Finisher Management

1
Finisher Management

• AnS 225
• Fall 2009

2
Characteristics of Grow-Finish

• FEED The Primary Cash Cost
• 55 to 65 percent of cost of production
• 2009 now 65 to 75
• High feed intake per pig (4 to 6 lb/day)
• Focus on efficiency
• MEAT The reason we raise hogs
• Payment based upon Lean
• Food Safety is a critical issue
• Antibiotic resistance, growth promoters, residues
• Meat Quality The next Frontier??

3
Characteristics of G/F, Cont.

• Facility Costs
• Confinement Facility (200 to 225/pig space)
• High Cost Option
• Deep pit or lagoon (liquid waste)
• Mechanical ventilation or combination
  mechanical/natural
• Lower labor cost per pig
• Hoop Structure (100 to 120/pig space)
• Low Cost Option
• Large groups
• Solid waste handling (deep bedded system)
• Natural ventilation
• Higher labor requirement

4
Characteristics of G/F Stage

• Long period
• Conventional (95 to 140 days on feed)
• Enter at 50 to 60 lbs (i.e. 50 to 60 days of age)
• Leave 250 to 300 lbs (150 to 210 days of age)
• Wean to Finish (140 to 200 days on feed)
• Enter 8 to 20 lbs (12 to 21 days of age)
• Leave 250 to 300 lbs (150 to 210 days of age)

5
Considerations

• Group Size
• Confinement Facilities
• 20 - 25 pigs/pen standard
• Significant interest in groups sizes of up to 500
  
• Hoop Structures
• 75 to 200 head per group standard
• Thermal comfort zone
• Temperature range in which animal does not have
  to expend additional energy to regulate its body
  temperature 40 - 75 lbs 70 - 85 F
• 75 - 150 lbs 60 - 83 F
• 150 - 250 lbs 45 - 80 F

6
Advantages of Intensive Confinement Systems

• Constant, controlled environment with proper
  ventilation results in more efficient production
• Low labor requirements per pig produced
• Intensive use of capital investment
• Improved marketing opportunities because of
  consistent flow of market hogs
• Allows use of specialized labor
• Improved working conditions for employees

7
Disadvantages of Intensive Confinement Systems

• Requires large capital outlay
• Little flexibility to change size of the
  production unit if situations warrant
• High energy requirements and alternate energy
  sources are needed
• Dependent on maintenance of mechanical devices
• Sufficient land must be available to dispose of
  large amounts of manure

8
Traditional Finisher
9
Traditional Finisher
10
Non-traditional Finisher -- Hoop
11
Hoops Deep Bedding
12
Advantages of Outdoor Production Systems

• Lower capital investment in buildings and
  equipment
• Flexible system that is easier to change and
  modify due to lower fixed costs
• Less dependence on mechanical devices and
  equipment
• Disagreeable aspects of environmentally regulated
  buildings (odor and manure handling) are largely
  avoided

13
Disadvantages of Outdoor Production Systems

• Less control over environment which may adversely
  affect animal performance
• Higher labor requirements per pig produced
• Less desirable working conditions for employees
• Requires pasture and/or bedding
• Usually lower profit opportunities

14
All-In, All-Out (AIAO)

• Strict sanitation and biosecurity
• Follow the rules remove all pigs from the
  facility, including tailenders
• Increased weight gain (6 10)
• Decreased days to market (6 10 days)
• Improved feed efficiency (5 7)

15
Feed Efficiency

• Traditional Measure
• lb feed/lb live wt gain
• Each 0.1 unit improvement in feed efficiency (lb
  feedlb live gain) reduces feed cost by 1.50 to
  2.00/pig or more

16
Factors Influencing Feed Efficiency

• Non-nutritional factors
• Feed wastage
• Stress (temperature, crowding)
• Health status
• Adequacy of feed preparation (particle size and
  form)
• Nutritional Factors
• Nutrient composition of diet
• Adequacy of diet for genetic type and production
  environment

17
Feed Wastage, Impact on Feed Utilization

• Improper adjustment
• Poor design
• Economic and Environmental Benefits to proper
  adjustment

50 to 250 lbs 31 feed/gain .60 P and 2.4 N
in diet
18
Feed Wastage, Impact on Feed Utilization

• Improper adjustment
• Poor design
• Economic and Environmental Benefits to proper
  adjustment

50 to 250 lbs 31 feed/gain .60 P and 2.4 N
in diet
19
Properly Adjusted Feeder
20
Impact of Feed Preparation on Feed Efficiency

• Feed particle size (target 600-800 microns)
• Every 100 microns higher loss of .50 to
  1.00/pig in feed efficiency
• Course grind pigs sort particles
• Fine grind pack in bins and feeders, ulcers

• Pellets
• 5 FE
• 10 to 15 /ton cost
• Reduced dust

• Meal
• Lower cost/ton
• On-farm grinding
• Fewer ulcers

21
Feed Intake

• Critical for establishing nutrient intake
• Measuring and monitoring on the farm is critical
• Sex effect is large
• barrows consume 10 more than gilts
• Genetic lines differ in voluntary intake
• Seasonal effects can be significant

22
How do we feed the G/F pig??

• Split sex feeding
• Barrow Gilt
• Feed Intake higher 10
• ADG higher 8 to 10
• Feed Efficiency poorer 2 to 3
• Lean Meat poorer 1 to 3
• Sexes may be fed to meet intake, growth and lean
  potential
• Barrows -- lower protein (lysine)
• Gilts -- higher energy density and protein
  (lysine) levels

23
Management Considerations

• Space requirements
• Conventional confinement finisher
• 7 to 8 square feet per pig
• Hoop structures
• 12 to 15 square feet per pig
• Water access
• Nipple waterers (minimum of 2 per pen)
• one for every 8 to 12 pigs
• Bowl waterers
• one bowl for each 8 to 10 pigs

24
Management Considerations

• Feeder space requirements
• General rule -- Dry feeders
• Space for 15 - 25 of pigs eating simultaneously
• 1 feeder hole per 4 to 5 pigs
• 10 to 12 inches of space per feeder hole
• Wet/Dry feeders
• Two holes for each 20 to 25 pigs

25
Wean-to-Finish Concept

• Benefits observed in labor and/or efficiency
• Reduced transportation costs
• Fewer moves and less labor to move pigs
• Reduced labor for washing and disinfecting
• Fewer nursery rooms to clean
• Reduced stress of moving and commingling
• Improved ADG, better FE
• Increased facility flexibility
• Finisher can be modified easier than a nursery
• Reduced down-time between groups

26
Wean to Finish Facility
27
Disadvantages of Wean-to-Finish

• Increased facility cost
• 15 to 20 per head to accommodate young pig
• Supplemental heat, mats, feeders, etc.
• Less efficient space utilization
• Especially with the small pig
• Potential for higher utility costs
• Supplemental heat early

28
Wean-to-Finish Conclusions

• Decision is farm situation dependent
• Must fit production flow
• Revenue must offset additional cost
• Health issue alone may be driver for some
  operations

29
Phase Feeding Matching nutrient levels to the
pigs needs

• Multiple diet formulations during G/F
• Often geared toward the middle or average pigs
  because weight variation exists within groups
• Between 3 and 6 diets often used (or more)
• Dependent on the understanding of pigs genotype,
  environment, feed costs, feed processing costs,
  target ending weight
• Liquid diets may facilitate easier changes

30
Nutritional Management
Single Phase Nutritional Program
Poor pig performance
15 CP (50 to 250 lb)
Underfeed CP
Overfeed CP
Excess N and P excretion
50
250
Live Weight
31
Nutritional Management
Multiple Phase Nutrition Program designed to
meet genetic capacity, health and facilities of
the pig
Minimize overfeeding of essential nutrients
CP and Nutrient Levels changed frequently to
closely match pig needs
50
250
Live Weight
32
Protein Deposition Rate
Disease
Weight
Protein deposition rate
Genetics
Building type

health
Temperature
Sex
humidity
Space allowance
Number of pigs/pen
33
Measuring On-Farm Protein Deposition

• Using ultrasound equipment, we can measure
  protein and fat deposition as a pig grows.
• Select a sub-sample of pigs and scan every three
  weeks from 50 lb to market.
• Based on the protein and fat accretion, we can
  then back-calculate a lysine requirement and feed
  intake.

34
Estimated protein deposition using serial
ultrasound measurements
Farm 1
Farm 2
35
Lysine Requirement
Farm 1
Farm 2
36
Protein Accretion RateGenetic Type Effects
37
Factors Affecting ProteinAccretion Rate

• Gender Effects
• Gilts exceed barrows in protein accretion even at
  lighter weights and the differences increase with
  weight.
• Basis for split-gender feeding and phase feeding
  as the differences in overall rate of lean growth
  and the rate of lean growth decline are different
  for barrows and gilts.

38
Gender Effect on Protein Accretion Rate
Commercial Conditions
Schinckel and Delange
39
Modeled Protein AccretionBarrows and Gilts
Tokach, et. al, 1997