Benchmarking framework for predicting sow reproductive efficiency from parity, genotype, and cycle dynamics

E. O. Aidelomon; N. Kernerová; E. M. Nnando; M. S. Iliyasu; P. Kamulegeya

doi:10.15421/0226080

E. O. Aidelomon University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice
N. Kernerová University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice
E. M. Nnando University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice
M. S. Iliyasu University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice
P. Kamulegeya University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice

Keywords: sow, reproduction, parity, litter size, predictive model, benchmarking.

Abstract

Improving reproductive efficiency remains a central objective in modern pig production, and robust benchmarking tools are essential for identifying the biological and management factors that influence litter size in commercial herds. This study analysed 1,013 reproductive records from a Czech commercial farm (2019–2022) to quantify how parity, genotype, gestation length, farrowing interval, weaning-to-conception interval, season, and year of conception contribute to variation in total piglets born (TNB) and piglets born alive (NBA). A Poisson mixed-effects modelling approach was applied to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRR) using Statistica 14 (TIBCO Software Inc.), allowing for the evaluation of the relative magnitude of each factor. Parity had the strongest biological influence. Sows were classified into 3 parity groups (1–2, 3–5, and 6–7). Parity group 1 produced smaller litters (TNB IRR: 0.944; NBA IRR: 0.971) compared with the reference group 3, while parity group 2 showed the highest prolificacy (TNB IRR: 1.047; NBA IRR: 1.049). Gen o type also contributed significantly to the variation. The large White × Landrace genotype achieves higher TNB (IRR: 1.044) and NBA (IRR: 1.027) than the reference genotype, and pure Large White sows demonstrated similarly favour a ble results. A short weaning-to-conception interval (≤4 days) increased TNB (IRR: 1.025) and had a positive, al though smaller, effect on NBA. By contrast, gestation length, farrowing interval, and season at conception had minimal infl u ence under stable production conditions. Predicted litter values from the model were used to develop a practical benc h marking system classifying reproductive performance as optimal, expected, or suboptimal. This framework provides producers with a clear decision-support tool for sow retention, gilt replacement, and breeding planning, supporting more efficient and sustainable reproductive managem ent in commercial swine herds.

References

Arend, L. S., Vinas, R. F., Silva, G. S., Lower, A. J., Connor, J. F., & Knox, R. V. (2023). Effects of nursing a large litter and ovarian response to gonadotropins at weaning on subsequent fertility in first parity sows. Journal of Animal Science, 101, skac398.

Bell, W., Urioste, J. I., Barlocco, N., Vadell, A., & Clariget, R. P. (2015). Genetic and environmental factors affecting reproductive traits in sows in an outdoor production system. Livestock Science, 182, 101–107.

Chitakasempornkul, K., Meneget, M. B., Rosa, G. J. M., Lopes, F. B., Jager, A., Gonçalves, M. A. D., Dritz, S. S., Tokach, M. D., Goodband, R. D., & Bello, N. M. (2019). Investigating causal biological relationships between reproductive performance traits in high-performing gilts and sows. Journal of Animal Science, 97(6), 2385–2401.

Gourley, K. M., Calderon, H. I., Woodworth, J. C., DeRouchey, J. M., Tokach, M. D., Dritz, S. S., & Goodband, R. D. (2020). Sow and piglet traits associated with piglet survival at birth and to weaning. Journal of Animal Science, 98(6), 1–9.

Guan, R., Zhou, X., Cai, H., Qian, X., Xin, X., & Li, X. (2022). Study on the influence of different production factors on PSY and its correlation. Porcine Health Management, 8(1), 9.

Guilpart, N., Iizumi, T., & Makowski, D. (2022). Data-driven projections suggest large opportunities to improve Europe’s soybean self-sufficiency under climate change. Nature Food, 3(4), 255–265.

Kantanamalakul, C., Sopannarath, P., & Tumwasorn, S. (2007). Estimation of breed effects on litter traits at birth in Yorkshire and Landrace pigs. Walailak Journal of Science and Technology, 4(2), 165–173.

Klimas, R., Klimienė, A., Sobotka, W., Kozera, W., & Matusevičius, P. (2020). Effect of parity on reproductive performance sows of different breeds. South African Journal of Animal Science, 50(3), 434–441.

Knox, R. V. (2025). Worldwide perspective for swine production and reproduction for the next 20 years. Theriogenology, 234, 24–33.

Koketsu, Y., & Iida, R. (2020). Farm data analysis for lifetime performance components of sows and their predictors in breeding herds. Porcine Health Management, 6(1), 24.

Koketsu, Y., Tani, S., & Iida, R. (2017). Factors for improving reproductive performance of sows and herd productivity in commercial breeding herds. Porcine Health Management, 3(1), 1.

Kramarenko, A., Yulevich, O., Lіuta, I., & Kramarenko, S. (2024). Analysis of variability in gestation length in sows and its association with litter traits at birth. Scientific Horizons, 27(11), 9–20.

Martini, G., Bracci, A., Riches, L., Jaiswal, S., Corea, M., Rivers, J., Husain, A., & Omodei, E. (2022). Machine learning can guide food security efforts when primary data are not available. Nature Food, 3(9), 716–728.

National Research Council (2012). Nutrient requirements of swine. National Academies Press, Washington.

Nowak, B., Mucha, A., Kruszyński, W., & Moska, M. (2020). Phenotypic correlations between reproductive characteristics related to litter and reproductive cycle length in sows. Czech Journal of Animal Science, 65(6), 205–212.

Nowak, B., Mucha, A., Moska, M., & Kruszyński, W. (2020). Reproduction indicators related to litter size and reproduction cycle length among sows of breeds considered maternal and paternal components kept on medium-size farms. Animals, 10(7), 1164.

Patterson, J. L., Beltranena, E., & Foxcroft, G. R. (2010). The effect of gilt age at first estrus and breeding on third estrus on sow body weight changes and long-term reproductive performance. Journal of Animal Science, 88(7), 2500–2513.

Piñeiro, C., Morales, J., Rodríguez, M., Aparicio, M., Manzanilla, E. G., & Koketsu, Y. (2019). Big (pig) data and the internet of the swine things: A new paradigm in the industry. Animal Frontiers, 9(2), 6–15.

Sanz-Fernández, S., Rodríguez-Hernández, P., Díaz-Gaona, C., Tusell, L., Quintanilla, R., & Rodríguez-Estévez, V. (2024). Evolution of sow productivity and evaluation parameters: Spanish farms as a benchmark. Veterinary Sciences, 11(12), 626.

Su, J., Xie, Q., Deng, Y., Wang, C., Xie, S., Gao, N., Ma, X., Kim, S. W., Nyachoti, C. M., Yin, Y., Tan, B., & Wang, J. (2025). Data-driven modeling of reproductive performance: A cohort study for elevated sow efficiency and sustainability in livestock farming. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 237, 110641.

Thiengpimol, P., Tappreang, S., & Onarun, P. (2017). Reproductive performance of purebred and crossbred landrace and Large White sows raised under thai commercial swine herd. Thai Journal of Science and Technology, 6(2), 163–172.

Tummaruk, P., Tantasuparuk, W., Techakumphu, M., & Kunavongkrit, A. (2010). Influence of repeat-service and weaning-to-first-service interval on farrowing proportion of gilts and sows. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 96(3–4), 194–200.

Yang, K. Y., Jeon, J. H., Kwon, K. S., Choi, H. C., Kim, J. B., & Lee, J. Y. (2019). Effect of different parities on reproductive performance, birth intervals, and tail behavior in sows. Journal of Animal Science and Technology, 61(3), 147–153.

Yatabe, Y., Iida, R., Piñeiro, C., & Koketsu, Y. (2019). Recurrence patterns and lifetime performance of parity 1 sows in breeding herds with different weaning-to-first-mating intervals. Porcine Health Management, 5(1), 15.