Limits...
Production parameters and pig production cost: temporal evolution 2010 – 2014

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: The assessment of the cost of production and the relative weight of the different production parameters is very important in pig farming. The goals of the present work were 1) to describe reliable reference values for production parameters and pig production cost from 2010 to 2014, 2) to describe their temporal evolution and 3) to determine the influence of the pig company size on them. Between 61 and 107 pig production companies from Spain were included in this study from 2010 to 2014. These companies sent data on feed consumption, number of pig produced, expenses and census every month. Sip consultors SL standardized collected data and calculate cost and production parameters to obtain values comparables between the different pig production companies. The collected data each month were merged to obtain a yearly average value taking into account the pig production flow each month. A suitable statistical analysis was carried out to tackle the goals.

Results: The production performance has been continuously improving in the piglet production and fattening phase from 2010 to 2014. Thus, the number of piglets by sow and year will increase 0.5 pigs by year and the total feed conversion rate will decrease approximately 0.03 kg feed/kg gain by year in the future if the same tendency continues. However, feed price has been steadily increasing from 2010 to 2012 and decreasing afterwards and the total cost per kilogram produced has followed a similar pattern. This result highlights the relevance of the feed price in the final cost in spite of continuous improvement in production performance across years. Finally, pig company size affected most of the production parameters studied. Thus, the best technical parameters were obtained for companies with less than 5000 sows. However, the opposite tendency is observed for feed price where the highest value was observed for the smallest companies.

Conclusions: Pig production parameters have generally improved in the last five years but this improvement did not directly imply a reduction in pig production cost due to the high feed prices during the period 2010–2013.

Electronic supplementary material: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40813-016-0027-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No MeSH data available.


Temporal evolutions of feed cost and cost of production during nursery (a and b) and fattening phase (c and d) from 2010 to 2014 in Spain. Values with different superscripts differ significantly between years at P < 0.05
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5382395&req=5

Fig3: Temporal evolutions of feed cost and cost of production during nursery (a and b) and fattening phase (c and d) from 2010 to 2014 in Spain. Values with different superscripts differ significantly between years at P < 0.05

Mentions: Average daily gain, feed conversion and mortality rate have not changed during the nursery phase from 2010 to 2014 (Additional file 1: Figure S1). However, nursery feed price has been increasing steeply from 2010 to 2013 and decreasing subsequently (Fig. 3). The cost of production of a nursery piglet has followed a similar pattern than the nursery feed price across years (Fig. 3). On the other hand, pig company size was affecting most of the parameters studied, with the exception of nursery mortality rate, in different ways (Table 1). Thus, the lower the pig size company is, the better are average daily gain, feed conversion rate and drug and vaccine cost per nursery piglet. However, the opposite tendency is observed for nursery feed price where the highest value was observed for the smallest companies (Table 1). As a consequence, the cost per nursery piglet is similar for all the companies with the exception of companies between 5000 and 10000 sows whose value is higher than for the others. Finally, a complete descriptive statistics is shown by year in this phase (Additional file 1: Table S1 and S2).Fig. 3


Production parameters and pig production cost: temporal evolution 2010 – 2014
Temporal evolutions of feed cost and cost of production during nursery (a and b) and fattening phase (c and d) from 2010 to 2014 in Spain. Values with different superscripts differ significantly between years at P < 0.05
© Copyright Policy - OpenAccess
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5382395&req=5

Fig3: Temporal evolutions of feed cost and cost of production during nursery (a and b) and fattening phase (c and d) from 2010 to 2014 in Spain. Values with different superscripts differ significantly between years at P < 0.05
Mentions: Average daily gain, feed conversion and mortality rate have not changed during the nursery phase from 2010 to 2014 (Additional file 1: Figure S1). However, nursery feed price has been increasing steeply from 2010 to 2013 and decreasing subsequently (Fig. 3). The cost of production of a nursery piglet has followed a similar pattern than the nursery feed price across years (Fig. 3). On the other hand, pig company size was affecting most of the parameters studied, with the exception of nursery mortality rate, in different ways (Table 1). Thus, the lower the pig size company is, the better are average daily gain, feed conversion rate and drug and vaccine cost per nursery piglet. However, the opposite tendency is observed for nursery feed price where the highest value was observed for the smallest companies (Table 1). As a consequence, the cost per nursery piglet is similar for all the companies with the exception of companies between 5000 and 10000 sows whose value is higher than for the others. Finally, a complete descriptive statistics is shown by year in this phase (Additional file 1: Table S1 and S2).Fig. 3

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Background: The assessment of the cost of production and the relative weight of the different production parameters is very important in pig farming. The goals of the present work were 1) to describe reliable reference values for production parameters and pig production cost from 2010 to 2014, 2) to describe their temporal evolution and 3) to determine the influence of the pig company size on them. Between 61 and 107 pig production companies from Spain were included in this study from 2010 to 2014. These companies sent data on feed consumption, number of pig produced, expenses and census every month. Sip consultors SL standardized collected data and calculate cost and production parameters to obtain values comparables between the different pig production companies. The collected data each month were merged to obtain a yearly average value taking into account the pig production flow each month. A suitable statistical analysis was carried out to tackle the goals.

Results: The production performance has been continuously improving in the piglet production and fattening phase from 2010 to 2014. Thus, the number of piglets by sow and year will increase 0.5 pigs by year and the total feed conversion rate will decrease approximately 0.03&nbsp;kg feed/kg gain by year in the future if the same tendency continues. However, feed price has been steadily increasing from 2010 to 2012 and decreasing afterwards and the total cost per kilogram produced has followed a similar pattern. This result highlights the relevance of the feed price in the final cost in spite of continuous improvement in production performance across years. Finally, pig company size affected most of the production parameters studied. Thus, the best technical parameters were obtained for companies with less than 5000 sows. However, the opposite tendency is observed for feed price where the highest value was observed for the smallest companies.

Conclusions: Pig production parameters have generally improved in the last five years but this improvement did not directly imply a reduction in pig production cost due to the high feed prices during the period 2010&ndash;2013.

Electronic supplementary material: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40813-016-0027-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No MeSH data available.