CASE REPORT
Effect of reducing crossfostering at birth on piglet mortality
and performance during an acute outbreak of porcine reproductive
and respiratory syndrome
Monte B. McCaw, DVM, PhD
McCaw MB. Effect of reducing crossfostering at birth on piglet
mortality and performance during an acute outbreak of porcine
reproductive and respiratory syndrome. Swine Health Prod.
2000;8(1):15-21. Also available in PDF
format (140k).
4700 Hillsborough Street, College of Veterinary Medicine,
North Carolina State University; Raleigh, North Carolina; email:
monte_mccaw@ncsu.edu
Summary
Objective: To determine whether limiting crossfostering
even within 24 hours of birth was essential to the success of
the management changes to reduce exposure
to bacteria to eliminate losses (McREBEL)
protocol in a 1800-sow herd.
Methods: During the first 10 weeks after an outbreak
of acute porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS)
in a herd but prior to implementing McREBEL management, crossfostering
was performed only within 24 hours of birth; however, because
the manager was sizing and sexing all litters at birth, > 85%
of piglets were being raised by a foster dam. Under the McREBEL
protocol, crossfostering practices were changed so that only the
minimal number of piglets needed to fill functional teats (fewer
than 15%) were moved between litters.
Results: Preweaning and nursery mortality (which included
euthanized culls) and weight at sale were all improved within
1 week of implementing the minimal-crossfostering protocol, although
PRRS, manifested as early farrowings, weak-born piglets, increased
mummies, and virus circulation among nursery pigs, continued for
9 subsequent weeks.
Implications: Crossfostering of piglets should be minimized
even within the first 24 hours of age and throughout lactation
during acute outbreaks of PRRS. Excellent production performance
was achieved without vaccination, nursery depopulation, or waiting
for virus circulation to end in the breeding herd and nursery.
Continued minimal fostering between litters (McREBEL management)
did not adversely affect production performance after the PRRS
outbreak subsided.
Keywords: Porcine
reproductive respiratory syndrome virus, PRRSV, McREBEL, crossfostering,
mortality.
Received: November 24, 1997
Accepted: November 8, 1999
One of the main challenges
in an
acute outbreak of porcine
reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) is the need to control
preweaning and nursery mortality. Vaccinating piglets is a recommended
method for controlling PRRSV in nursery pigs.1 Sow
vaccination has also been attempted to prevent reproductive and
possibly nursery pig disease, but vaccine should be administered
only to nonpregnant sows. Several investigators have questioned
the use of modified-live PRRSV vaccine in late-term naive gestating
sows (an unapproved use) to control acute reproductive
losses and to minimize preweaning mortality.2,3 Furthermore,
other investigators have noted outbreaks of disease in well-vaccinated
herds, suggesting that the vaccine might not protect against the
full range of different field isolates.4,5 None of
these measures controls PRRS-associated disease losses in suckling
pigs during acute outbreaks or in herds with endemic PRRS.
We have used a set of farrowing house management practices--management
changes to reduce exposure to bacteria
to eliminate losses (McREBEL)--to control mortality
rates in both suckling and nursery pigs during acute outbreaks
of PRRS. McREBEL is based on three principles:
- piglets are born essentially free of bacteria, with the notable
exception of Streptococcus suis;6
- none of nine different field isolates of PRRSV were able
to kill caesarian-derived, colostrum-deprived (CDCD) piglets
after these bacteria-free pigs were challenged with the virus;7
and
- the majority of clinical signs and mortality associated with
field cases of PRRS is the result of secondary bacterial infections.8
McREBEL has been successfully used in herds with endemic PRRS
in the nursery in which virus is continuing to circulate among
sows and in herds that appear to be infected with strains of the
virus that are not controlled by commercial vaccines.9
In this study, we investigated what effect minimizing the amount
of crossfostering within the first 24 hours of life, as part of
a McREBEL protocol, would have on preweaning and nursery mortality
in a herd in which PRRSV was still actively circulating.
Case history
An 1800-sow farrow-to-feeder pig herd (PIC Camborough 15 genetics)
experienced an outbreak of acute PRRSV, with a sudden increase
in nursery and then preweaning mortality (Figure
1), late-term abortions, and early farrowings. The
herd was using an all-in-all-out (AIAO) animal flow strategy in
both the farrowing and nursery sections at the time of the outbreak.
During each week of the first month of the outbreak, 14%-19.5%
of litters were aborted at > 80 days gestation or were born
early. The percentages of stillborn piglets and mummified
fetuses increased sharply in the third to fourth weeks of the
outbreak (Figure 2). The percentage
of mummies remained elevated (> 1.8%) for 16 weeks. In many
litters, weakborn piglets were observed during this outbreak.
Treatment by mass injection of all piglets in affected litters
or rooms with different antibiotics (penicillin, gentamycin, and
ceftiofur) was not successful in controlling preweaning mortality.
Nursery mortality (> 3%) was also not improved by antibiotics
(tetracycline or amikacin) administered in the drinking
water or via intramuscular injection of affected
pigs.
Facilities
The herd was housed in four parallel free-standing buildings.
The breeding and gestation facilities were two curtain-sided buildings
ventilated with large fans at one end and air inlets at the other
in the "tunnel ventilation" configuration. Sows were
maintained in gestation crates or breeding pens. Water was delivered
by a common trough running the length of the building in the front
of each crate. Waste was removed from all buildings by flush gutters
under concrete slats or woven wire. Farrowing took place in the
third building, which contained eight individual farrowing rooms
opening off a common hallway. Each farrowing room was equipped
with 36 crates. The farrowing building was solid-sided and was
mechanically ventilated by drawing air into the common hallway
through cool cells. The common hallway was used to temper air
before it was drawn through the open attic and into individual
rooms through ceiling baffles. Piglets were weaned at 18-21 days
of age and moved to nursery rooms via a covered walkway.
The nursery building had seven rooms opening off a common hallway.
The nursery was solid-sided and ventilated with the same equipment
as the farrowing building. Nursery pigs were reared to 9-9.5 weeks
of age on wire mesh floors with approximately 20 pigs per pen.
Starter feed was pelleted and all other stages of nursery feed
were ground.
Pre-outbreak management
Gilts sent to the herd at 26 weeks of age from the company
farrow-to-finish multiplier were vaccinated at 10 and 18 weeks
of age for PRRSV (RespPRRS(TM), Boehringer Ingelheim/Nobl
Laboratories; St. Joseph, Missouri). No sows in the study herd
were revaccinated for PRRSV. No isolation facilities existed for
housing breeding animals sent to the herd.
Although crossfostering between litters after 24 hours of age
had been minimized in the case herd prior to the PRRS outbreak,
the producer was moving piglets between litters at birth to match
them by size and by sex. The producer stated that >= 85% of
the piglets were fostered off their birth dam during the sizing
and sexing procedure. At weaning, two to three size- and sex-matched
litters would be placed into one nursery pen. Pigs from two farrowing
rooms were being commingled into a single nursery room in a strict
AIAO protocol. All the pigs farrowed within the same week were
kept together as a cohort and cohorts were not commingled. These
management procedures were in place at the onset of the PRRS outbreak
and continued until the McREBEL protocol was implemented 9 weeks
after the initial outbreak.
Study design
Two months after the initial PRRS outbreak, the herd was still
experiencing severe PRRS-associated losses. The crossfostering
protocol was changed to that called for by McREBEL management:
- crossfostering of piglets between litters did not occur after
24 hours of age, and even within the first 24 hours, fostering
was limited to moving only enough piglets to fill available teat
spaces. (The 24-hour "rule" was established arbitrarily
as a compromise between the need to limit movement of piglets
among litters to reduce spread of bacterial pathogens during
PRRS outbreaks and the need to use all functional teats available.)
For example, only four pigs would be exchanged between a litter
with 14 and a litter with six liveborn piglets, if both sows
had 10 functional teats. The farrowing house personnel were instructed
to disregard size variation within litters and piglet sex when
making fostering decisions. Piglets were only moved to other
litters within the same farrowing room. No piglets were fostered
between litters after 24 hours of age except in cases of sow
mortality or complete agalactia. These changes resulted in 15%
of piglets being fostered away from their birth dams.
- suckling piglets and nursery pigs were moved strictly AIAO
by room;
- piglets were not moved among different rooms to "nurse
sows" (especially poor-doing piglets to younger age groups
attempting to save them); and
- pigs that were clinically unresponsive to therapy with
ceftiofur (Naxcel(R), Pharmacia and Upjohn; Kalamazoo,
Michigan) (three total injections at 3 mg per lb administered
every other day to all litters in which affected piglets were
observed), and piglets that were very thin, lethargic, gaunt,
moribund, or lightweight and depressed were euthanized immediately
(to minimize the exposure of other pigs in the litter or room
to secondary bacteria and PRRSV). These piglets were never placed
on nurse sows in rooms with younger piglets. All preweaning euthanasias
were recorded as a mortality against their sow.
No sows were moved to other farrowing rooms after initial placement
nor were piglets weaned to another nursery room. Piglets were
weaned at approximately 18-21 days of age. Piglets in the two
rooms (72 crates total) were weaned AIAO each week into a single
nursery room; these piglets constituted the "cohort"
for that week. At weaning, pigs were sorted into nursery pens
by size and sex regardless of their litter of origin. Two to four
pens per room were initially left empty to receive sick pigs that
needed antibiotic therapy and reduced competition. These pens
were located adjacent to exhaust fans in one end of the nursery
room. Otherwise, pigs were left in their original pens throughout
the nursery phase. Poor quality, lightweight, or sick pigs were
euthanized prior to sale and assigned as mortalities to their
group, rather than moved to a room with younger pigs. Once McREBEL
was implemented, approximately 0.5% of nursery pigs were euthanized
per production group until virus circulation ceased.
Data collection
Total number of piglets born live, died, and weaned were recorded
for each room, and cohort group performance values were combined
from the two farrowing rooms for statistical analysis. Total number
of piglets placed into each nursery room, number of mortalities
per week, and the total number died/sold were recorded for each
nursery room. Total production group mortality from birth to sale
(approximately 10 weeks old) was calculated using liveborn and
combined mortality data from both farrowing and nursery room charts.
Piglet sale bills were used to determine the average weight of
pigs sold from each nursery room. All pigs in each nursery room
were either shipped or euthanized on the day of sale. PigCHAMP(R)
bureau records were used to determine total pigs born per litter,
percent stillbirths, and percent mummies.
Statistical analysis
Data was analyzed by 10-week-long production periods, the amount
of time required for a cohort to complete a "turn" or
move completely through the farrowing and nursery facilities.
The "PreMcREBEL" period consisted of the 10 weeks prior
to implementing McREBEL management. "McREBEL 1" represented
the first 10 weeks of production under McREBEL management. A total
of 40 weeks of production ("PreMcREBEL," "McREBEL
1," "McREBEL 2," and "McREBEL 3") were
included in the statistical analysis. Differences between mean
production group preweaning mortality, nursery mortality, total
mortality (production group combined preweaning and nursery mortality),
and mean nursery sale weight were compared among the four production
periods by one-way ANOVA.
Virus circulation monitoring
Blood samples were collected from 10 nursery pigs per sampled
room at various intervals during the three postMcREBEL periods.
Four different samplings were conducted on pigs that were at 3,
5, 7, and 9 weeks of age. Sows (30) and gilts (15) were also randomly
selected and tested toward the end of McREBEL 2 (production week
27). All samples were analyzed by PRRSV ELISA (HerdChek PRRS(R),
IDEXX Laboratories, Inc; Westbrook, Maine) and some were confirmed
as viremic by virus isolation on porcine alveolar macrophage cultures.
Results
Percentages of preweaning mortality, nursery mortality, and
total mortality were significantly higher and mean sale weight
was significantly lower during the PreMcREBEL period than during
the three McREBEL periods (Tukey's comparison of means, rejection
level = .010) (Table 1). Production
group preweaning mortality was significantly lower (P
<.01) for the piglets born during McREBEL 1 than
for piglets born during the PreMcREBEL period (Figure
3). Nursery mortality for the production groups born during
McREBEL 1 also dropped quickly (Table
1). The rapid reduction in mortality rates during McREBEL
1 occurred while fewer pigs were born per week and significantly
(P<.01) fewer pigs were dying in lactation and the nursery
(Figure 3, Figure
4, Table 1). Mean nursery pig
sale weight began to increase 4 weeks prior to the implementation
of McREBEL (Figure 5). The production
period mean mortality and sale weights (Table 1) were significantly
different between PreMcREBEL and each of the three McREBEL periods
(P<=.0001). Weakborn piglets, early farrowings, and
elevated percentages of mummies continued to the end of McREBEL
1 (production week 20).
PRRSV was isolated from seven of 10 9-week-old nursery pigs
in production week 25 (during McREBEL 2). When nursery pigs were
serosampled halfway through McREBEL 2, only the 9-week-old group
contained seropositive pigs. When the same nursery pig age groups
were tested later in McREBEL 2 (production week 27), all were
seronegative for PRRSV sows and gilts still had an unstable PRRSV
antibody profile at this time (Figure
6).
Discussion
In this herd, extensive fostering of piglets between litters
within the first 24 hours of life did not appear to control piglet
losses associated with an acute outbreak of PRRS. Moving most
piglets from their birth dams to another litter may help spread
PRRSV and other bacterial pathogens to more litters. Also, extensive
crossfostering may contribute to a delay in successful lactation
for several hours after the new litter is assigned.10
Loss of regular nutrient uptake by already weak piglets may contribute
to their inability to mount a successful response to environmental
pathogens.
Prior to implementing McREBEL, the producer was not systematically
treating whole litters with antibiotics, nor euthanizing pigs
that were very sick, moribund, or nonresponsive to therapy. These
practices may have increased the amount of pathogens littermates
were exposed to during lactation.
The performance improvements observed in this case after McREBEL
management was implemented in the herd were achieved despite evidence
that the infection with PRRSV was still in the acute phase (i.e.,
continued birth of weakborn--potentially virus-infected--litters,
elevated number of mummified fetuses, and continued virus circulation
in the nursery). Early farrowings and abortions were also observed
until the latter part of McREBEL 1, but were not noted because
the breeding manager did not realize that they needed to be recorded
as a specific event on the sow's record.
The extensive crossfostering before 24 hours of age practiced
in this herd before McREBEL was implemented, with little or no
crossfostering after 24 hours, did not prevent elevated preweaning
and nursery mortality after the outbreak of acute PRRSV. Extensive
crossfostering before 24 hours of age was not practiced by previous
herds in which McREBEL was used to successfully control preweaning
disease and mortality.9
The improvement observed in nursery pig mean sale weights 4
weeks before McREBEL was implemented was probably due to the euthanasia
of nursery pigs of all ages that were chronically ill, unthrifty,
and unresponsive to therapy at the start of McREBEL management.
Therefore, the mean sale weight for these groups could have been
artificially elevated as a result of removing remaining chronically
ill pigs from the production groups present in the nursery at
the time of McREBEL implementation.
Target levels of production group preweaning and nursery mortality
were obtained by the second week after McREBEL was implemented
(10th week of the outbreak) (Figure 3).
Preweaning mortality was reduced to 9.5% during McREBEL 1, well
below the 14.53% Baysinger reported for the fifth- and sixth-month
performance in 27 post-PRRSV-outbreak herds..11
However, elevated rates of mummified fetuses (>=2.2%) were
observed through the end of McREBEL 1. Significantly elevated
rates (P <.05) of mummified fetuses were observed during
the fifth and sixth months following the onset of PRRS in Baysinger's
study. Therefore, our observation of elevated numbers of mummified
fetuses during the eighteenth week of the outbreak (i.e., the
end of McREBEL 1) appears not to be unusual.11
In this herd, the farrowing house supervisor observed thin,
weak-born, "PRRS-like" litters through the sixteenth
week, and elevated mummies were observed until the nineteenth
week after the beginning of the outbreak. These litters were easily
observed since the farm was crossfostering very few piglets. Regrettably,
no colostrum-deprived weakborn piglets could be found for sampling
to attempt virus isolation on the days of any of the several herd
visits. The thin, weakborn piglets we observed were likely to
have been infected with PRRSV in utero during this period, given
the elevated rates of mummified fetuses (>= 2.2%) that were
recorded (through the end of McREBEL 1). At-term birth of weakborn
viremic piglets in litters with high numbers of mummified fetuses
has been reported in a study in which pregnant sows (at 84 days
of gestation) were experimentally infected with the Lelystad strain
of the virus.12 Viremic littermates have now been observed
in litters with mummified fetuses from PRRSV-free gilts exposed
to both strains of the virus as early as 20 days gestation.13
In the present case herd, herd size and the use of three separate
buildings for breeding, gestation, and farrowing may have delayed
the time of infection for certain subpopulations within the herd,
thus potentially prolonging the duration of reproductive losses.
Therefore, it appears likely that some PRRSV-infected litters
were still being born during most or all of McREBEL 1, even though
the herd returned to normal preweaning mortality rates at the
beginning of this period.
Spontaneous resolution of PRRSV-associated nursery disease
and mortality starting with the groups of pigs raised under McREBEL
management (born study week 11, McREBEL 1) appears unlikely. PRRSV
commonly circulates among nursery pigs for prolonged periods of
time, causing continued clinical signs following cessation of
reproductive losses.14 PRRSV continued to circulate
among nursery pigs in the case herd until approximately the twenty-first
production week, when the last seropositive group of nursery pigs
to be sold entered the nursery. Interestingly, this group of pigs
(born study week 18) was the last in which observations of weakborn
litters and an elevated number of mummified fetuses was reported.
Also, 25 weeks after the onset of reproductive PRRS (i.e., during
McREBEL 2), serologic evidence of virus circulation could no longer
be detected in the nursery. This was accomplished without depopulation
or other alterations to normal AIAO pig flow.
Prior to the present study, successful control of endemic
nursery pig PRRSV-related losses was possible only by depopulating
the nursery after virus circulation among the sow herd had ended.15
However, other investigations have been unable to control endemic
PRRSV by depopulating the nursery.16 This may be due
in part to cessation of the birth of viremic piglets that would
carry the virus and therefore reintroduce it into the newly depopulated
nursery. Arresting virus circulation among sows is probably essential
to ending the birth of in utero-infected viremic piglets.
The case herd in the present study may have been approaching
the time when it could have successfully used nursery depopulation
to stop PRRSV circulation and losses, as evidenced by the serologic
results obtained near the end of McREBEL2. By implementing McREBEL
management, the producer reduced the expected period of reduced
gains and elevated mortality by at least eight production groups
versus waiting to depopulate the nursery. If weekly average nursery
mortality (deaths and euthanized poor-health pigs) for the PreMcREBEL
period (8.03%+/-3.50%) and average mortality for McREBEL 1 (2.98%+/-1.29%)
is multiplied by the average number of pigs weaned per week during
McREBEL 1 (730), then by implementing McREBEL rather than waiting
to depopulate the nursery, the producer realized a net increase
of 295 surviving pigs for the period.
If PRRSV vaccine had been used in suckling piglets, it may
also have helped reduce nursery pig losses in this herd. Some
clinicians have reported good results using piglet vaccination
(at the time, an off-label use) to control PRRSV-associated nursery
pig losses.1 However, others have reported that the
vaccine was ineffective in controlling reduced daily gains in
PRRSV-infected nurseries.5,17 In this herd, abortions,
weakborn pigs, and high rates of mummified fetuses were observed
in all parities, including recently introduced and twice-vaccinated
gilt litters. We chose not to revaccinate the herd based upon
this observation, assuming that cross protection between the vaccine
and wild-type virus was minimal. In late 1996 to mid 1997, other
"well vaccinated" herds experienced devastating outbreaks
of PRRS-like disease, including high rates of mid- to late-term
abortions, high rates of sow mortality and adult morbidity and
fever, and elevated preweaning and nursery mortality.4,5
McREBEL may provide a successful management tool for limiting
preweaning and nursery pig losses in vaccinated herds experiencing
"acute PRRS" outbreaks.
Antibiotic treatment alone has not consistently controlled
clinical and production losses associated with bacterial infections
secondary to endemic PRRS in nursery pigs.16 Others
have reported a decrease in severity but not elimination
of clinical signs resulting from antibiotic treatment programs.18
Besides McREBEL, no other strategy has been reported to date
to control preweaning piglet losses that occur during active PRRS
outbreaks. Long-term piglet and nursery pig PRRS control (prevention)
efforts are now focused upon controlling sow herd virus circulation
by isolating, acclimating, and vaccinating the sow.19,20
Preweaning and nursery performance levels of mortality and
growth that met the production goals of this large sow herd were
maintained for the last 29 weeks of the study, during a period
when virus was actively circulating within the herd. This was
achieved without depopulating the on-site, single-roof nursery,
where seropositive 9-week-old pigs continued to be present. The
nursery production levels achieved with McREBEL for the final
two observation periods attained rates close to the 2.0% mortality
reported for nursery depopulation.15 This level of
performance was attained at least 8 weeks prior to the first possible
opportunity to successfully depopulate the nursery.
The producer has continued to use McREBEL management since
it was implemented during the outbreak reported here. Farrowing
and nursery performance levels similar to those achieved during
McREBEL 1-3 have been maintained, and 9-week-old nursery pigs
were still seronegative for PRRSV when sampled in June and July
of 1997.
Further controlled investigations are needed to isolate the
specific factors that may be responsible for the apparent need
to minimize crossfostering of piglets among litters even within
the first 24 hours of age to control disease losses during PRRSV
outbreaks.
Implications
- Minimal crossfostering of piglets between litters is critical
to the success of McREBEL for minimizing preweaning and nursery
pig mortality even during the first 24 hours of life.
- McREBEL management did not adversely affect this herd's achievement
of target performance values for herd preweaning mortality, nursery
mortality, or 9.5-week sale weights.
- PRRSV-related increases in preweaning and nursery pig mortality
can be controlled rapidly without vaccination or depopulation
of the nursery by implementing McREBEL management.
- Even in an 1800-sow herd, McREBEL effectively controlled
PRRSV-associated preweaning and nursery mortality.
Acknowledgements
Special recognition to Mr. Mike Chase and Mrs. Mary Harrison
for both open-mindedness and dedication to implementing a new
method of operation. Special thanks for outstanding perseverance
to Mr. Jerry Quisenberry and for "big picture" vision
to Dr. David James. Special thanks to Dr. Gene Erickson for PRRS
ELISA collaboration, and to IDEXX Laboratories, Inc. for providing
PRRS ELISA test kits. Thanks to Dr. (Jeffery) Todd Smith for expert
field technical assistance.
References--refereed
1. Dee SA, Collins J,
Halbur P, et al. Control of porcine reproductive and respiratory
syndrome (PRRS) virus. Swine Health Prod. 1996;4(2):95-98.
2. Botner A, Strandbygaard B, Sorensen KJ, Have P, Madsen KG,
Madsen ES, Alexandersen S. Appearance of acute PRRS-like symptoms
in sow herds after vaccination with a modified-live PRRS vaccine.
Vet Rec. 1997;141:497-499.
4. Mengeling, WL, Lager KM, Vorwald AC. Clinical consequences
of exposing pregnant gilts to strains of Porcine Reproductive
Respiratory Syndrome virus isolated from field cases of "atypical"
PRRS. AJVR. 1998;59(12): 1540-1544.
6. Amass SF, Clark
LC, Knox R, et al. Streptococcus suis colonization of piglets
during parturition. Swine Health Prod. 1996;4(6):269-272.
7. Halbur PG, Paul PS, Meng XJ, Lum MA, Andrews JJ, Rathje
JA. Comparative pathogenicity of nine US porcine reproductive
and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV) isolates in a five-week-old
cesarean-derived, colostrum-deprived pig model. J Vet Diagn
Invest. 1996;8:11-20.
8. Done SH, Paton DJ. Porcine reproductive and respiratory
syndrome: Clinical disease, pathology, and immunosuppression.
Vet Rec. 1995;136:32-35.
10. Price EO, Hutson GD, Price MI, Borgwardt R. Fostering in
swine as affected by age of offspring. J Anim Sci. 1994;72:1697-1701.
11. Baysinger AK, Dewey
CE, Straw BE, et al. Risk factors associated with endemic reproductive
deficiencies caused by PRRSV infection. Swine Health Prod.
1997;5(5):179-187.
12. Terpstra C, Wensvoort G, Pol JMA. Experimental reproduction
of porcine epidemic abortion and respiratory syndrome (mystery
swine disease) by infection with Lelystad virus: Koch's postulates
fulfilled. Vet Quart. 1991;13(3):131-136.
13. Lager KM, Mengeling WL, Brockmeier SL. Homologous challenge
of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus immunity
in pregnant swine. Vet Micro. 1997;58:113-125.
14. Stevenson GW, Van Alstine WG, Kanitz CL, Keffaber KK. Endemic
porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus infection
of nursery pigs in two swine herds without reproductive failure.
J Vet Diagn Invest. 1993;5:432-434.
15. Dee SA, Joo HS, Polson DD, et al. Evaluation of the effects
of nursery depopulation on the persistence of Porcine Reproductive
and Respiratory Syndrome virus and the productivity of 34 farms.
Vet Rec. 1997;140(10):247-248.
16. Keffaber KK. AASP Newsletter. 1992:4(4):38-40.
17. Sornsen SA, Zimmerman
JJ, Polson DD, Roof MB. Effect of PRRS vaccination on average
daily gain: A comparison of intranasal and intranasal-intramuscular
administration. Swine Health Prod. 1998;6(1):13-19.
19. Dee SA. An overview
of production systems designed to prepare naïve replacement
gilts for impending PRRSV challenge: A global perspective. Swine
Health Prod. 1997;5(6):231-239.
20. Dee SA, Joo HS. Prevention of the spread of porcine reproductive
and respiratory syndrome virus in endemically infected pig herds
by nursery depopulation. Vet Rec. 1994;135:6-9.
References--nonrefereed
3. Hogedal P. Koncept for Handtering of PRRS. Proc Danish
Vet Ass Ann Cong. 1997:67-72.
5. Halbur PG, Bush E. Update on abortion storms and sow mortality.
Swine Health Prod. 1997;5(2):73.
9. McCaw MB. Proc 2nd Intl Symp PRRS. 1995:33.
18. Gillespie. Proc. AD Leman Swine Conf. 1995;(22):163-165.
|