Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-mx8w7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-22T19:33:43.463Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of an on-farm method to assess colostrum IgG content in sows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2015

A. Balzani ,
H. J. Cordell  and
S. A. Edwards
A. Balzani*
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK
H. J. Cordell
Affiliation:
Institute of Genetic Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK
S. A. Edwards
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK
*
† E-mail: a.balzani@newcastle.ac.uk
Get access

Abstract

The objective of this work was to investigate the evaluation of swine colostrum immunoglobulin G (IgG) concentration using the Brix refractometer. Colostrum samples were collected across all teats, from 124 sows of mixed parities. According to sampling time, three categories were created: samples available from 9 h before the onset of parturition until the first piglet was born were classified as before farrowing; samples collected after the first birth until 4 h later were classified as during farrowing; and finally samples collected from this point until 14 h after parturition, were classified as after farrowing. Samples were drawn and divided into three portions; one was immediately analyzed, a second was refrigerated and the third was frozen at −20°C. Fresh and refrigerated colostrum samples were analyzed at the farm with a Brix refractometer. IgG content of frozen samples was analyzed using a Brix refractometer, with a subset of 42 samples also tested with a commercially available radial immune diffusion (RID) kit. The Brix percentage ranged from 18.3% to 33.2%. Brix percentage repeatability, assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), was very strong (fresh ICC=0.98, refrigerated ICC=0.88 and frozen ICC=0.99). One-way repeated-measures ANOVA showed that storage temperature did not affect BRIX percentage of colostrum IgG (P>0.05). ANOVA results show a significant effect of sampling time on colostrum immunoglobulin concentration, measured with both Brix and RID (Brix: P<0.003; RID: P<0.05). Immunoglobulin G concentration measured by RID ranged from 13.27 to 35.08 mg/ml. Pearson correlation coefficient revealed that Brix percentage was positively correlated (r=0.56, P<0.001) with RID results (regression equation: RID=1.01 (±0.2) Brix −1.94 (±5.66); R 2=0.31). The results of this study indicate that the Brix refractometer provides a simple, fast and inexpensive estimation of colostrum IgG in sows.

Keywords

Brix refractometercolostrum IgGevaluationon-farm methodswine

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , April 2016 , pp. 643 - 648
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ariza-Nieto, C, Bandrick, M, Baidoo, SK, Anil, L, Molitor, TW and Hathaway, MR 2011. Effect of dietary supplementation of oregano essential oils to sows on colostrum and milk composition, growth pattern and immune status of suckling pigs. Journal of Animal Science 89, 1079–1089.Google Scholar
Bartier, AL, Windeyer, MC and Doepel, L 2015. Evaluation of on-farm tools for colostrum quality measurement. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 1878–1884.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bielmann, V, Gillan, J, Perkins, NR, Skidmore, AL, Godden, S and Leslie, KE 2010. An evaluation of Brix refractometry instruments for measurement of colostrum quality in dairy cattle. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 3713–3721.Google Scholar
Bland, IM, Rooke, JA, Bland, VC, Sinclair, AG and Edwards, SA 2003. Appearance of immunoglobulin G in the plasma of piglets following intake of colostrum, with or without a delay in sucking. Animal Science 77, 277–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulot, S 2009. Hyperprolific sow, physiological or pathological? Reproduction in Domestic Animals 44, 66.Google Scholar
Bourne, FJ 1969. Antibody transfer and colostral whey proteins in the pig. The Veterinary Record 84, 607–608.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cabrera, RA, Lin, X, Campbell, JM, Moeser, AJ and Odle, J 2012. Influence of birth order, birth weight, colostrum and serum immunoglobulin G on neonatal piglet survival. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology 3, 42.Google Scholar
Cash, RSG 1999. Colostral quality determined by refractometry. Equine Veterinary Education 11, 36–38.Google Scholar
Chavatte, P, Clement, F, Cash, R and Grongnet, JF 1998. Field determination of colostrum quality by using a novel, practical method. American Association of Equine Practitioners 44, 206–209.Google Scholar
Chigerwe, M and Hagey, JV 2014. Refractometer assessment of colostral and serum IgG and milk total solids concentrations in dairy cattle. BMC Veterinary Research 10, 6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chigerwe, M, Tyler, JW, Middleton, JR, Spain, JN, Dill, JS and Steevens, BJ 2008. Comparison of four methods to assess colostral IgG concentration in dairy cows. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 233, 761–766.Google Scholar
Csapo, J, Martin, TG, CsapoKiss, ZS and Hazas, Z 1996. Protein, fats, vitamin and mineral concentrations in porcine colostrum and milk from parturition to 60 days. International Dairy Journal 6, 881–902.Google Scholar
Csapo, J, Stefler, J, Martin, TG, Makray, S and Csapokiss, Z 1995. Composition of mares colostrum and milk – fat-content, fatty-acid composition and vitamin content. International Dairy Journal 5, 393–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curtis, SE 1970. Environmental-thermoregulatory interactions and neonatal piglet survival. Journal of Animal Science 31, 576–587.Google Scholar
Devillers, N, van Milgen, J, Prunier, A and Le Dividich, J 2004. Estimation of colostrum intake in the neonatal pig. Animal Science 78, 305–313.Google Scholar
Foisnet, A, Farmer, C, David, C and Quesnel, H 2011. Farrowing induction induces transient alterations in prolactin concentrations and colostrum composition in primiparous sows. Journal of Animal Science 89, 3048–3059.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fraser, D 1984. Some factors influencing the availability of colostrum to piglets. Animal Production 39, 115–123.Google Scholar
Gapper, LW, Copestake, DEJ, Otter, DE and Indyk, HE 2007. Analysis of bovine immunoglobulin G in milk, colostrum and dietary supplements: a review. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 389, 93–109.Google Scholar
Harker, DB 1978. Simple estimation of immunoglobulin content of ewe colostrum. Veterinary Record 103, 8–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Inoue, T 1981a. Possible factors influencing immunoglobulin-a concentration in swine colostrum. American Journal of Veterinary Research 42, 533–536.Google Scholar
Inoue, T 1981b. Possible factors influencing the immunoglobulin-m concentration in swine colostrum. American Journal of Veterinary Research 42, 1429–1432.Google Scholar
Kehoe, SI, Jayarao, BM and Heinrichs, AJ 2007. A survey of bovine colostrum composition and colostrum management practises on Pennsylvania dairy farms. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 4108–4116.Google Scholar
Klobasa, F, Werhahn, E and Butler, JE 1987. Composition of sow milk during lactation. Journal of Animal Science 64, 1458–1466.Google Scholar
Machadoneto, R, Graves, CN and Curtis, SE 1987. Immunoglobulins in piglets from sows heat-stressed prepartum. Journal of Animal Science 65, 445–455.Google Scholar
Morin, DE, Constable, PD, Maunsell, FP and McCoy, GC 2001. Factors associated with colostral specific gravity in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 84, 937–943.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morrill, KM, Conrad, E, Polo, J, Lago, A, Campbell, J, Quigley, J and Tyler, H 2012. Estimate of colostral immunoglobulin G concentration using refractometry without or with caprylic acid fractionation. Journal of Dairy Science 95, 3987–3996.Google Scholar
Morrill, KM, Polo, J, Lago, A, Campbell, J, Quigley, J and Tyler, H 2013. Estimate of serum immunoglobulin G concentration using refractometry with or without caprylic acid fractionation. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 4535–4541.Google Scholar
Morrill, KM, Robertson, KE, Spring, MM, Robinson, AL and Tyler, HD 2015. Validating a refractometer to evaluate immunoglobulin G concentration in Jersey colostrum and the effect of multiple freeze-thaw cycles on evaluating colostrum quality. Journal of Dairy Science 98, 595–601.Google Scholar
Porter, P 1969. Transfer of immunoglobulins IgG, IgA and IgM to lacteal secretions in the parturient sow and their absorption by the neonatal piglet. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 181, 381–392.Google Scholar
Quesnel, H 2011. Colostrum production by sows: variability of colostrum yield and immunoglobulin G concentrations. Animal 5, 1546–1553.Google Scholar
Quesnel, H, Farmer, C and Devillers, N 2012. Colostrum intake: influence on piglet performance and factors of variation. Livestock Science 146, 105–114.Google Scholar
Quigley, JD, Lago, A, Chapman, C, Erickson, P and Polo, J 2013. Evaluation of the Brix refractometer to estimate immunoglobulin G concentration in bovine colostrum. Journal of Dairy Science 96, 1148–1155.Google Scholar
Wolak, ME, Fairbairn, DJ and Paulsen, YR 2012. Guidelines for estimating repeatability. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 3, 129–137.Google Scholar