The study found that growing pigs exposed to PED virus as piglets had impaired performance compared to unexposed pigs. Specifically, exposed pigs had 12.5% higher mortality, 0.16 lb/day lower average daily gain, and 0.55 higher feed conversion ratio. The results suggest PED virus infection has negative impacts beyond just suckling piglets, decreasing performance of growing pigs through increased mortality and decreased growth rates.

1. Impact of PED in growing pigs
Julio Alvarez, Javier Sarradell,
Robert Morrison, Andres Perez
DVM, PhD
Department of Veterinary Population Medicine
College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Minnesota

2. PED impact
a
• Primarily due to losses in suckling piglets
– Mortalities between 50-80%b
– Time to recover baseline production of
>10 wksc
• Further impact?
– Infected growing pigs: 1-3% mortalityb
– Pigs exposed to PED as piglets that make it to the
growing phase?
a Swine enteric Coronavirus disease testing summary report, Sept 3 2014
b White Paper (Geiger and Connor, 2013)
c Swine Health Monitoring Project (Goede and Morrison, 2014)

3. Objective
• To quantify the impact of PEDv infection
in growing pigs by comparing
– Mortality
– Average daily gain (ADG)
– Average daily feed intake (ADFI)
– Feed conversion rate (FCR)
in batches exposed/unexposed to the virus

4. Peek at the results
• Impaired performance of pigs from
first PED+ batches compared with
PED- pigs
– Increased mortality (6-18%)
– Decreased ADG (0.07-0.26 lb/day)
– Increased FCR (0.3-0.8)

5. Material and methods
• Screening of productive records to select
batches from positive flows
– Only nursery/WF batches
• Selection of 33 flows
– 11 nursery
– 22 WF
Commercial sow
Nursery
Finishing
Wean to
finish
PED detection

6. Inclusion criteria
• Selection of first PED+ batch within a given flow
(“infected” batch)
• Selection of the closest preceding PED- batch
from the same flow (“control” batch)
– At least 14 days before the infected batch (increase
specificity)
– Not more than 4 months before the infected batch
PED+
batch
Control batch (closest available)
Weeks

7. Data analysis
• Pairs of batches - paired non-parametric
comparison (Wilcoxon test) of
performance records
• Comparison of nursery to WF paired
differences (Mann-Whitney test)

8. Study population
• 18 flows fulfilled the inclusion criteria (18 case + 18
control batches)
– 4 nursery
– 14 WF (double stocking: first stage in growing, ≈60d)
• Average mortality, ADG, ADFI and FCR in the previous
four months (before PED) within normal limits

9. Descriptive results
• First PED+ batch  change in trends
– Increase in mortality (4.9 to 15.2%)
– Decrease in ADG (0.79 to 0.72)
– No change in ADFI
– Increase in FCR (1.75 to 2.28)
• GRAFICA GLOBAL
4 3 2 1 PED!

10. Paired comparison
• Mortality
12.5% increase
(95% CI: 6.4-18.4)
Control Infected

11. • Performance
ADG ADFI
FCR
↓0.16 lb/d
↑ 0.55
Control Infected Control Infected Control Infected

12. So, as previously mentioned…
• Impaired performance of pigs from
first PED+ batches compared with
PED- pigs
– Increased mortality (6-18%)
– Decreased ADG (0.07-0.26 lb/day)
– Increased FCR (0.3-0.8)

13. Conclusions (II)
• Caveats of the study
– Reduced dataset
– No adjustment by covariates (site)
• However…
– Robust trend suggesting a decreased performance of
growing pigs from PED+ batches
• Increase in mortality (6-18%... Or more!)
• Decrease in ADG, ADFI unaffected Increase in FCR (0.3-0.8)
– Rough numbers: with 0.3$/lb feed from wean to 40 lbs,
0.55 poorer FCR costs approx $0.16/lb gain
• Impact of PEDv goes beyond suckling piglets

14. Dr. Sarradell
Dr. Morrison
Questions?
jalvarez@umn.edu
Dr. Perez