Published on Sept. 24, 2024
The advantages of Electronic Feed Stations in swine production and breeding
To get the most out of your Hypor Libra, managing the nutrition and welfare of sows is critical for ensuring productivity and profitability. More traditional feeding methods, such as group feeding and manual rationing present significant challenges including feed competition, uneven nutrition distribution, and more stress and conflict among sows. To remedy these issues, the Electronic Feed Station (EFS) was invented and improved over the years.
What are Electronic Feed Stations (EFS)?
EFS are automated systems (Picture 1, and Picture 2) designed to individually feed sows based on specific nutritional requirements. All sows should utilize RFID systems (Radio Frequency Identification) tags attached (Picture 3), allowing the feed station to identify individual animals and dispense a pre-determined amount of feed accordingly. The feed stations typically come with software that tracks feeding patterns, consumption, pregnancy status and health indicators, providing real-time data to farm managers and technical support.
Advantages of EFS
Individualized Feeding Programs
One of the primary benefits of EFS is the ability to create custom feeding programs for each stage of the sow’s life. Traditional group feeding, with competitive systems, often leads to dominant animals consuming too much, while submissive sows may not receive enough. EFS systems, however, ensure that each sow receives the exact amount of feed prescribed based on factors such as body condition, stage of gestation, and parity.
It was demonstrated that individualized feeding through EFS led to better body condition scores and improved reproductive performance compared to conventional feeding method 1. This is particularly important during gestation, where precise nutrition is critical for fetal development, the sow's health and longevity.
Reduced feed competition and aggression
In group housing systems, feed competition can lead to increased aggression among sows, which can cause injuries, stress, and compromised welfare. EFS minimizes these issues by controlling access to feed, ensuring that each sow can eat in a calm and stress-free environment.
It is proven that sows in groups with access to EFS exhibited significantly lower levels of aggression compared to those fed in traditional group systems2. This reduction in stress contributes to better overall health and reduces the risk of injury, which can also decrease veterinary and culling costs.
Improved feed efficiency
EFS improves feed efficiency by reducing waste and optimizing feed usage. The precise control over feed distribution means that every gram of feed is utilized effectively, with minimal spillage or overfeeding. This efficiency can lead to substantial cost savings for swine producers.
It was recently reported that farms utilizing EFS experienced a 5-10% reduction in feed costs due to better feed management and reduced waste3. Over time, this can translate into significant financial benefits, especially in large-scale operations.
Enhanced data collection and management
The integration of EFS with farm management software provides a wealth of data that can be used to monitor the health and performance of sows. Data collected includes feed intake patterns, weight gain, and even behavioral indicators. This information allows for proactive management decisions, such as adjusting feed rations or identifying health issues early. Consequently, the data from EFS systems can be used to create predictive models that improve reproductive performance4.
Environmental benefits
Efficient feed management through EFS also contributes to environmental sustainability. By minimizing feed waste and optimizing feed use, farms can reduce their overall environmental footprint. In that regard, Leinonen et al.5 conducted a life cycle assessment that found farms using EFS had lower greenhouse gas emissions and reduced nutrient runoff compared to traditional feeding systems. This makes EFS an important tool in the effort to promote more sustainable livestock production practices.
Labor
Automating the feeding process with EFS significantly reduces the labor required for feeding. Traditional feeding methods often require manual labor for measuring, distributing, and monitoring feed (Picture 4). EFS systems automate these tasks, allowing farm workers to focus on other essential activities, such as health checks and barn maintenance. More and more farms are also using EFS during farrowing (Picture 5) to be able to control feed amounts exactly throughout the entire cycle.
In an era of labor shortage, skilled and motivated farm workers and/or managers are of critical importance in making sure the registration of animals in the EFS software is up to date and correct. Incorrect and incomplete administration will significantly reduce the benefits of feed stations.
Also, the adaptation period of gilts to the EFS is critical to their lifelong performance and, here as well, skilled farm workers are crucial to obtain optimal results. This means that before transferring gilts to EFS systems, they must have adequate adaptation training.
Improved sow welfare
Group housing of gestating sows is a welfare-friendly system based on the criteria of freedom of movement. While group housing can initially lead to increased aggression due to social hierarchy establishment, ESF systems help mitigate this by ensuring that each sow gets adequate and timely access to feed, reducing competition and stress. Healthy, well-nourished sows are more likely to have successful pregnancies, deliver healthy and heavier piglets, and recover quickly after farrowing. Improved welfare can lead to better productivity, as sows are more likely to exhibit natural behavior and maintain good reproductive health, and it also aligns with increasing consumer demand for ethically produced pork products.
Hypor and EFS
Hypor was the first global swine breeding company to use EFS in its nucleus farms to ensure the breeding of futureproof sows. Using this technology at a nucleus-level allows us to select animals that are calm, inquisitive, and suited to group housing. Also, the data on feed-intake and weight gain gathered during gestation is highly valuable to our geneticists when selecting for the next generations of great-grandparent stock.
Furthermore, the use of PPT-stations (Pig performance testing) allows us to monitor growth and feed conversion from an early stage of production, allowing for more accurate breeding value estimations as well as supplying us with detailed information on the number of visits to the PPT and the amount of feed consumed per visit.
Many of our customers work with EFS and they notice our sow, being calm and easy to manage, is well equipped to deal with the new reality that is free-housing systems. Hendrix Genetics, being a multi-species company, develops and/or implements new technologies at a high pace across its different species. Many technologies have overlapping qualities. The use of sensors, information and communication technologies are the basics of precision livestock farming, as we can see in Picture 6, and it allows us to develop systems that estimate and deliver, at the right time, a ration with a quantity and composition adapted to the requirements of each animal6. The next step in monitoring animal behavior and welfare will be through sensors, cameras and artificial intelligence.
Conclusion
EFS represents a significant advancement in swine production and genetics, offering numerous advantages over traditional feeding methods. By enabling individualized feeding, reducing feed competition, improving feed efficiency, and enhancing data collection, EFS systems contribute to better sow health, welfare, and farm profitability. Moreover, the environmental and labor savings associated with these systems make them an attractive option for modern swine producers seeking to optimize their operations.
Hypor, the swine brand of Hendrix Genetics, has always been at the forefront in balanced breeding and animal welfare, and the utilization of EFS was a logical next step in this process.
References
- Raasch, M., Knorr, C., and Fels, M. 2018. Impact of individualized feeding on sow body condition and reproductive performance. Animal Reproduction Science, 192, 101-108.
- Berg, P., and Andersen, I. L. 2019. Effects of group housing and feeding methods on aggression and welfare in sows. Journal of Animal Science, 97(4), 1234-1242.
- Smith, J., Clark, R., and Johnson, T. 2020. Economic benefits of feed efficiency improvements in swine production. Agricultural Economics, 51(2), 345-354.
- Muns, R., Malbert, C. H., and Pelletier, F. 2017. Predictive models for optimizing reproductive performance in sows using feed intake data. Livestock Science, 203, 70-78.
- Leinonen, I., Williams, A. G., and Kyriazakis, I. 2019. Environmental impacts of precision livestock farming technologies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 210, 119-130.
- Gaillard, C., Brossard, L., Dourmad, J-Y. 2020. Improvement of feed and nutrient efficiency in pig production through precision feeding, Animal Feed Science and Technology, 268.
