving a significant
after hearing that line!
Working in the pig industry as a technical advisor, sales representative, product
manager or even a key account manager, in any sales orientated business,
is quite a challenge these days. Farmers
and managers are hesitant to see the
person on a day to day basis, as time
is limited on any piggery and there are
biosecurity questions that need to be
addressed. The farmer is bombarded
daily, with too much information and too
many concepts and ideas. I asked this
Table 1
Based on 250 piglets/week
Year
1
2
3
4
5
Product
A
Cost/Piglet
ZAR 3.00
ZAR 3.30
ZAR 3.63
ZAR 3.99
ZAR 4.39
Product
B
Cost/Piglet
ZAR 3.20
ZAR 3.52
ZAR 3.87
ZAR 4.25
ZAR 4.67
Product
A
Total/year
ZAR
39 000.00
ZAR
42 900.00
ZAR
47,190.00
ZAR
51 909.00
ZAR
57 060.90
Product
B
Total
ZAR
41 600.00
ZAR
45 760.00
ZAR
50 310.00
ZAR
55 250.00
ZAR
60 710.00
Porcus Oktober 2010
POINT OF VIEW
amount over five year’s time! And one should consider
complimenting the sales person on product A. Both
sales persons that are responsible for product A and B,
do occasionally visit the customer on farm and are involved in similar value-added activities for the customer.
We all shared the same experience throughout the years,
although this is 2010 and times have changed.
The chart in Table 1 is of no importance considering
the following: Where are my extra cents going to on
product A? Am I paying for my own hat, shirt or even
sponsor for attending some important event? Surely
there must be a difference in product?
The same argument could be supported when you, as
a farmer, should decide to construct a new pig building.
Will you poorly invest in sub-standard assets, with the
expectation of excellent return on investment? Do we
purchase cheap genetics, low quality semen, or poor
quality slats? You know the answer to that question.
Safety, quality, consistency, efficacy, support and a
company driven by research can surely not compete
with any product or company that does not do any
work of meaningful importance.
In my opinion, one should consider the following
aspects when deciding to purchase a product or
service:
• Purchase ethical and innovative products, and don’t
copy.
• Research and development is crucial for your future,
purchase from a company that invests in your future.
• Use these product specialists to train your staff,
on specific topics, as it is a value-added service that
comes free of charge, while respecting biosecurity.
An outside office is more than sufficient to do proper
training. This exercise has saved producers thousands
annually. In return this acts as motivation from another
perspective.
• Product support is essential; your questions should
be answered in less than one day on the company’s
product used.
• Discuss and learn about new innovative products
and how to use them effectively with trained persons,
not the local popular magazine.
• Run product trials and never stop exploring new
avenues. It is in both parties’ interest to do so.
• The consulting veterinarians’ protocol should be followed on medicine use – use the supplying company to
train your staff effectively.
• Quality products are manufactured in high tech labs,
not in garages.
• Talk to your company representative and get the supplying company to support you, in your specific need.
All these topics have financial implications for the
industry. Looking at this from a different perspective
means that one is investing in the future of pork production in South Africa. This will have a snowball effect,
allowing research and development to be taken to new
levels within the pharmaceutical industry. Pork production is our greatest asset. It brings home the bacon, so
INVEST in it.
I end this article with great words of wisdom “Leaders
don’t wait. They shape their own frontiers. The bigger
the challenge, the greater the opportunity” - Unknown
Porcus October 2010
37
STUDY GROUP
PRODUC-
Pondering Points
PP was recently
able to spend
a short time in
China but, as our
host was anxious
to point out, not the galloping glittering new China of Shanghai and
Beijing. Rather the old Western
end, close to what used to be Tibet, where we could enjoy rural living, even a bit of farming and some
authentic Yunnan/Sichuan food.
There is an 800 year old rustic town
called LiJiang situated on the old spice
route passing from India across the front
of the Himalayas where the horse and
yak caravans would stop for marketing
and provisioning. In the days of the second world war the same route was used
to get supplies and arms through to the
Chinese, having their own war with the
Japanese at the time.
LiJiang was old all right, with narrow
winding cobbled streets with no cars at
all, three streams running through it, all
set about with a fantastic array of flowers
(many roses, azaleas, rhododendrons,
orchids, originated in those parts).
Not everything was old – mercifully
the plumbing in our hotel was a welcome
exception and so were the contents of
the several hundred small shops lining
the quaint streets:
• Silverware, soft goods, tea of all
kinds, electronics, weaving by pretty girls
in pretty tribal costumes and intricate
wood-carving;
• Fresh vegetables and fruit (some of
them mysterious) at the market along
with (mostly) live fish, skinned frogs,
smoked ducks, gamey yak meat, salted
pork and cut up old pet dogs – what are
Progress and potholes:
Another Chinese
revolution
you planning for Wagter when he can no
longer bark?
• Restaurants and take-away food
stalls by the dozen with a bigger range
of enticing local foods than one could
shake a chopstick at.
In short, the “old town” has become
a tourist centre attracting thousands of
camera-toting, money-spending, prosperous-looking visitors from – eastern
China – where else?!
Us westerners were out-numbered
a hundred to one with the local minority tribes people making a recognisable
small contribution to the mix.
Doing tourist-type haggle business
is somewhat handicapped by having no
common language other than a handheld calculator, but that does it, along
with suitable gestures like disbelief, hilarity, indifference and soon settling for 60%
of the asking price.
It all causes one to ponder: What
happened to the totalitarian brutal communist state ruled by Mao Tse Tung and
his politburo with its millions of hungry,
oppressed grey little people?
Mao said “ It is better to be poor
under communism than to be rich under
capitalism” – who did he think he was
kidding? Big pothole.
After laying waste to anything academic, cultured or beautiful in the name of the
“cultural revolution”, Mao died in 1978.
Zoonotic Continued from p. 15
ed Mozambique. It is associated with
abortions. It is the second most virulent
Brucella for man, after Brucella melitensis, the cause of Malta Fever. The recent
outbreaks of PRRS, Foot and Mouth disease and Classical Swine Fever, which
probably all originated from ships docking at our ports, makes Brucella suis a
real threat to the pork industry in South
Africa. The other recently imported diseases were not zoonoses, but Brucella
is a severe threat to the health of man,
and the Department of Health as well as
the Department of Agriculture, Forestry
38
and Fisheries would be involved in any
control programme. Having two different government departments involved,
would complicate control measures
greatly. Brucella canis, which was always
absent from South Africa, has recently
been isolated in three dogs in the Western Cape area. The method by which
the infection entered South Africa is
unknown. There is a real possibility that
a Brucella suis infection could also enter
South Africa in the same way as the viral
infections or some unknown way.
His successor, Deng Xiaoping, altered
the stance considerably to read: “We
don’t want capitalism but we don’t want
poverty either, we want progressive,
productive socialism that will make the
country wealthy and strong”
He gets about six out of ten but was
way out in thinking that the Chinese,
given the opportunity to enjoy the trappings of capitalism, didn’t want it.
The role played by agriculture in
getting the rural population out of its
collective farm pothole is not generally
known. In a village called Xiaogang at the
eastern end of the country a group of 18
farmers who had seen 60 of their family
members die of starvation made an
epoch-changing decision in 1978. They
pledged that, come what may, they were
abandoning the crippling, pathetically
unproductive collective farm scheme
with its mistakes in what crops, fertilisers, methods of production were to be
used, and the complete lack of incentive
to do it even half well because the crop
belonged to the state.
They parcelled out the land, the
equipment, the seed, the cattle, the pigs
and chickens to the families and said: “
What we grow, we keep. If there is more
than we need at home we will sell it”.
What happened? Local officials,
versed in the ways of Mao, put as many
potholes in the rebellious farmers’ paths
as they could. Deng, by now in charge,
heard of it and backed the farmers.
End result: within less than two generations there are virtually no starving or
even hungry Chinese – there are plenty
of rich farmers, entrepreneurs, businessmen and traders. Go to LiJiang and
drive out into the country. It is not very
different from the Free State: big mealie
lands, soya, sunflowers, the odd dagga
plant, all on contoured hills or drained
vleilands.
Every family, according to our
guide, has three or four pigs and
maybe even ten.
The new revolution is complete.
Porcus Augustus/September 2010
TRAINING
Porcus October 2010
39