Farrowing induction induces transient alterations in prolactin concentrations and colostrum composition in primiparous sows1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hormonal changes involved in the farrowing process partly control the initiation of lactation. Inducing farrowing by injection of PG may alter the normal prepartum hormonal cascade. The aim of the study was to investigate the consequences of farrowing induction on colostrum yield and composition, as well as newborn piglet growth. Gilts were treated with 2 mg of alfaprostol on d 113 of gestation (induced farrowing, IF, n = 9) or were injected with 1 mL of a saline solution (natural farrowing, NF, n = 11). Colostrum production was estimated during 24 h, starting at the onset of parturition, based on piglet BW gains. Colostrum samples were collected during the 36 h after the onset of parturition. Blood samples were collected from sows as of d 112 of pregnancy until d 2 postpartum (d 0 being the day of parturition). Piglet blood samples were obtained at birth, on d 1, and on d 21. Litter size and litter weight at birth did not differ between groups (P > 0.10). Farrowing induction did not influence (P > 0.10) colostrum yield (3.96 ± 0.20 kg) or piglet BW gain during d 1 postpartum (116 ± 8 g). At the onset of farrowing (T0), lactose content in colostrum was greater in IF sows than in NF sows (P < 0.05), whereas colostrum ash and protein contents were less (P < 0.05) in IF sows. Concentrations of IgG in colostrum were similar in both groups of sows, whereas concentrations of IgA at T0 were less in IF than in NF sows (P < 0.01). Overall, endocrine changes in blood from d -2 until d 2 (cortisol, prolactin, progesterone, and estradiol-17β) were not altered by farrowing induction (P > 0.10), but 1 h after the injection of alfaprostol, IF sows had greater circulating concentrations of prolactin (P < 0.01) and cortisol (P < 0.10) than NF sows. The greater concentration of lactose in colostrum from IF sows could be attributed to this transient increase in prolactin and cortisol. At birth, concentrations of white blood cells were less in piglets born from IF sows (P < 0.01). On d 1 and 21, piglets from IF sows had similar IgG concentrations in plasma to piglets from NF sows (P > 0.1). In conclusion, farrowing induction at 113 d of pregnancy induced transient hormonal changes in sows and alterations in colostrum composition, without significantly affecting colostrum yield. It also modified some hematological variables of piglets at birth.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".