01 maria nazare torres simoes

908 views

Published on

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
908
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
72
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
21
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

01 maria nazare torres simoes

  1. 1. Maria Nazaré T. Simões Lisboa DVM Campinas São Paulo Brasil [email_address] THE BRAZILIAN SWINE INDUSTRY
  2. 2. BRAZIL: Great Opportunity in South America
  3. 3. Brazil: Competitive Advantages <ul><li>Lands availability </li></ul><ul><li>Cost of competitive facilities </li></ul><ul><li>Good human resources </li></ul><ul><li>Low production costs (grains) </li></ul><ul><li>Good grains production </li></ul><ul><li>Strong industrial plant </li></ul><ul><li>PRRS Free </li></ul><ul><li>Favorable weather </li></ul><ul><li>Good technology adoption </li></ul>
  4. 5. BRAZILIAN PRODUCTION COST In Euros $ € 1,0 – 1,20 SALES COST PER KG OF PIG In Euros $ € 1,2 – 1,30
  5. 6. Distribution of the Technified Housed Sows Southeast - 381 thousand dams Midwest - 273 thousand dams South - 980 thousand dams Northeast - 18 thousand dams North – 2 thousand dams SC - 420.000 RS - 290.000 PR - 270.000 MG - 241.490 SP - 120.000 MT- 110.000 GO - 100.000 MS - 51.749 ES - 18.660 DF - 11.000 CE - 8.000 BA - 6.000 Other – 7.101 Total = 1.654.000
  6. 7. Pork Exports (thousand tons) Source: ABIPECS, 2011.
  7. 8. Evolution of Pork Brazilian Consumption Per Capita Beginning of the program to stimulate domestic pork consumption of ABCS (BASP) . Source: ABCS, 2011.
  8. 9. Destination of Pork Production in Brazil in 2007
  9. 10. Destination of Pork Production in Brazil in 2010 Source: ABIPECS, 2011.
  10. 11. Sows per region in 2010 Source: Abipecs, Sips, Sindicates RS and PR, Embrapa Number of industrial sows per region Southern Region Southeast Region Midwest Region 948.055 310.563 216.873 4% increase in 2010
  11. 12. Main Destinations of Brazilian Exports of Pork 2010 Volume: 540.417 ton. Income: U$$ 1.340.714
  12. 13. Production System of Swine Brazilian Farms
  13. 14. Main producers per category <ul><li>Agribusiness; </li></ul><ul><li>Cooperatives; </li></ul><ul><li>Independents </li></ul>
  14. 15. FARMS’ PROFILE <ul><li>Large groups with 26 - 28 weaned/ sow/year </li></ul><ul><li>Good labor </li></ul><ul><li>Nº of sow/person between 80 -120 sows </li></ul><ul><li>The cost of labor is near 8 -12 % in most </li></ul><ul><li>of the farms </li></ul><ul><li>Some with costs like 5 – 8% </li></ul>
  15. 16. Several farms are improving their results <ul><li>Table: Data from farms assisted by Consuitec. Evaluation from the last 12 months (April to March - source Pig Champ). </li></ul>ISSUES 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Born 11,5 11,9 12,7 13,3 14,4 14,8 Born Alive 10,6 10,7 11,7 12,1 13,0 13,3 Weaned 9,4 9,5 10,8 11,4 12,0 12,5
  16. 17. PPU - FARM UPL
  17. 18. NATURAL VENTILATION
  18. 19. CONTROLLED VENTILATION
  19. 20. INTEGRATION (SITE 3)
  20. 21. Biosecurity Measures
  21. 22. LABOR QUALITY
  22. 23. The farrowing are assisted in most of the pig farms
  23. 24. The weaning age is between 21 – 24 days Weight = 6,0 -7,0 kg
  24. 25. Depending on the region and market, the animals are sold between 90 and 126 kg of weight
  25. 26. CONCLUSIONS <ul><li>The costs of production in Brazil are very competitive </li></ul><ul><li>There are a lot of opportunities </li></ul><ul><li>It is a growing country </li></ul><ul><li>It has a population of de 190 million people and counting </li></ul><ul><li>The purchasing power is improving </li></ul><ul><li>There is room for more pork consumption in </li></ul><ul><li>Brazil and in the world </li></ul>
  26. 27. Efficacy and safety of 0.5ml Circovac ® in the control of PCVD (Porcine Circovirus Disease) under Brazilian field conditions. “ A field observation”
  27. 28. BRAZILIAN SITUATION <ul><li>PMWS is significant in the 2000 decade. </li></ul><ul><li>Present in all Brazilian territory. </li></ul><ul><li>In the beginning autogenous vaccines were used for a long time. </li></ul><ul><li>In the first program only sows were vaccinated. </li></ul><ul><li>Currently there are commercial vaccines that are used in the control programs: Sows and Piglets </li></ul>
  28. 29. CONTROL <ul><li>PCVD control is based on: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Nutritional strategies; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Medical strategies; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Management strategies, and above all : </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The use of vaccines can contribute to the effective control of Postweaning Multisystemic Wasting Syndrome -> Great benefits: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li> Increase productivity ; </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Sanitary control of affected farms . </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  29. 30. A Field Observation Piglets vaccinated at weaning with 0,5ml Circovac ® had lower wasting rates and lower field mortality, showing marked performance improvement of the vaccinated herd
  30. 31. GOAL <ul><li>To evaluated Circovac ® vaccination effect on: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Wasting rate; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mortality; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Weight Gain; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lung Lesions. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>NOTE: Animals were naturally challenged with porcine Circovirus type 2 (PCV-2) </li></ul></ul>
  31. 32. Materials and Methods Evaluations were performed with piglets of different ages, from immunization to slaughter. Results between the vaccinated and control groups were always compared This study was one of the various evaluations which supported product claim for piglets in Brazil in 2008
  32. 33. Materials and Methods <ul><li>Animals selection </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1200 piglets were used, divided into two replicates, subdivided into 2 treatments : </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>T1 – Vaccinated group (0,5ml Circovac ® ) at 21 days of age </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>T2 – Non-vaccinated group (control group ) </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  33. 34. Materials and Methods <ul><li>Farms selection : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Each replicate was conducted in a farm with history and confirmed PCVD diagnosis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>NOTE: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Both with mortality higher than 6% in the last 6 months. For Circovirus disease confirmation, piglets with clinical signs were euthanized and clinical samples were sent to the lab for histopathological and immunohistochemical tests </li></ul></ul>
  34. 35. Materials and Methods <ul><li>Treatments/Observations : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1200 animals randomly allocated into two groups (30 or 15 animals/pen ); </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DWG (gaily weight gain), mortality and wasting rates evaluation -> the experimental unity was each animal ; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>FC ( Feed conversion) evaluation -> the experimental unity was the pen; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Feed intake, wasting and mortality rates were weekly evaluated . </li></ul></ul>
  35. 36. Materials and Methods <ul><li>Productive parameters evaluated : </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Weighing at 65 and 138 days of age (R1) and at </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>0, 47, 70 and 137 days of age (R2 ) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>DWG (Daily weight gain) ; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>FC (Feed Conversion) ; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Wasting and mortality rates ; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Post-vaccine local or systemic reactions . </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Slaughter evaluation : </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>110 animals randomly selected were evaluated at slaughter. Half of this number corresponds to vaccinated animals </li></ul></ul></ul>
  36. 37. RESULTS : TWG R1 & R2 Figure 1. From 21 to 65 days there was no significant weight gain difference. Although at the final, weight animals from vaccinated group (Circovac ® ) was bigger( 3,09 Kgs), when compared to the control group . Weight Gain R1 91,1 26,8 26,8 88,1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 65 138 Day s Weight Vac. group Non vac. group
  37. 38. RESULTS Replicates 1&2 Total Weight Gain R2 Figure 2. In the evaluated period there was no significant weight gain difference. At day 137 animals from the Circovac ® vaccinated group had considerable advantage in feed conversion . 6,8 15,6 32,7 90,1 6,8 15,6 32,6 89,7 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 47 70 137 Days Weight Vac. group Non vac. group
  38. 39. RESULTS AWG in for both replicates Figure 5. At weaning and nursery there was no significant difference in the ADG. Later there was an ADG of 37 gr/day more meat for the groups of piglets vaccinated with Circovac ® , totaling in the study period to 3,09 Kg for the vaccinated group . Average Daily Gain 0,466 0,876 0,839 0,466 0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1 21-65 65-138 Period Average gain in kg/day Vac. group Non vac. group
  39. 40. RESULTS <ul><li>Wasting rate </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The groups vaccinated with Circovac ® showed more uniformity in the batches ; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>On replicate 1, the vaccinated group had 5,5% vs. 8% ; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The wasting rate for replicate 2 of the vaccinated group was 9,6% vs. 18% reported for the non vaccinated group ; </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The reduction for the control group is inclusive due to the fact that vaccinated animals excrete less virus, reducing the environmental challenge . </li></ul></ul></ul>
  40. 41. RESULTS Figure 6. In replicate 1 there was no significant statistical difference (P>0,05), only numeric. In replicate 2 there was a statistical difference (p<0,05) in the mortality rate between treatments . Mortality Rate Rate of Average Mortality 1200 70 111 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 Total de Animaals Total Animals Deaths in vac. group Deaths in non vac. group
  41. 42. RESULTS Considering the mortality rate of replicate 1, we noticed only a numeric difference between treatments. In replicate 2 the control group lost 30 animals more than the group of piglets vaccinated with Circovac ® . <ul><li>Mortality Rate </li></ul>Deaths R1 Deaths R2 Treatment Live Dead Treatment Live Dead T1 576 24 T1 554 46 T2 565 35 T2 524 76
  42. 43. RESULTS <ul><li>Lung Lesions and Pneumonia Rate </li></ul>Figure 7. From the 95 slaughtered animals per treatment, the group of piglets vaccinated with Circovac ® had 17,9% of lung lesions vs. 33,7% of the control group. In the further study of lesions, the vaccinated group had less impairment of lung lobes (lower index of pulmonary hepatization lungs ). Some animals from the control group showed pericarditis and adherence (indicating manifestation of secondary agents )
  43. 44. RESULTS Local reactions In the assessment of possible post-vaccine local or systemic reactions, no alteration was observed (behavior and body temperature), as well as lack of appetite .
  44. 45. CONCLUSIONS <ul><li>Under the conditions that the experiments </li></ul><ul><li>were conducted it was concluded </li></ul><ul><li>Between treatments there was no influence </li></ul><ul><li>in the performance of piglets at pre´-nursery and nursery stages </li></ul><ul><li>Weaned piglets vaccinated with 0,5ml Circovac ® </li></ul><ul><li>intramuscular rout significantly reduced the wasting and mortality rates ; </li></ul><ul><li>The vaccination of weaned piglets with 0,5ml Circovac ® via intramuscular rout increased the average daily gain in 37gr and improved the feed conversion in 100gr of ration/kg of aggregate meat . </li></ul>
  45. 46. CONCLUSIONS <ul><li>The vaccination of weaned piglets with 0,5ml Circovac ® via intramuscular rout did not cause any systemic or local reaction . </li></ul><ul><li>The vaccination of weaned piglets with 0,5ml Circovac ® via intramuscular rout decreased significantly pleural and lung lesions at slaughter . </li></ul>
  46. 47. Thank you for paying attention

×