Banner
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First ArticlesArchive

Research Article

volume 54 issue 11 (november 2020) : 1332-1337,   Doi: 10.18805/ijar.B-3824

A Comparative Evaluation on Productive and Reproductive Traits of Tamworth X Desi and Hampshire X Niang Megha Pigs under Subtropical Hill Ecosystem in Eastern Himalayas Region of India

G
G. Kadirvel
N
N. Manoranjan Singh
M
Mokidur Rahman
L
L. Anandakumar Singh
G
G. Khargharia
R
Rakesh Kumar
1Division of Livestock Production, ICAR Research Complex for NEH region, Umiam-793 103, Meghalaya, India.
Cite article:- Kadirvel G., Singh Manoranjan N., Rahman Mokidur, Singh Anandakumar L., Khargharia G., Kumar Rakesh (2020). A Comparative Evaluation on Productive and Reproductive Traits of Tamworth X Desi and Hampshire X Niang Megha Pigs under Subtropical Hill Ecosystem in Eastern Himalayas Region of India. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 54(11): 1332-1337. doi: 10.18805/ijar.B-3824.

ABSTRACT

Background: Pig farming is the integral component of farming system in the tribal dominated North Eastern region of India since pork is the most preferred meat among tribal population. However, pork still remains deficit and a high supply-demand gap exists due to low productivity of nondescript local pigs. In this context, popularization of crossbred pigs is the suitable option to enhance productivity. Thus, the study was carried out to evaluate the performance of crossbred pigs viz., Tamworth X Desi (T&D), Hampshire X Niang Megha (H&NM) in order to improve the pig productivity in the region.
Methods: Data was collected from crossbred pigs viz., Tamworth X desi (T&D), Hampshire X Niang Megha (H&NM) and Niang Megha (NM) pigs which is maintained in the Pig breeding farm of the institute. This data included the study of productive (n=778 piglets), reproductive (n =107 sows) and carcass traits (n =45 slaughters) over a period of about eight years (2005-2013) from the farm record books cum-pedigree sheet of the pig farm. The date was analyzed suitable statistical tools.  
Result: The study recorded no significant differences (P<0.01) in pre weaning body weight, growth rate and mortality rate between T&D and H&NM crossbred pigs however, both the crossbred pigs revealed significantly (P< 0.05) higher pre weaning body weight and growth rate than that of NM pig. Post weaning body weight were significantly (P<0.05) highest in T&D crossbred pigs followed by H&NM crossbred pig as compared to NM pigs at all age groups. Farrowing rate were significantly (P<0.05) highest in NM pigs and lowest in T&D crossbred pigs. However, farrowing interval were significantly (P<0.05) highest in NM pig and lowest in H&NM crossbred pigs. Regarding litter size at birth and weaning, there was no significant (P<0.01) difference between T&D and H&NM pig but both these pigs revealed significantly (P<0.05) higher litter performance than NM pig. Back fat thickness and loin eye area were significantly highest in T&D pigs and lowest in NM pig. However, NM pig has significantly highest lean meat content than T&D and H&NM crossbred pig. There was no significant difference (P<0.01) observed of dressing percentage between T&D and H&NM crossbred pig but, both the genetic group yield significantly (P<0.05) higher dressing percentage than Niang Megha pigs. Based on the productive, reproductive and carcass traits, the study concluded that T&D pigs more suitable for fattener pig production due to their higher growth performance and carcass yield, whereas H&M pigs can be utilized for breeding purpose in subtropical hill ecosystem of Northeast India.

REFERENCES

  1. Annual Report (2008-09). Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Regional Centre for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalya.
  2. Annual Report. (2012-13). Department of Agricultural Research and Education (DARE) Govt. of India, New Delhi.
  3. Clark L.K. and Leman A.D. (1986). Factors that influence litter size in pigs. Pig News and Inf. 7: 303-310.
  4. Dewey C.E., Martin S.W., Friendship R.M., Kennedy B.W. and Wilson M.R. (1995). Associations between litter size and specific sow-level management factors in Ontario swine. Preventive Veterinary Medicine. 23: 101-110.
  5. Duncan, D.B. (1955). Multiple Range and Multiple F-Test. Biometrics. 11: 1-5.
  6. Goonewardene, L.A., Sahayaruban, P., Rajamahendran, R. and Rajaguru, A.S.B. (1984). A study of some production traits among indigenous pigs in Sri Lanka and its crosses with improved white breeds. Animal Breeding Abstracts. 53(8): 5120.
  7. Islam, R., Nath, P. and Hussain, J. (2014). Performance of Tand D and crossbred pigs under field condition. Indian Journal of Animal Production and Management. 30(3-4): 128-130.
  8. Iversen, M.W., Nordbø, Ø., Gjerlaug-Enger, E., Grindfek, E., Lopes, M.S. and Meuwissen, T. (2019). Effects of heterozygosity on performance of purebred and crossbred pigs.Genetics Selection Evolution. 51(8):1-13. 
  9. Johnson, R.K. (1981). Crossbreeding of swine: experimental results. Journal of Animal Science. 52: 906-923.
  10. Kadirvel, G., Kumaresan, A., Anubrata, D., Bujarbaruah, K. M., Subramanian, V. and Ngachan, S. V. (2013). Artificial insemination of pigs reared under smallholder production system in north-eastern India: Success rate, genetic improvement and monitory benefit. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 45: 679-686.
  11. Kalita, G., Rouchoudhury, R., Kalita, D., Saikia, B. N., Saharia, J., Bora, M., Nath, M. K. and Talukdar, D. J. (2016). Effect of weaning management on carcass characteristics of T and D pigs. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology. 2(2): 2395-6011.
  12. Khargharia, G., Zaman, G., Laskar, S., Das, B., Aziz, A., Roychoudhury, R. and Roy, T. C. (2014). Phenotypic characterization and performance studies of Niang Megha and Doom pigs of North eastern India. Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary. 1(27): ISSN: 2319-2801.
  13. Kramer, C. T. (1957). Extension of multiple range test to group corrected adjusted means. Biometrics. 13:13-18.
  14. Kumar, A., Staal, S., Elumalai, K. and Singh, D.K. (2007). Livestock sector in North-Eastern Region of India: An appraisal of performance. Agricultural Economics Research Review. 20(2): 255-272.
  15. Kumar, R., Mandal, B., Kumari, N. and Patel, N. (2018). Performance of different genetic groups of pigs maintained under AICRP on Pig. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 7: 822-826.
  16. Kumar, S., Singh, S.K., Singh, R.L., Sharma, B.D., Dubey, C.B. and Verma, S.S. (1990). Effects of genetic and non-genetic factors on body weight, effecting of feed utilization reproductive performance and survivability in Landrace, Desi and their halfbreds. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 60: 219-1223.
  17. Kumaresan, A., Bujarbaruah, K.M., Pathak, K.A., Das, A. and Bardoloi, R.K. (2009). Integrated resource-driven pig production systems in a mountainous area of Northeast India: production practices and pig performance. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 41(7): 1187-1196.
  18. Mukhopadhyay, A., Singh, R. L. and Singh, S.K. (1992). A comparative study on the effect of genetic and non-genetic factors of Landrace, Tamworth, Desi pigs and their crosses on some reproductive characters. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 62: 482-484.
  19. Mukhopadhyay, A., Singh, R. L. and Singh, S.K. (1992). A comparative study on the effect of genetic and non-genetic factors of Landrace, Tamworth, Desi pigs and their crosses on some reproductive characters. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 62: 482-484.
  20. Okoro, V and Mbajiorgu, C (2017a). Diallel cross in swine production: A review. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 52 (2): 212-218. 
  21. Okoro, V and Mbajiorgu, C. (2017b). Estimates of crossbreeding parameters for growth and conformation traits in Nigerian indigenous and exotic pig breeds. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research. 15 (4):117-128.
  22. Pandey, R.N., Singh, S.K. Singh, R.L. and Dubey, C.B. (1997). Genetic study of weight at different ages in exotic, Desi and their halfbred pigs. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 67(12): 1086-1090.
  23. Radovic, C., Petrovic, M., Parunovic, N., Radojkovic, D., Savic, R., Stanišic, N. and Gogic, M. (2017). Carcass and pork quality traits of indigenous pure breeds (Mangalitsa, Moravka) and their crossbreads. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 51:371-376.
  24. Rothschild, M. and Bidanel, J.P. (1998). Biology and genetics of reproduction, in The Genetics of the Pig, [edited by M. F. Rothschild and A. Ruvisnky]. CAB International, Wall ingford, Oxon, UK. pp. 313-343.
  25. Sellier, P. (1976). The basis of crossbreeding in pigs: A review, Livestock Production Science. 3: 203.
  26. Sheikh, G. G., Baghe, R.P.S., Nayak,S., Fatima, B. and Ganie, A. A. (2017). Effect of sex on growth performance, nutrient utilization and carcass characteristics in cross bred pigs. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 51(1): 175-178
  27. SPSS (2001). Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows, Version 8. SPSS Inc. USA.
  28. Stein, T.E., Duffy, S.J. and Wickstrom, S. (1990). Differences in production values between high- and low productivity swine breeding herds. Journal of Animal Science. 68: 3972-3979.
  29. Sukhdeo, Chhabra, A.K., Arora, R.L., Satya Paul and Bisht, G.S. (1992). Genetic and non-genetic factors affecting growth performance in Desi pigs and its crosses. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 62(11): 1107-1108.
  30. Sumit Mahajan, J.S. Papang and K.K. Datta. (2015). Meat consumption in North-East India: pattern, Opportunities and Implications. Journal of Animal Research. 5(1):37-45.
  31. Zaman, G., Aziz, A., Laskar, S., Phookan, A. and Akhtar, F. (2014). Reproductive performance of indigenous pigs of north-east India. The North-East Veterinarian. XÀV (2): 9-10.
Published In
Indian Journal of Animal Research
Article Metrics
Metrics Icon
0
Views
0
Citations
Reviewed By
Share Article
Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Research Article

    volume 54 issue 11 (november 2020) : 1332-1337,   Doi: 10.18805/ijar.B-3824

    A Comparative Evaluation on Productive and Reproductive Traits of Tamworth X Desi and Hampshire X Niang Megha Pigs under Subtropical Hill Ecosystem in Eastern Himalayas Region of India

    G
    G. Kadirvel
    N
    N. Manoranjan Singh
    M
    Mokidur Rahman
    L
    L. Anandakumar Singh
    G
    G. Khargharia
    R
    Rakesh Kumar
    1Division of Livestock Production, ICAR Research Complex for NEH region, Umiam-793 103, Meghalaya, India.
    Cite article:- Kadirvel G., Singh Manoranjan N., Rahman Mokidur, Singh Anandakumar L., Khargharia G., Kumar Rakesh (2020). A Comparative Evaluation on Productive and Reproductive Traits of Tamworth X Desi and Hampshire X Niang Megha Pigs under Subtropical Hill Ecosystem in Eastern Himalayas Region of India. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 54(11): 1332-1337. doi: 10.18805/ijar.B-3824.

    ABSTRACT

    Background: Pig farming is the integral component of farming system in the tribal dominated North Eastern region of India since pork is the most preferred meat among tribal population. However, pork still remains deficit and a high supply-demand gap exists due to low productivity of nondescript local pigs. In this context, popularization of crossbred pigs is the suitable option to enhance productivity. Thus, the study was carried out to evaluate the performance of crossbred pigs viz., Tamworth X Desi (T&D), Hampshire X Niang Megha (H&NM) in order to improve the pig productivity in the region.
    Methods: Data was collected from crossbred pigs viz., Tamworth X desi (T&D), Hampshire X Niang Megha (H&NM) and Niang Megha (NM) pigs which is maintained in the Pig breeding farm of the institute. This data included the study of productive (n=778 piglets), reproductive (n =107 sows) and carcass traits (n =45 slaughters) over a period of about eight years (2005-2013) from the farm record books cum-pedigree sheet of the pig farm. The date was analyzed suitable statistical tools.  
    Result: The study recorded no significant differences (P<0.01) in pre weaning body weight, growth rate and mortality rate between T&D and H&NM crossbred pigs however, both the crossbred pigs revealed significantly (P< 0.05) higher pre weaning body weight and growth rate than that of NM pig. Post weaning body weight were significantly (P<0.05) highest in T&D crossbred pigs followed by H&NM crossbred pig as compared to NM pigs at all age groups. Farrowing rate were significantly (P<0.05) highest in NM pigs and lowest in T&D crossbred pigs. However, farrowing interval were significantly (P<0.05) highest in NM pig and lowest in H&NM crossbred pigs. Regarding litter size at birth and weaning, there was no significant (P<0.01) difference between T&D and H&NM pig but both these pigs revealed significantly (P<0.05) higher litter performance than NM pig. Back fat thickness and loin eye area were significantly highest in T&D pigs and lowest in NM pig. However, NM pig has significantly highest lean meat content than T&D and H&NM crossbred pig. There was no significant difference (P<0.01) observed of dressing percentage between T&D and H&NM crossbred pig but, both the genetic group yield significantly (P<0.05) higher dressing percentage than Niang Megha pigs. Based on the productive, reproductive and carcass traits, the study concluded that T&D pigs more suitable for fattener pig production due to their higher growth performance and carcass yield, whereas H&M pigs can be utilized for breeding purpose in subtropical hill ecosystem of Northeast India.

    REFERENCES

    1. Annual Report (2008-09). Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Regional Centre for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalya.
    2. Annual Report. (2012-13). Department of Agricultural Research and Education (DARE) Govt. of India, New Delhi.
    3. Clark L.K. and Leman A.D. (1986). Factors that influence litter size in pigs. Pig News and Inf. 7: 303-310.
    4. Dewey C.E., Martin S.W., Friendship R.M., Kennedy B.W. and Wilson M.R. (1995). Associations between litter size and specific sow-level management factors in Ontario swine. Preventive Veterinary Medicine. 23: 101-110.
    5. Duncan, D.B. (1955). Multiple Range and Multiple F-Test. Biometrics. 11: 1-5.
    6. Goonewardene, L.A., Sahayaruban, P., Rajamahendran, R. and Rajaguru, A.S.B. (1984). A study of some production traits among indigenous pigs in Sri Lanka and its crosses with improved white breeds. Animal Breeding Abstracts. 53(8): 5120.
    7. Islam, R., Nath, P. and Hussain, J. (2014). Performance of Tand D and crossbred pigs under field condition. Indian Journal of Animal Production and Management. 30(3-4): 128-130.
    8. Iversen, M.W., Nordbø, Ø., Gjerlaug-Enger, E., Grindfek, E., Lopes, M.S. and Meuwissen, T. (2019). Effects of heterozygosity on performance of purebred and crossbred pigs.Genetics Selection Evolution. 51(8):1-13. 
    9. Johnson, R.K. (1981). Crossbreeding of swine: experimental results. Journal of Animal Science. 52: 906-923.
    10. Kadirvel, G., Kumaresan, A., Anubrata, D., Bujarbaruah, K. M., Subramanian, V. and Ngachan, S. V. (2013). Artificial insemination of pigs reared under smallholder production system in north-eastern India: Success rate, genetic improvement and monitory benefit. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 45: 679-686.
    11. Kalita, G., Rouchoudhury, R., Kalita, D., Saikia, B. N., Saharia, J., Bora, M., Nath, M. K. and Talukdar, D. J. (2016). Effect of weaning management on carcass characteristics of T and D pigs. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology. 2(2): 2395-6011.
    12. Khargharia, G., Zaman, G., Laskar, S., Das, B., Aziz, A., Roychoudhury, R. and Roy, T. C. (2014). Phenotypic characterization and performance studies of Niang Megha and Doom pigs of North eastern India. Asian Academic Research Journal of Multidisciplinary. 1(27): ISSN: 2319-2801.
    13. Kramer, C. T. (1957). Extension of multiple range test to group corrected adjusted means. Biometrics. 13:13-18.
    14. Kumar, A., Staal, S., Elumalai, K. and Singh, D.K. (2007). Livestock sector in North-Eastern Region of India: An appraisal of performance. Agricultural Economics Research Review. 20(2): 255-272.
    15. Kumar, R., Mandal, B., Kumari, N. and Patel, N. (2018). Performance of different genetic groups of pigs maintained under AICRP on Pig. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 7: 822-826.
    16. Kumar, S., Singh, S.K., Singh, R.L., Sharma, B.D., Dubey, C.B. and Verma, S.S. (1990). Effects of genetic and non-genetic factors on body weight, effecting of feed utilization reproductive performance and survivability in Landrace, Desi and their halfbreds. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 60: 219-1223.
    17. Kumaresan, A., Bujarbaruah, K.M., Pathak, K.A., Das, A. and Bardoloi, R.K. (2009). Integrated resource-driven pig production systems in a mountainous area of Northeast India: production practices and pig performance. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 41(7): 1187-1196.
    18. Mukhopadhyay, A., Singh, R. L. and Singh, S.K. (1992). A comparative study on the effect of genetic and non-genetic factors of Landrace, Tamworth, Desi pigs and their crosses on some reproductive characters. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 62: 482-484.
    19. Mukhopadhyay, A., Singh, R. L. and Singh, S.K. (1992). A comparative study on the effect of genetic and non-genetic factors of Landrace, Tamworth, Desi pigs and their crosses on some reproductive characters. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 62: 482-484.
    20. Okoro, V and Mbajiorgu, C (2017a). Diallel cross in swine production: A review. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 52 (2): 212-218. 
    21. Okoro, V and Mbajiorgu, C. (2017b). Estimates of crossbreeding parameters for growth and conformation traits in Nigerian indigenous and exotic pig breeds. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research. 15 (4):117-128.
    22. Pandey, R.N., Singh, S.K. Singh, R.L. and Dubey, C.B. (1997). Genetic study of weight at different ages in exotic, Desi and their halfbred pigs. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 67(12): 1086-1090.
    23. Radovic, C., Petrovic, M., Parunovic, N., Radojkovic, D., Savic, R., Stanišic, N. and Gogic, M. (2017). Carcass and pork quality traits of indigenous pure breeds (Mangalitsa, Moravka) and their crossbreads. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 51:371-376.
    24. Rothschild, M. and Bidanel, J.P. (1998). Biology and genetics of reproduction, in The Genetics of the Pig, [edited by M. F. Rothschild and A. Ruvisnky]. CAB International, Wall ingford, Oxon, UK. pp. 313-343.
    25. Sellier, P. (1976). The basis of crossbreeding in pigs: A review, Livestock Production Science. 3: 203.
    26. Sheikh, G. G., Baghe, R.P.S., Nayak,S., Fatima, B. and Ganie, A. A. (2017). Effect of sex on growth performance, nutrient utilization and carcass characteristics in cross bred pigs. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 51(1): 175-178
    27. SPSS (2001). Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows, Version 8. SPSS Inc. USA.
    28. Stein, T.E., Duffy, S.J. and Wickstrom, S. (1990). Differences in production values between high- and low productivity swine breeding herds. Journal of Animal Science. 68: 3972-3979.
    29. Sukhdeo, Chhabra, A.K., Arora, R.L., Satya Paul and Bisht, G.S. (1992). Genetic and non-genetic factors affecting growth performance in Desi pigs and its crosses. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences. 62(11): 1107-1108.
    30. Sumit Mahajan, J.S. Papang and K.K. Datta. (2015). Meat consumption in North-East India: pattern, Opportunities and Implications. Journal of Animal Research. 5(1):37-45.
    31. Zaman, G., Aziz, A., Laskar, S., Phookan, A. and Akhtar, F. (2014). Reproductive performance of indigenous pigs of north-east India. The North-East Veterinarian. XÀV (2): 9-10.
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us
      Published In
      Indian Journal of Animal Research

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)