Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition >

2026 , Vol. 38 >Issue 5: 3209 - 3229

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12418/CJAN2026.257

REVIEW

Current Status, Influencing Factors and Improvement Measures of Lifetime Reproductive Performance of Sows

  • WANG Yutian , 1 ,
  • WANG Xin 2 ,
  • CAI Chuanjiang 2 ,
  • ZENG Xiangfang , 1, *
Expand
  • 1 State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition and Feeding, College of Animal Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China
  • 2 College of Animal Science and Technology, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China
*professor, E-mail:

Received date: 2025-10-17

  Online published: 2026-05-14

Fold

Abstract

With the continuous improvement of the degree of intensification in animal husbandry, single indicators of sow production, such as the number of weaned piglets provided by each sow per year or the production life of sows, can no longer meet the demand for comprehensively reflecting the reproductive performance of pig herds. Therefore, the concept of sow lifetime reproductive performance (LRP) is proposed to comprehensively summarize and fully utilize the reproductive potential of sows, thereby reducing the production costs of pig farms by maximizing the LRP of all sows. This article conducts a review from three aspects: the current status of LRP in sows, influencing factors and improvement measures, aiming to provide references for enhancing the reproductive efficiency of sows and promoting the sustainable development of animal husbandry.

Key words： sows; lifetime reproductive performance; reproductive efficiency; sow nutrition; precision feeding

Cite this article

WANG Yutian , WANG Xin , CAI Chuanjiang , ZENG Xiangfang . Current Status, Influencing Factors and Improvement Measures of Lifetime Reproductive Performance of Sows[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2026 , 38(5) : 3209 -3229 . DOI: 10.12418/CJAN2026.257

国家统计局发布的全国畜牧业数据显示,2024年我国生猪出栏量有所下降,全国生猪出栏量为70 256万头,比上年减少2 406万头;猪肉产量为5 706万t,同比降低88万t,下降1.5%[1]。而根据欧盟统计局发布的数据,2024年欧盟猪肉产量为2 109万t,同比增长45万t,提高2.2%;美国2024年猪肉产量为1 887万t,同比降低37万t,下降1.9%[2]。上述数据的变化凸显出猪肉生产的波动下降,而猪肉产量的稳定和提升与母猪繁殖性能存在密不可分的关系。终身繁殖性能(lifetime reproductive performance,LRP)是衡量种用动物繁殖能力的综合性指标,是指种用动物从性成熟至淘汰整个生命周期内,持续产出健康后代的能力,评价维度涵盖配种、妊娠维持、分娩及后代存活等关键生产环节。作为畜牧业核心竞争力的重要衡量标尺,LRP不仅直接决定单头、单胎种畜禽的生产效益,更对种质资源的可持续利用和全产业链的经济效益具有深远意义。目前,加拿大、美国等发达国家已构建起覆盖种畜禽全生命周期的繁殖管理体系,例如通过后备母猪发展单位(gilt development unit,GDU)计划和基于能量动态模型优化母猪营养供给策略等技术手段[3],实现了种畜禽终身繁殖效率的显著提升。相比之下,我国养猪生产仍存在繁殖效率偏低、管理瓶颈以及营养与遗传短板等突出问题。值得注意的是,母猪LRP的提升还有极大空间,这需要通过遗传潜力挖掘、精准营养物质供给、智能化猪场管理和各类常见及慢性疾病的预防来共同解决。突破母猪繁殖性能瓶颈、提高母猪LRP,对于保障国家畜牧业稳定增产、推动种业自立自强具有重要战略意义。
本文系统梳理了母猪LRP的影响机制和改善路径,旨在构建“遗传-营养-管理-疾病”多维调控理论框架;通过整合基因组选择技术[如全基因组关联分析(genome-wide association study,GWAS)定位布鲁拉繁殖力(FecB)、雌激素受体(ESR)等多胎基因]、动态精准饲喂模型(基于NRC标准优化阶段性能量-氨基酸供给比)及智能化管理系统(物联网监测发情周期),揭示母猪LRP的协同表达规律;同时,结合种业振兴背景,提出“精准饲喂+基因组精准选育+智慧养殖”的融合发展路径,以期为突破我国母猪LPR偏低现状、建立高效优良的繁殖性能提升体系提供科学依据。

1 母猪LPR现状

根据母猪LPR的内在逻辑和生产实践需求,其评价指标可分为繁殖力(reproductive capacity)和生育力(fertility capacity)2部分,这2个指标在畜牧学研究中既存在关联又有明确差异。其中,繁殖力反映母猪维持正常繁殖周期的能力,用于表现繁殖过程的连续性和稳定性,主要采用母猪终身生产效率(包括总生产胎次、淘汰胎次、终身生产力和年均胎次)、母猪年产仔效率(包括母猪每年提供的断奶仔猪头数、母猪年产胎次)、繁殖周期效率(包括非生产天数、断奶至再次发情间隔、返情率和分娩率)和种群周转效率(包括淘汰率和更新率)等指标进行评价。而生育力则体现母猪单次繁殖周期的产出质量和数量,主要采用产仔性能(包括窝均总仔数、活仔数和初生重)、哺乳性能(包括断奶仔猪数、断奶窝重和仔猪存活率)和窝次质量指标(包括仔猪均匀度、断奶前增重速率)来进行评价[4-5]。
据国家统计局数据显示,2025年第2季度末全国能繁母猪存栏量为4 043万头[6],同时2024年行业内全国每头母猪年提供断奶仔猪数(pigs weaned per sow per year,PSY)约为24头,丹麦等国际先进水平的PSY则可高达35头左右[7-9],若我国整体PSY可达到丹麦水平,则实际有效产能仅需2 772万头母猪。按每头能繁母猪年耗料1.8 t计算,多存栏的1 271万头能繁母猪每年将多消耗饲料约2 288万t,直接浪费1 144亿元(以5 000元/t饲料估算),由此可见母猪LPR低下尤其是繁殖力低下给我国养猪业带来的巨大损失。在生育力方面,尽管2024年我国头部养殖场窝产活仔数达16.77头,但行业平均仅有13.5头[8],与国际水平存在差距,较丹麦的平均水平低33.5%。此外,我国种畜LPR呈现“单胎效率尚可、持续产能不足”的显著特征。更严峻的是,多胎次繁殖障碍呈现累积效应,经产母猪子宫内膜炎发病率偏高[10-11],这直接导致种母猪淘汰率攀升,这种“高产低效”的现状严重制约了畜牧业的高质量发展。国内外母猪繁殖力指标(部分)对比见表1[12],生育力指标(部分)对比见表2[13]。
表1 国内外母猪繁殖力指标(部分)对比

Table 1 Comparison of reproductive capacity indicators of sows at home and abroad (partly)

项目
Items		 中国行业平均
Average of Chinese
industries (2024)		 中国头部养殖场(如牧原)
Top livestock farms in
China (such as Muyuan)		 丹麦
Denmark
(2024)		 老挝
Laos
(2023)[12]
每头母猪年分娩窝数
Number of litters born per sow per year/胎		 2.23 2.50 2.24 1.5~1.8
每头母猪年提供断奶仔猪数
PSY/头		 24.03 28~30 >35 10.5~14.4
每头母猪年非生产天数
Number of non-productive days
per sow per year/d		 46.63 21.10 33.15
表2 国内外母猪生育力指标(部分)对比

Table 2 Comparison of fertility capacity indicators of sows at home and abroad (partly)头

项目
Items		 中国行业平均
Average of Chinese
industries (2024)		 中国头部养殖场
(如牧原)
Top livestock farms
in China (such as Muyuan)		 丹麦
Denmark
(2024)		 美国
America
(2023)		 菲律宾
Philippines
(2024)[13]
平均窝产总仔数
Average number of total piglets per litter		 13.50 16.77 20.3 15.84
平均窝产活仔数
Average number of live piglets per litter		 12.44 14.75 18.5 14.15 7.03
平均窝产断奶仔猪数
Average number of weaned
piglets per litter		 10.98 12.95 15.9 12.27 6.95

2 影响母猪LPR的因素

近年来,母猪繁殖效率低下和生产性能不足等问题日益突出,成为制约我国及世界养殖业发展的重要因素,而遗传基础薄弱、精细化营养物质供给体系不全面、环境应激累积等饲养技术不完善以及繁殖障碍疾病或肠道亚健康状态是其主要原因;此外,母猪单胎繁殖力和繁殖寿命协同提升的调控机理也尚不明确,这些不利因素不仅会使母猪产生多种健康问题,更导致我国乃至世界母猪繁殖潜力发挥不足。

2.1 遗传因素

品种遗传特性对繁殖性能具有决定性影响,不同品种的母猪具有不同的遗传特性,品种改良和品种选育是提高母猪繁殖性能的重要手段之一。不同猪品种的遗传学差异会影响窝产仔数和初生重等繁殖力和生育力指标。据报道,纯种大白母猪和“杜洛克×大白”二元母猪的产仔数分别为12.5和14.5头,产仔率分别90.0%和94.5%[14]。通过对不同品种的三元母猪进行研究发现,父本使用大白猪的三元母猪繁殖性能明显优于父本使用杜洛克的三元母猪,且前者对保育仔猪的生长性能有明显的促进作用[15]。这提示将表现优良繁殖性能的猪种引种进行杂交,或许可以改善现有母猪的LPR。
除传统育种技术外,基因编辑、基因标记等现代新兴分子生物学技术在种畜禽繁殖性能研究中的应用日益深入,这些技术可实现对种畜禽遗传特性的精准调控,为遗传改良提供全新的研究思路和技术方法。例如:大白猪的ESR和促卵泡激素β亚基(FSHβ)基因已被证实与窝产仔猪数的提升显著相关[16],而分子标记辅助选择(marker-assisted selection,MAS)技术在猪繁殖育种中的应用,能够使年均窝产活仔数显著提高[17]。目前,我国启动了猪种群分子身份构建工作,完成了50个不同地方猪品种共计1 011头地方猪的全基因组高通量深度测序工作[18],为后续探究种猪尤其是我国地方猪种的繁殖育种新突破奠定了坚实基础。

2.2 营养因素

畜禽繁殖性能的优劣与饲粮营养密切相关[19]。研究表明,妊娠期饲粮营养成分失衡(如能量过剩或纤维不足)不仅造成卵母细胞线粒体功能受损、胚胎着床率降低,还会导致母猪肢蹄病发生率增加,进而缩短其生产寿命;而哺乳期间的低采食量则不利于提高仔猪平均断奶重[19]。能量、蛋白质、维生素和矿物质等营养物质的供给与需求对种母猪繁殖性能具有深远影响。

2.2.1 能量供应对母猪LRP的动态影响

能量是维持种畜禽正常生理活动和繁殖性能的基础,其供应水平与平衡状态直接影响母猪的体况储备、卵泡发育、胚胎存活、胎儿生长和泌乳能力[20-24]。能量摄入需求与母猪繁殖周期呈现明显的阶段性变化,瘦肉型母猪不同繁殖阶段每日能量需求与生理特点见表3。
表3 瘦肉型母猪不同繁殖阶段每日能量需求与生理特点

Table 3 Daily energy requirements and physiological characteristics of lean-type sows at different reproductive stages[34]

项目
Items		 生理特点
Physiological
characteristics		 消化能需要量
Digestible energy
requirement/(kcal/d)		 代谢能需要量
Metabolic energy
requirement/(kcal/d)		 关键调控目标
Key regulatory
targets
后备期 Reserve period (<75 kg) 骨骼、器官发育 7 595 7 290 保障发育,防止过肥
后备期 Reserve period (>75 kg) 生殖系统成熟 9 080 8 715 控制膘情
妊娠前期(配种至妊娠第90天) Early gestation period (mating to day 90 of pregnancy) 胚胎着床 7 110~7 520 6 830~7 230 减少胚胎损失
妊娠后期(妊娠第90~110天)
Later gestation period
(days 90 to 110 of pregnancy)		 胎儿器官形成,
快速生长		 8 860~9 100 8 515~8 745 调节胎儿均
匀度和初生重
哺乳期 Lactation period 泌乳高峰期 16 500~21 450 17 000~22 100 最大化产奶量

1 kcal≈4.184 kJ。

后备期是母猪体脂、生殖器官和乳腺发育的关键阶段,该时期的能量供应需平衡生长与发育的关系[25]。过度能量摄入或能量限制均对乳腺发育存在负面作用[26],高能量饮食会导致乳腺脂肪沉积过多,乳腺实质发育受阻,进而导致乳腺细胞凋亡[27];而低能量饮食则会影响分泌组织并导致乳腺实质发育受损[28],由此可见能量供应失衡会损害终身泌乳能力。在养猪生产中,后备母猪配种时的体重和背膘厚度能够反映能量摄入的水平,丹麦《经产母猪和后备母猪手册》指出,理想交配体重为150~165 kg,理想背膘厚度应控制在12~14 mm,低于12 mm(过瘦)或高于14 mm(过肥)均会对母猪繁殖性能产生不利影响[29]。
配种前的能量策略对排卵数和卵母细胞质量具有决定性作用[30]。催情补饲(flushing)是指在配种前14 d进行短期优饲,即使用高能高蛋白质哺乳母猪料每日饲喂3.0~3.5 kg,可显著提高雌二醇和促卵泡激素水平,促进卵泡发育和增加排卵数[31]。研究显示,实施催情补饲的母猪窝产仔数有提高趋势,发情表现也更加明显[32]。但需要注意的是,催情补饲应在检测到发情征兆后立即停止,配种后迅速转为妊娠前期饲喂方案(日饲喂量降至2.2 kg[33])。
妊娠期能量供给需遵循“短期优饲”的动态模式,以满足不同阶段胚胎和胎儿的发育需求。瘦肉型母猪妊娠前期(配种至妊娠第90天左右)饲粮消化能需要量为3 330 kcal/kg(1 kcal≈4.184 kJ),妊娠第90天以后的饲粮消化能需要量增至3 435 kcal/kg[34]。在生产实践中,还会针对不同妊娠阶段调整饲喂量,在配种后至妊娠第30天期间高能量摄入不利于受精卵着床,此时饲喂量需要保持在1.5~2.2 kg/(d·头);妊娠第30~75天期间可以保持饲喂精料2.0~2.6 kg/(d·头)以保持胎儿体型;妊娠第75~95天是母猪乳腺发育和胎儿器官形成的关键时期,但需注意控制采食量在1.9~2.5 kg/(d·头),防止母猪过肥或乳腺膨胀过度而影响泌乳;而妊娠第95~110天则是胎儿快速生长期,胎儿体重的80%在此阶段形成,
需大幅提高能量供应[2.8~3.5 kg/(d·头)],以保障胎儿充分发育和初生重;不过,在分娩前1周(妊娠第110~114天),需逐步将饲喂量由3.5 kg/(d·头)降至1.0 kg/(d·头),以减少分娩困难和产后食欲不振[35];妊娠第109天母猪的背膘厚度不影响分娩时间和仔猪出生体重,但显著影响母猪泌乳3~10 d的产奶量,因此,母猪妊娠晚期的饲喂策略对于在分娩前获得最佳背膘厚度和提高产奶量非常重要[36]。
哺乳期是母猪能量需求最为迫切的阶段,母猪调动大量身体储备以维持泌乳。哺乳期的平均采食量可能超过8 kg/(d·头),在哺乳高峰期可达11 kg/(d·头)[37]。研究表明,高采食量的母猪也表现出高泌乳量[38],因此哺乳期能量供应的重点是提高哺乳母猪采食量。然而,产奶和维持所需的能量需求通常远超过采食摄入能量,这种能量负平衡导致哺乳母猪调动体内储备,体脂和肌肉蛋白质被大量动员,同时会影响乳汁产量和成分。当哺乳母猪体重下降10%且能量供应不足15 MJ/d时,产奶量会受到影响[39]。

2.2.2 蛋白质和氨基酸精准供给对母猪LRP的调控

蛋白质和氨基酸作为构成母猪繁殖功能的物质基础,母猪对蛋白质的需求随繁殖阶段呈现显著变化。妊娠前期(配种至妊娠第90天)母猪的蛋白质需要量相对较低,仅需满足母体维持需求和少量胚胎发育所需。研究表明,降低饲粮蛋白质水平可以使仔猪断奶窝重提高13.7%,这可能是由于母猪用于分解多余蛋白质时消耗的能量较少,因此可以分配更多能量用来产奶[40]。进入妊娠后期(妊娠第90~110天),随着胎儿的快速生长和胎盘发育,母猪对蛋白质需求急剧增加,代谢重心转向胎儿发育,以繁殖为目的的蛋白质需求大幅提升。胎儿从妊娠第69天后蛋白质增长显著加快,妊娠母猪蛋白质需求在妊娠中后期增长达19倍[41],标准回肠可消化赖氨酸(SID Lys)需要量在妊娠第104天后增长60%[42],这提示妊娠末期的氨基酸缺乏会导致母猪表现较差的繁殖性能[43]。有趣的是,研究表明在妊娠后期补充赖氨酸(蛋白质),并不会促进母猪的乳腺发育[44]。对于头胎妊娠母猪而言,保证其营养物质供给以减少体内蛋白质和脂肪的损失,避免母猪头胎哺乳期营养不良至关重要,这是因为母猪脂肪和蛋白质的过度损失会对窝产仔猪生长性能产生负面影响[45],并导致哺乳期母猪营养不良、体重减轻、泌乳量降低,进一步导致仔猪初乳摄入量不足、同窝仔猪体重差异增大以及哺乳竞争加剧,最终影响终身繁殖力[46-47]。母猪的过渡期(通常被定义为妊娠的最后1周和泌乳的前3~5 d)伴随着剧烈的生理变化和对营养物质需求的快速转变。剂量反应表明,当经产母猪饲粮中SID Lys含量为6.06 g/kg时,过渡期氮(蛋白质)的利用率最高;虽然初乳产量不受饲粮处理的影响,但过渡饲粮中SID Lys含量对随后哺乳期的产奶量有残留效应,经产母猪的过渡饲粮在饲喂量为3.8 kg/(d·头)(代谢能为13.0 MJ/kg)时应含有5.79 g /kg SID Lys,SID Lys总摄入量为22 g/d[48]。

2.2.3 维生素和矿物质对母猪LRP的影响

维生素和矿物质同样与母猪的繁殖性能相关,它们作为辅酶因子、抗氧化剂和代谢调节物,参与母猪体内几乎所有与繁殖相关的生理过程[49-54]。目前,行业内母猪的高产特性使得机体对微量营养素的需求大幅增加,而养殖业对成本控制的追求又往往导致维生素和矿物质供给处于临界状态,这种矛盾使得精准补充措施变得尤为重要。
母猪对微量营养素的需要同样存在繁殖阶段差异。在维生素方面,配种前应侧重补充抗氧化维生素(微生素E、微生素C和β-胡萝卜素)和叶酸,以提高卵母细胞质量[55-56];妊娠前期继续强化叶酸供给并维持抗氧化体系稳定,保障胚胎存活;妊娠后期增加维生素D和生物素,促进胎儿骨骼发育;哺乳期则需全面补充各类维生素,尤其是B族维生素和维生素C,以支持高代谢负荷下的能量代谢和乳合成[19]。在矿物质方面,妊娠后期和哺乳期需重点满足钙和磷需求,从而有效预防母猪骨质疏松和产后瘫痪[57]。
当前,母猪维生素和矿物质营养已从单纯的预防缺乏症转向繁殖性能优化。研究表明,母猪补充维生素虽对其自身身体成分无显著改善作用,但能对仔猪早期生长性能产生显著积极影响[58]。在实际生产应用中,需注意维生素的稳定性问题(高温、高湿环境对其的影响),以及微量元素、氯化胆碱等物质会加速维生素的氧化失效,这一现象在夏季及长期储存条件下尤为突出。因此,选择经过稳定化处理的维生素形式(如包膜维生素C、酯化维生素A),并定期检测其实际有效含量,是保证补充效果的关键措施。此外,霉菌毒素会干扰维生素A、维生素D、维生素E和维生素K的吸收利用,因此在维生素和矿物质的投喂时,还需考虑到各种霉菌毒素的不利影响,在原料霉变风险较高时,需额外增加10%~20%的维生素添加量[59]。

2.3 管理因素

饲养管理和繁殖管理都是影响母猪LRP的重要因素,主要包括环境管理控制和繁殖管理技术。

2.3.1 环境管理制度影响母猪LRP

环境管理制度包括温度、相对湿度、光照和饲养密度等。在温湿度方面,生产上猪的生育能力存在季节性现象,夏末秋初交配时的热应激会使母猪出现断奶至发情间隔延长、流产、分娩率降低和窝产仔数减少等症状,导致冬季出生的仔猪减少,因此在美国过去20~30年的数据显示,每年夏季可供屠宰的生猪数量都偏少[2],由此可见热应激对母猪繁殖性能的影响极大。高温高湿环境易诱使母猪断奶后发情延迟,其诱导的热应激可能导致母猪生殖机能紊乱。热应激会通过下丘脑-垂体-肾上腺/性腺轴影响上述组织或器官的功能[60],该过程中任何一个环节都能够导致生育能力的下降。夏季导致的高温热应激效应还会影响公母畜生育能力,从而损害公畜精子生成并降低精子质量[61],以及对母畜生长表现和育幼行为等繁殖表现产生不利影响[62]。同时,对热应激的反应程度决定了母猪繁殖性能受到的影响程度,与后备母猪和母猪生育力下降相关的关键指标包括单独的每日最高温度或与相对湿度相结合的温湿度指数(THI)[63]。猪在19 ℃以上会减少活动,并通过伸展身体和侧卧来改变行为,通过传导来失去体温。在60 kg后备母猪中,呼吸频率的拐点温度为21~23 ℃,直肠温度的拐点温度为25~27 ℃,自愿采食量的拐点温度为23~26 ℃[64]。研究表明,在降低妊娠率和胚胎数量的热应激条件下,子宫血流量没有变化,但热应激影响牛的胎儿大小和胎盘血流量[65],由此推断热应激可能也会对猪产生类似不利影响。简而言之,虽然热应激对生殖道的影响并不总是一致或明确的,但有研究表明应激反应与肾上腺糖皮质激素和生殖激素有关[66]。
胎次差异使得母猪对环境温度的响应存在显著不同。低胎次母猪对高温更加敏感,这可能与其内分泌系统尚未完全成熟及采食量较低相关;而高龄母猪则更易受低温的影响,会面临产仔数减少、返情率升高等繁殖性能下降的问题,推测与其对寒冷环境的适应能力较弱有关[67]。基于此,生产中需建立完善的温控系统,维持适宜的温湿度条件,以规避高低温胁迫对母猪繁殖性能的不利影响。
在光照方面,猪是短日照动物,长光照时间对后备母猪的繁殖性能具有积极影响,在母猪配种前及妊娠期延长光照时间,能促进母猪雌二醇和孕酮的分泌,增强卵巢和子宫机能,有利于受胎和胚胎发育。研究发现,每增加1 h光照,后备母猪的首次交配年龄(age at first mating,AFM)会减少1.13 d[68];当光照周期从11.5 h延长至12.5 h时,后备母猪的首次发情时间缩短了3.04 d[69]。但是光照时间过长,也会对繁殖性能产生负面影响,与16 h的光照相比,妊娠期间8 h的光照有利于母猪生出更多的活仔猪,然而这会导致仔猪的出生体重较低[70]。此外,光照强度同样影响母猪繁殖性能,如250 lx的光照强度适用于后备母猪发情。
此外,猪群对饲养密度也有要求,活动空间不足会引发刻板行为,从而降低受胎率。欧盟生猪指令规定,母猪或后备母猪只能在受精后4周和分娩前1周内被限制在畜栏内[71]。一般来说,限位栏的单栏面积应不小于1.2 m2/头,群养环境则应≥2.5 m2/头。

2.3.2 繁殖管理技术影响母猪LRP

繁殖管理技术直接影响种猪的繁殖效率。后备母猪的初配年龄不当,如过早配种(<220日龄)或过晚配种(>260日龄)显著影响其终身繁殖效率,导致终身产仔数减少15%~20%[34]。较早初配时间的母猪会累计偏少的终身非生产天数,从而提高其LPR[5,72];相反,较晚初配时间(278日龄以上)的母猪也会因繁殖时可能的超重风险而导致其LPR表现不佳[73],因此,美国、南欧国家和日本的初次配种通常在后备母猪约240日龄时进行配种,这或许有助于提高母猪的繁殖潜力[5]。同时,母猪发情后立即进行第1次配种,可以提高母猪的受胎率;相反,延迟配种或单次配种则会导致受胎率降低,产仔数减少[74]。此外,母畜对断奶后的养护也至关重要,如母猪断奶后的采食量将直接影响下一胎的繁殖性能,采食量不足会导致断奶至发情间隔延长,这将进一步降低母猪产仔数,因此精准把握配种时机、合理控制断奶至配种间隔如在断奶后4~6 d进行配种,根据实际情况调整哺乳时长,则会平衡仔猪生长和母猪获得优良的繁殖性能[75]。

2.4 疾病因素

猪繁殖性能的优劣与垂直传播疾病和慢性疾病的防控密切相关。垂直传播疾病不仅直接损害母猪的繁殖能力,还通过胎盘或初乳感染后代,造成窝产仔数减少、流产率上升及仔猪死亡率提高[76-78];而包括母体肠道亚健康状态和氧化应激在内的慢性疾病则会加剧繁殖性能衰退[79-81],形成“疾病-代谢-氧化”的恶性循环。

2.4.1 垂直传播疾病

垂直传播疾病包括繁殖障碍疾病和传染病。常见的繁殖障碍疾病包括母畜不发情、猪繁殖与呼吸综合征(porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome,PRRS,或称蓝耳病)、屡配不孕以及流产;而传染病包括猪瘟、猪流行性腹泻(porcine epidemic diarrhea,PED)、布鲁氏菌病和猪支原体性肺炎(Mhyop)等。这些疾病的发生和传播对种畜禽的繁殖性能构成了严重威胁,如PRRS可导致母猪出现厌食症、产仔率降低或不育、晚期流产、死胎和产木乃伊仔猪[82]。据报道,美国对PRRS的损失预测从2004年5.6亿美元[83]增加至2010年的6.64亿美元[84],远远超过其他猪疾病。PRRS作为养猪业中危害较大的疾病之一,对母猪的繁殖性能影响显著,对PRRS效应进行敏感性分析表明,PRRS会使母猪生产寿命减少255 d,扑杀母猪年龄提前6.9月,并额外增加24 d非生产天数[82]。
而PED感染则会影响母猪妊娠各个阶段,妊娠前30 d感染PED病毒会显著降低母猪窝产仔数[85],而在妊娠后期感染则会导致哺乳期仔猪死亡率增加、断奶仔猪数量减少[86]。此外,母猪感染PED后的产前死亡率提升,分娩率降低15%[87]。

2.4.2 母体肠道亚健康

母猪肠道健康的维持是保障其高效繁殖能力的重要基础。近年来,母猪肠道亚健康问题愈发凸显,主要表现为肠道菌群失衡、代谢紊乱及消化吸收功能下降等亚临床症状。此类状态虽未发展至明显疾病程度,但已成为影响母猪LPR的潜在风险因素[88-92]。
研究发现,高繁殖力母猪肠道内与5-羟色胺代谢相关的细菌如梭菌属(Clostridium)、瘤胃球菌属(Ruminococcus)和产甲酸草酸杆菌(Oxalobacter formigenes)显著富集,这些菌群均能促进宿主5-羟色胺的生物合成,作为一种关键的神经递质和血管活性物质,血清5-羟色胺含量与母猪每窝健康仔猪数、断奶仔猪数等繁殖指标呈显著正相关,这提示母猪肠道健康状态可能与其繁殖性能存在密切关联;同时,研究还发现高繁殖力母猪肠道中普雷沃氏菌属(Prevotella)相对丰度较低,而该菌属与繁殖性能呈负相关,这进一步提示特定菌群的失衡可能成为引发繁殖障碍的风险因素[93]。
肠道亚健康常伴随代谢紊乱,如胰岛素抵抗和瘦素水平异常,这些变化会干扰繁殖相关内分泌稳态。肠道菌群失衡会改变胆汁酸代谢,影响类固醇激素的合成和分解,从而干扰雌激素和孕酮等关键生殖激素的正常水平[94]。肠道微生物代谢产物的缺乏可能会导致母猪代谢紊乱,并可能影响母猪发情,研究表明罗伊氏乳杆菌(Lactobacillus reuteri)和普雷沃氏菌属可能通过参与孕烯醇酮、孕酮、睾酮和雌激素的相互转化来调控母猪发情[94]。
此外,肠道健康状态还会影响胎盘微生物、血管生成和胎儿发育。前人在胎盘研究中发现了肠道中的非致病性大肠杆菌,表明肠道可能是胎盘微生物的重要来源[95]。通过优化肠道微生物群落组成并强化肠道功能和胎盘屏障,能够降低母体和胎儿的脂多糖水平,从而促进胎盘发育并缓解子宫内炎症和氧化应激[96]。

2.4.3 母猪母体氧化应激

值得注意的是,肠道亚健康很少单独存在,常与氧化应激共同发生,形成复杂的病理网络。而氧化应激是当机体活性氧(reactive oxygen species,ROS)的产生超过抗氧化防御能力时发生的氧化-抗氧化系统失衡状态,在母猪繁殖周期中尤为常见且危害严重。研究表明,低初生体重仔猪的胎盘组织表现出更为严重的氧化损伤特征[97],包括8-羟基脱氧鸟苷(8-OHdG,DNA氧化损伤标志物)水平升高和血管密度降低,这些变化与胎儿宫内发育迟缓(IUGR)直接相关[98]。此外,氧化应激可以通过叉头框蛋白O1(FoxO1)依赖性机制调控卵巢功能,影响母猪繁殖性能,其具体作用机制是氧化应激激活转录因子FoxO1后,上调NORSF(一种参与母猪颗粒细胞功能的长链非编码RNA)表达,进而损害卵巢功能,导致雌激素分泌不足[99]。NORSF基因启动子区域的变异与母猪总产仔数、产活仔数和健仔数等繁殖性状显著关联,这为抗氧化应激与繁殖性能的遗传关联提供了直接证据[100]。母猪繁殖周期各阶段氧化应激标志物变化趋势见表4。
表4 母猪繁殖周期各阶段氧化应激标志物变化趋势

Table 4 Changing trends of oxidative stress markers during each stage of sow’s reproductive cycle

项目
Items		 氧化应激标志物变化
Changes in oxidative
stress markers		 关键影响因素
Key influence factors		 对繁殖性能的影响
Effects on reproductive
performance
发情期
Estrus period		 丙二醛(MDA)含量升高,谷胱甘肽
过氧化物酶(GSH-Px)活性降低		 雌激素波动,
代谢需求增加		 卵母细胞质量下降,
受胎率降低[99,101]
妊娠前期
Early gestation period		 总抗氧化能力(T-AOC)升高,
活性氧(ROS)含量相对稳定		 孕酮水平升高,
胚胎着床		 胚胎存活率受影响较小[102]
妊娠后期
Later gestation period		 MDA含量显著升高,8-羟基脱氧鸟苷
(8-OHdG)含量增加		 胎儿快速生长,代谢旺盛 胎盘功能不足,
胎儿发育迟缓[97]
哺乳期
Lactation period		 GSH-Px活性降低,还原型烟酰胺腺嘌呤二核
苷酸磷酸氧化酶2(NOX2)活性增强		 泌乳代谢负荷,
采食不足		 泌乳量减少,
乳品质下降[59,103]
断奶后
After weaning		 指标逐渐恢复,
但未完全正常		 代谢负荷减轻,
采食恢复		 体况恢复慢,
发情间隔延长[104-105]

2.4.4 母猪母体慢性炎症反应

与急性炎症不同,慢性炎症表现为低度、持续、系统性的炎症状态,常无典型临床症状,但却能对母猪生殖系统逐渐造成不可逆损害。母猪慢性炎症大多起源于持续或反复的感染或长期暴露于促炎环境,表现为促炎细胞因子(如肿瘤坏死因子-α、白细胞介素-1β、白细胞介素-6)水平持续轻度升高、急性期蛋白(如C反应蛋白)水平提高以及免疫细胞浸润和组织重塑。奶牛慢性炎症会干扰生殖过程,包括造成慢性子宫内膜炎、卵巢炎和乳腺炎等[106]。慢性子宫内膜炎主要由细菌(如大肠杆菌、链球菌等)感染引发,若急性期未彻底治愈,可转为慢性炎症,持续影响子宫内膜的再生和修复,这种炎症会显著降低母猪的繁殖效率:一方面,炎性分泌物改变子宫内环境,不利于精子存活和受精过程;另一方面,炎症介质如前列腺素水平升高,可干扰黄体功能和孕酮分泌,增加早期胚胎死亡风险。奶牛慢性炎症对卵巢功能的损害常被忽视,却对繁殖性能有深远影响,卵巢炎症的微环境变化会干扰卵泡发育,慢性炎症还能通过影响下丘脑-垂体-性腺轴,改变促性腺激素释放激素(gonadotropin-releasing hormone,GnRH)的脉冲释放模式,进而干扰繁殖内分泌稳态[107]。慢性乳腺炎除了会影响母体健康,更能通过乳汁质量变化损害仔猪生长[108],患病的母猪乳腺组织结构会渐进性改变,包括腺泡萎缩、间质纤维化和导管堵塞,使其有效乳腺数减少,乳中免疫球蛋白和乳脂含量降低。

2.5 协同提升畜禽单胎繁殖力和繁殖寿命的调控机理不明

协同提升畜禽单胎繁殖力和繁殖寿命的调控机理不明已成为制约母猪繁殖效率的瓶颈之一,其影响机制主要体现在遗传潜力表达受限、营养与环境调控失衡以及繁殖衰退的累积效应3个方面。首先,遗传层面缺乏对多胎基因和繁殖寿命相关性状的协同调控路径解析,例如在高繁殖力研究中发现,虽然FecB基因是已知多羔主效基因,但其纯合个体(小尾寒羊)仍存在产单羔现象,而未携带该基因的群体也可能产多羔,这提示多胎性状的表达受到其他未知基因网络或表观遗传修饰的复杂调控[109]。其次,营养供给与繁殖周期动态需求的匹配机制尚未明确,母猪妊娠后期氨基酸需要量随窝产仔数增加而显著上升(如赖氨酸需求在妊娠末期增加),但传统饲喂模式难以精准满足阶段性能量与氨基酸比,导致母体组织过度消耗和繁殖寿命缩短,从而影响其繁殖力和生育力[110]。此外,环境应激引发的表观遗传重编程可能加速繁殖衰退,例如热应激(THI>72)通过诱导卵巢DNA甲基化改变,抑制胰岛素样生长因子-1(IGF-1)信号通路活性,提高卵泡闭锁率,而这类损伤在多胎次繁殖中具有累积效应,造成经产母猪子宫内膜炎发病率高于初产,导致母猪繁殖年限降低[111]。这些机理的缺失是我国断奶仔猪数比发达国家少33%的因素之一,严重降低了遗传改良成果的经济转化效率。

3 改善母猪LPR的措施

3.1 品种改良与选育

品种改良与选育是提升母猪LPR的核心策略,通过遗传因素的优化,可以显著提高窝产仔数、仔猪成活率和整体繁殖寿命,从而对LRP产生积极影响。我国种畜禽品种改良和选育的方向,要从培育适应性强、繁殖性能高、肉质优良的新品种、新品系入手。我国拥有极为丰富的地方猪遗传资源,《国家畜禽遗传资源品种名录》已收录的地方猪品种达76个,其中梅山猪、二花脸猪、莱芜猪和香猪等以高繁殖力著称[112],卵泡发育相关基因的高表达是梅山猪高繁殖性能的可能机制之一[113]。通过GWAS技术,已定位影响大白猪产仔数的关键基因G蛋白偶联受体12(GPR12)[114]和太湖猪多产性状基因VRTN[115]。但存在基因聚合效率低的问题——传统回交育种需8~10代,而成簇规律间隔短回文重复序列(CRISPR)介导的等位基因渐渗技术可将周期大大缩短[116],未来或许可以利用大白猪、长白猪等引进品种,与中国地方猪种进行杂交配套系选育,培育繁殖力强、抗逆性好、产肉性能强的新品系。同时,我国2019年启动的千猪基因组计划对我国50个不同地方猪种群进行高深度测序,得到了6 300万个基因组变异位点,推动了本土种畜品种改良和选育[18]。

3.2 精准饲喂调控LRP

现代养猪业正从传统的“一刀切”喂养模式向个性化、精准化的营养措施转变,这种转变不仅大幅提高了母猪的生产效率,也显著延长了其繁殖寿命,能为养猪业带来可观的经济效益。精准饲喂模式是根据动物的个体营养需求制定个性化的饲养方案,不断调整营养供应水平的饲喂模式,可以有效节省饲料消耗,提高饲养效率,降低饲料成本。同时,对母猪各组织器官进行靶向营养与调节,能够实现生猪高效养殖,其中组织间通讯状态[117]和组织内代谢模式[118]是决定营养素在动物器官间分配和利用效率的关键过程,与繁殖性能相关的特定组织代谢调控包括对乳腺[119]、肌肉[120]和卵巢[121]等关键器官和组织的靶向调控,是提升动物蛋白质合成效率的新方向,这也有利于精准调控母猪LRP。下文将从能量、蛋白质和氨基酸、功能性营养物质以及智能饲喂技术4个维度,分析如何通过精准饲喂手段优化母猪各繁殖阶段的生理需求,并基于最新研究数据和实践案例,提出可行的营养干预方案。

3.2.1 能量供给的阶段性精准调控

能量供给是母猪繁殖周期中最为动态变化的营养要素,当前产业根据母猪繁殖阶段调整净能供给。后备母猪60 kg前应采取自由采食模式,保证骨骼和生殖器官发育,但60 kg至配种期间需严格控制日饲喂量在2.5 kg左右(消化能为3 030~3 100 kcal/kg),以避免乳腺脂肪过度沉积而影响后期泌乳能力。研究表明,配种时背膘厚度控制在18~22 mm的母猪,其LPR优于背膘厚度过薄(<12 mm)或过厚(>22 mm)的个体[35]。催情补饲作为配种前的关键干预措施,在母猪断奶至交配期间增加饲喂量,可使母猪排卵率提高1.8%、窝产仔数提升1.2头[122]。这一效果的机制可能与刺激雌激素和促卵泡激素分泌有关,从而激活胰岛素-IGF-1信号通路,该通路可促进哺乳动物的卵泡发育和排卵[123]。
母猪妊娠期间,对比传统“步步高”模式(随妊娠进展线性增加饲喂量)与“高低高”模式(妊娠前期高饲喂量,中期降低,后期再提高)发现,后者更符合高产母猪的生理特点。“高低高”模式可使妊娠30 d母猪背膘从(15.11±2.98) mm显著增至(16.11±2.94) mm,同时提高总产仔数[(12.93±2.23)头 vs (12.26±2.45)头]和产活仔数[(12.53±2.20)头 vs (12.02±2.39)头][124]。这种模式的优势在于:妊娠早期较高的能量摄入加速了体况恢复,为胚胎着床创造有利条件;中期适当限饲则避免了母体过肥导致的胰岛素抵抗;后期增饲则匹配了胎儿快速生长的需求。值得注意的是,妊娠后期“攻胎”(过量增加喂量)虽能略微提高仔猪初生重,但会增加窝内仔猪体重变异系数,这对后续整齐度管理不利[125]。
母猪在哺乳期间极易发生负能量平衡(negative energy balance,NEB)状态,当体重减轻超过初始体重的10%~12%时,NEB会对繁殖结果产生负面影响,尤其是初产母猪,将导致分娩率和产仔数减少,最终使2胎繁殖性能明显下降[126-127]。这种NEB状态若持续超过14 d,将导致GnRH脉冲频率降低,并延长断奶至发情间隔[128]。

3.2.2 蛋白质和氨基酸的精准供给策略

随着目前现代母猪产仔数和泌乳能力等繁殖性能的持续提高,现代母猪蛋白质营养已从粗蛋白质水平转向可消化氨基酸平衡模式,传统的蛋白质营养理念已不能准确满足高产母猪的需求,需要基于繁殖阶段的生理特点和氨基酸代谢规律,建立动态的供给模型。
作为猪的第一限制性氨基酸,赖氨酸需要量随胎次和繁殖阶段显著变化。初产瘦肉型妊娠母猪SID Lys需要量分别为11.4 g/d(妊娠天数<90 d)[129]和19.1 g/d(妊娠天数≥90 d),经产母猪则要分别降低38.5%和40.3%。哺乳期需要比妊娠期更高的赖氨酸含量,有模型预测产仔数多的哺乳期母猪氨基酸需要量大幅增加,产仔数为16头时的赖氨酸每日需要量将比产仔数为10头时高出33%~35%[130]。高产母猪的SID Lys饲喂量应适当提升,不足会导致瘦体重过度动员,进而影响后续繁殖性能。母猪饲粮添加其他氨基酸的作用效果见表5。
表5 母猪饲粮添加其他氨基酸的作用效果

Table 5 Effects of other amino acid supplementation in diets for sows

项目
Items		 关键作用阶段
Key acting stage		 推荐添加量
Recommended
addition amount		 作用效果或作用机制
Effects or mechanisms of action
脯氨酸 Proline 妊娠期 1%脯氨酸 改变母猪结肠微生物群落组成[131]
精氨酸
Arginine		 妊娠中期(妊娠第30天)
至哺乳期		 每天额外添加
25 g精氨酸		 初乳乳成分受到显著影响[132]
蛋氨酸
Methionine		 哺乳期 蛋氨酸∶赖氨
酸为0.37~0.57		 提高泌乳第1周仔猪平均体重;提高哺乳期
血浆和乳汁中同型半胱氨酸含量[133]
亮氨酸
Leucine		 妊娠后期 0.4%~0.8%亮氨酸 通过改变血浆氨基酸组成模式、氨基酸
转运载体表达和哺乳动物雷帕霉素靶蛋白
(mTOR)信号通路来增加蛋白质合成[134]
N-氨基甲酰谷氨酸
N-carbamylglutamate		 妊娠早期
(妊娠第1~28天)		 0.05% N-氨基
甲酰谷氨酸		 差异调节子宫内膜、胎儿和胎盘胚胎
着床发育相关因素以及羊水和血清代谢物[135]
此外,氨基酸营养的精准化还离不开动态监测技术的支持。近红外光谱技术能够实时分析原料氨基酸含量,结合母猪个体采食量记录,可以构建基于实际摄入量的氨基酸平衡模型。未来,随着技术的发展和理论研究的深入,精准饲喂将进入到“精准到个体”的新阶段,为母猪LPR的挖掘提供更精细的调控手段。

3.2.3 功能性营养素

随着营养产业科技的飞速发展,通过维生素、矿物质和长短链脂肪酸的调控从而改善母猪繁殖性能的研究已经初见成效,部分功能性营养素的应用效果见表6。
表6 部分功能性营养素的应用效果

Table 6 Application effects of some functional nutrients

项目
Items		 推荐添加量
Recommended addition amount		 作用效果或作用机制
Effects or mechanisms of action
维生素E Vitamin E 90 IU/kg饲粮[136] 促进促甲状腺素和促肾上腺皮质激素以及促性腺激素的产生;
增强卵巢机能,使卵泡黄体细胞增加
维生素C Vitamin C 500 mg/kg饲粮[137] 抗应激,促进胶原合成;增强肾上腺皮质激素分泌
叶酸 Folic acid 35 mg/头[138] 参与嘌呤的合成,提高胚胎存活率,稳定提高窝产仔数
β-胡萝卜素 β-carotene 200~400 mg/kg饲粮或
注射70~200 mg/头[56]		 降低皮质醇水平,促进卵泡成熟
硒 Selenium 0.1 mg/kg亚硒酸钠,
0.5 mg/kg有机硒[139]		 通过硒蛋白增强抗氧化能力
值得注意的是,对维生素和矿物质等功能性营养素的补充,需要结合环境和健康状态调整。高温季节需额外增加维生素C和维生素E,缓解热应激;繁殖障碍多发时,增加维生素E和硒;便秘问题突出时,补充镁和维生素C促进肠道蠕动。针对不同生产问题的维生素和矿物质调整方案,可有效改善整体繁殖性能。

3.2.4 智能养殖技术

智能饲粮配方系统是一种基于物联网、大数据分析和人工智能技术的现代化养殖管理系统,其通过实时监测动物生长数据、环境参数和饲料成分,动态优化饲粮配方并实现精准饲喂,通过智能饲喂配方系统、营养监测和预警等手段,可以实现营养管理的精准化和智能化[140]。体况评分(body condition score,BCS)和背膘厚度是该系统调整营养方案的重要指标。在理想状态下,母猪BCS在配种时应为3.5分(背膘厚度为18~22 mm),妊娠中期为3.0分(背膘厚度为16~18 mm),分娩时为3.5~4.0分(背膘厚度为18~20 mm),断奶时不低于3.0分(背膘厚度为14~16 mm)。现代母猪电子饲喂(electronic sow feeding,ESF)系统可以记录个体采食量、体重变化,结合背膘扫描数据,自动生成个性化喂料曲线,实现精准到个体的营养调控[141]。智能饲粮配方系统可以根据种畜禽的营养需求和饲料原料的营养成分等信息,并结合当前母猪BCS及背膘厚度,自动计算出最优的饲粮配方。这种系统不仅可以提高饲料的营养价值和利用率,还可以减少浪费和污染,降低养殖成本。
营养状况监测与预警技术可以对种畜禽的生长性能、生理指标和健康状况等进行实时监测和分析,如可以通过深度学习模型分析动物采食行为数据和体温数据等,提前3 d预测奶牛发情,准确率可达90%以上[142]。在母猪上,可将母猪激动行为和红外热成像整合,通过机器学习模型评估母猪发情期体表尤其是眼眶温度变化[143],从而准确检测母猪发情。除此之外,研究表明,利用外阴图像特征识别母猪发情准确率超过97%[144],基于母猪姿势变化的检测准确率则可达94.1%[145]。
由此可见,未来精准饲喂管理将成为种畜禽繁育领域的重要发展方向。随着智能化养殖技术、人工智能和大数据技术的不断发展,精准饲喂管理将实现更加智能化和个性化。通过实时监测和分析种猪的生长性能、生理指标和健康状况等信息,可以制定更加精准的饲喂方案和营养管理策略,从而提高饲料利用率和繁殖性能[146-150]。

3.3 智能化环境管理

面对温湿度影响母猪LRP的情况,智能化环境管理系统应保持猪舍恒温恒湿,我国对规模化猪场标准猪舍内温度推荐值为空怀妊娠母猪舍15~20 ℃、哺乳母猪舍18~22 ℃,空气相对湿度则为60%~70%[151]。此外,空气质量也对母猪营养利用和繁殖性能有影响[152],需加强母猪舍通风(冬季0.30 m/s,夏季1.00 m/s)[151]。在实际生产中,通过使用新风系统,以及使用负压通风+湿帘降温、喷雾/喷淋降温系统、垂直通风等保温通风,保持母猪舍温度≤27 ℃(THI<75)[151],可以有效减轻猪的热应激。
随着物联网、人工智能等技术的不断发展,智能化环境控制系统和智能化仪器设备将更加智能化和精准化。一方面,先进的环境监测技术可以全面、实时监测养殖环境中的温度、相对湿度、光照等参数,为猪群提供一个舒适的生活环境[153-155]。这种技术可以有效避免因环境因素导致的繁殖性能下降和疾病发生,提高种畜禽的健康水平和繁殖效率。另一方面,通过实时监测和分析种猪群的生理指标和行为特征等信息,可以及时发现潜在的繁殖问题并采取相应措施进行干预[156]。例如,通过智能传感器可以实时监测动物的体温、心率等生理指标,及时发现异常情况并采取相应措施进行处理[157-159]。同时,通过智能摄像头或声音定位器可以实时监测母猪的行为特征,如活动量、采食量、分娩情况等,为评估其繁殖性能提供重要依据[160-163],以制定更加个性化的繁育方案和管理策略,提高繁殖效率和产品质量。

3.4 疾病预防与治疗净化

疾病发生的原因多种多样,包括饲养管理不当、环境卫生条件差以及病原体感染等。传播途径则包括直接接触传播、空气传播以及媒介传播等。为了保障种畜禽的繁殖性能,必须采取有效的疾病防控策略和生物安全措施。其中,疫苗接种是预防疾病的重要手段之一,通过接种相应的高活力疫苗可以提高母猪的免疫力,减少疾病的发生和传播[164-165]。检疫隔离则是防止病原体引入和扩散的有效措施之一,通过对新引进的种畜禽进行检疫隔离可以及时发现和处理潜在的疾病风险[166]。此外,消毒灭源也是保障种猪繁殖性能的重要措施之一,通过定期对饲养环境和器具进行消毒可以杀灭病原体,减少疾病的发生和传播[167]。
对于母猪亚健康状态如肠道菌群失衡、母体氧化应激及慢性炎症等,应在养殖实践中注重母猪肠道健康的监测和维护,适量在饲粮中添加益生菌或补充外源性抗氧化剂,同时还应定期评估评估母猪的肠道健康指标(粪便评分、菌群组成)[88,168-169]、氧化应激状态(通过检测丙二醛、抗氧化酶等指标)[118,170-171]和炎症标志物(如急性期蛋白、细胞因子)[79-81],建立早期预警系统。同时,可利用红外热成像技术筛查潜在炎症部位,而定期测量背膘厚度和BCS则有助于判断营养状况和代谢健康。此外,还需要记录和分析母猪的繁殖性能数据,如产仔数、初生重、断奶重、发情间隔等,及时发现异常个体并查找潜在原因。

4 小结

综上所述,当前我国母猪LRP呈现“两极化”特征,这种差异主要源于遗传改良覆盖率不足、饲养和管理技术断层以及疾病急性或慢性侵袭生殖系统等。目前,在遗传因素方面,我国种猪繁殖寿命的遗传改良几乎停滞,当前通过GWAS技术已经鉴定出新的繁殖相关基因,产仔数的遗传改良研究有所进展;饲养管理缺陷导致母猪哺乳期体损失严重,并影响下一胎的母猪窝产活仔数,中小猪场仍依赖固定饲粮配方,未能动态调整氨基酸比例,精准饲喂调控的实际应用还有待发展;疾病防控体系的薄弱使PRRS阳性场占比较高,造成母猪年淘汰率显著升高,同时母猪母体肠道亚健康和氧化应激也对其繁殖性能产生不利影响,导致肠道菌群失衡普遍。
未来,基因组选择技术或将使母猪繁殖性能的遗传进展提升;在物联网支持下的精准饲喂系统可使母猪年淘汰率降低,并有望解决母猪产奶量低、营养不良、体重及背膘损失高等产业问题;环境智能调控设备则可减少猪群的冷热应激;高活力疫苗的研发与氧化应激、肠道亚健康等慢性疾病的缓解将共同减轻疾病对母猪LRP的影响。总之,跨学科协同创新、解决产业痛点难题都是能够提高母猪LPR的可行措施,将为我国乃至国际畜牧业的可持续发展注入新的活力。

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]
魏锋华. 2024年农业经济形势稳中向好[EB/OL].(2025-01-17)[2025-09-09]. https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/sjjd/202501/t20250117_1958344.html.

WEI F H. The agricultural economy is expected to remain stable and improve in 2024[EB/OL].(2025-01-17)[2025-09-09]. https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/sjjd/202501/t20250117_1958344.html. in Chinese)

[2]
United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service. National statistics for hogs[EB/OL].(2018-05-04)[2025-09-09]. https://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_Subject/result.php?94498DB1-635C-39F4-80EC-806D1BF1798B&sector=%E5%8A%A8%E7%89%A9%E4%B8%8E%E4%BA%A7%E5%93%81&group=%E7%89%B2%E7%95%9C&comm=%E7%8C%AA.

[3]
PATTERSON J, FOXCROFT G. Gilt management for fertility and longevity[J]. Animals, 2019, 9(7):434.

DOI

[4]
PLAENGKAEO S, DUANGJINDA M, STALDER K J. Longevity and lifetime reproductive trait genetic parameter estimates from Thai Landrace and Large White pig populations[J]. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 2021, 53(2):319.

DOI PMID

[5]
KOKETSU Y, TANI S, IIDA R. Factors for improving reproductive performance of sows and herd productivity in commercial breeding herds[J]. Porcine Health Management, 2017, 3(1):1.

DOI

[6]
魏锋华. 全国夏粮稳产丰收农业生产形势良好[EB/OL].(2025-07-16)[2025-09-09]. https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/sjjd/202507/t20250716_1960439.html.

WEI F H. The summer grain harvest across the country was stable and bountiful, and the agricultural production situation was favorable[EB/OL].(2025-07-16)[2025-09-09]. https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/sjjd/202507/t20250716_1960439.html. in Chinese)

[7]
Danish Pig Research Centre. Report 1236:analysis of productivity in selected DanBred herds—2020[EB/OL].(2021-12-30)[2025-09-09]. https://pigresearchcentre.dk/Research-results#Report1236.

[8]
猪译官. 全球养猪看丹麦:2024年平均PSY 35.6,效率碾压式领先[EB/OL].(2025-07-21)[2025-09-09]. https://www.yangzhu360.com/guoji/20250721/889607.html.

Pig Translator. Global pig farming relies on denmark:an average PSY of 35.6 in 2024,with efficiency leading by a landslide margin[EB/OL].(2025-07-21)[2025-09-09]. https://www.yangzhu360.com/guoji/20250721/889607.html. in Chinese)

[9]
新猪网. 2024猪业数据年报:PSY提升将近4头,中国猪业效率和成本还有哪些改变?[EB/OL].(2025-01-21)[2025-09-10]https://www.163.com/dy/article/JME5C4B60514DAM5.html.

New Pig Network. 2024 Pig industry data annual report:the PSY has increased by nearly 4 heads.What other changes have occurred in the efficiency and costs of the Chinese pig industry?[EB/OL].(2025-01-21)[2025-09-10]https://www.163.com/dy/article/JME5C4B60514DAM5.html. in Chinese)

[10]
DE JONG E, APPELTANT R, COOLS A, et al. Slaughterhouse examination of culled sows in commercial pig herds[J]. Livestock Science, 2014, 167:362-369.

DOI

[11]
NAM N H, ANH DAO B T, SUKON P. Risk factors for puerperal endometritis in the sow[J]. South African Journal of Animal Science, 2023, 53(6):843-849.

DOI

[12]
XAYALATH S. Comparative study on reproductive performance and management methods of Hungarian and Lao indigenous pig breeds[D]. Ph.D. Thesis. Debrecen: University of Debrecen, 2023.

[13]
NONAN K L, NICOLAS K M G, MARCOS M J L, et al. Characterization and rearing practices of Philippine native pigs at San Mariano,Isabela[J]. International Journal of Open-Access,Interdisciplinary & New Educational Discoveries of ETCOR Educational Research Center, 2024, 3(2):414-434.

[14]
HAGAN J K, ETIM N N. The effects of breed,season and parity on the reproductive performance of pigs reared under hot and humid environments[J]. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 2019, 51(2):411-418.

DOI

[15]
杨志华, 周晓义, 姚国忠, 等. 不同品种父本对三元母猪繁殖性能及其仔猪生长性能的影响[J]. 浙江畜牧兽医, 2023, 48(2):7,6.

YANG Z H, ZHOU X Y, YAO G Z, et al. The effects of different male breeds on reproductive performance of the three way crossbred sows and their piglet’s growth performance[J]. Zhejiang Journal Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2023, 48(2):7,6. (in Chinese)

[16]
WU S, XIE J J, ZHONG T, et al. Genetic polymorphisms in ESR and FSHβ genes and their association with litter traits in Large White pigs[J]. Animal Biotechnology, 2023, 34(9):4713-4720.

DOI

[17]
LI J, LIN X F. Analyzing the impact of marker-assisted selection on livestock productivity and genetic diversity[J]. Animal Molecular Breeding, 2024, 14(1):119-129.

[18]
DU H, ZHOU L, LIU Z, et al. The 1 000 Chinese indigenous pig genomes project provides insights into the genomic architecture of pigs[J]. Nature Communications, 2024, 15(1):10137.

DOI

[19]
MONTEIRO M S, CARNEVALE R F, MURO B B D, et al. The role of nutrition across production stages to improve sow longevity[J]. Animals, 2025, 15(2):189.

DOI

[20]
CARRIÓN-LÓPEZ M J, MADRID J, MARTÍNEZ S, et al. Effects of the feeding level in early gestation on body reserves and the productive and reproductive performance of primiparous and multiparous sows[J]. Research in Veterinary Science, 2022, 148:42-51.

DOI

[21]
FARMER C, JOHANNSEN J C. Feeding gilts and sows to maximize mammary development and lactation performance[J]. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 2024, 104(4):411-419.

DOI

[22]
FERREIRA S V, RODRIGUES L A, FERREIRA M A, et al. Plane of nutrition during gestation affects reproductive performance and retention rate of hyperprolific sows under commercial conditions[J]. Animal, 2021, 15(3):100153.

DOI

[23]
LUGARÀ R, REALINI L, KREUZER M, et al. Effects of maternal high-energy diet and spirulina supplementation in pregnant and lactating sows on performance,quality of carcass and meat,and its fatty acid profile in male and female offspring[J]. Meat Science, 2022, 187:108769.

DOI

[24]
REMPEL L A, KEEL B N, OLIVER W T, et al. Dam parity structure and body condition during lactation influence piglet growth and gilt sexual maturation through pre-finishing[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2022, 100(4):skac031.

[25]
GREGORY N, FARMER C, FRIENDSHIP R M, et al. The effect of moderate energy and protein restriction during gilt development on changes in body weight and backfat depth and subsequent lactation performance[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2023, 101:skac351.

[26]
HUE-BEAUVAIS C, FAULCONNIER Y, CHARLIER M, et al. Nutritional regulation of mammary gland development and milk synthesis in animal models and dairy species[J]. Genes, 2021, 12(4):523.

DOI

[27]
XU S Y, TANG L C, XU H T, et al. Effects of energy and dietary fiber on the breast development in gilt[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2022, 9:830392.

DOI

[28]
FARMER C, PALIN M F, MARTEL-KENNES Y. Impact of diet deprivation and subsequent over-allowance during prepuberty.Part 1.Effects on growth performance,metabolite status,and mammary gland development in gilts[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2012, 90(3):863-871.

DOI

[29]
DanBred. Sow & gilt manual[EB/OL].[2025-09-10]. https://danbred-manual.com/en/sow-gilt-manual/mating-unit/.

[30]
GIANLUPPI R D F, LUCCA M S, MELLAGI A P G, et al. Effects of different amounts and type of diet during weaning-to-estrus interval on reproductive performance of primiparous and multiparous sows[J]. Animal, 2020, 14(9):1906-1915.

DOI PMID

[31]
KRYNAUW J. The effect of flush feeding during lactation on sow reproductive efficiency,litter size,birth weight and with-in litter variation[D]. Master’s Thesis. Pretoria: University of Pretoria, 2020.

[32]
MALLMANN A L, AREND L S, OLIVEIRA G S, et al. Effects of flush feeding strategy before breeding on reproductive performance of modern replacement gilts:impacts on ovulation rate and litter traits[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2020, 98(6):skaa186.

[33]
中国农科新闻网. 不同阶段母猪的营养调控[EB/OL].(2020-03-10)[2025-09-10]. http://www.nkb.com.cn/2020/0310/338119.html.

Agricultural Science News Network. Nutritional regulation for sows at different stages[EB/OL].(2020-03-10)[2025-09-10]. http://www.nkb.com.cn/2020/0310/338119.html. in Chinese)

[34]
中华人民共和国国家市场监督管理总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. 猪营养需要量:GB/T 39235—2020[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2020.

State Administration for Market Regulation,National Standardization Administration. Nutrient requirements of swine:GB/T 39235—2020[S]. Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2020. (in Chinese)

[35]
眉山市畜牧局. 影响母猪繁殖因素探讨[EB/OL].(2018-12-18)[2025-09-10]. https://www.ms.gov.cn/info/5575/1048769.htm.

Meishan Municipal Bureau of Animal Husbandry. Discussion on factors affecting sow reproduction[EB/OL].(2018-12-18)[2025-09-10]. https://www.ms.gov.cn/info/5575/1048769.htm. in Chinese)

[36]
THONGKHUY S, CHUAYCHU S B, BURARNRAK P, et al. Effect of backfat thickness during late gestation on farrowing duration,piglet birth weight,colostrum yield,milk yield and reproductive performance of sows[J]. Livestock Science, 2020, 234:103983.

DOI

[37]
THINGNES S L, EKKER A S, GAUSTAD A H, et al. Ad libitum versus step-up feeding during late lactation:the effect on feed consumption,body composition and production performance in dry fed loose housed sows[J]. Livestock Science, 2012, 149(3):250-259.

DOI

[38]
STRATHE A V, BRUUN T S, HANSEN C F. Sows with high milk production had both a high feed intake and high body mobilization[J]. Animal, 2017, 11(11):1913-1921.

DOI PMID

[39]
THEIL P K, KROGH U, BRUUN T S, et al. Feeding the modern sow to sustain high productivity[J]. Molecular Reproduction and Development, 2023, 90(7):517-532.

DOI

[40]
ICROFS. Protein level in feed for gestating sows can be reduced[EB/OL].(2025-11-13)[2025-11-20]. https://icrofs.dk/en/aktuelt/nyheder/viewnews/artikel/protein-level-in-feed-for-gestating-sows-can-be-reduced.

[41]
MCPHERSON R L, JI F, WU G, et al. Growth and compositional changes of fetal tissues in pigs[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2004, 82(9):2534-2540.

DOI PMID

[42]
NYACHOTI C M, ZIJLSTRA R T, DE LANGE C F M, et al. Voluntary feed intake in growing-finishing pigs:a review of the main determining factors and potential approaches for accurate predictions[J]. Canadian Journal of Animal Science, 2004, 84(4):549-566.

DOI

[43]
KRAELING R R, WEBEL S K. Current strategies for reproductive management of gilts and sows in north America[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2015, 6(1):3.

DOI PMID

[44]
FARMER C, GILLIES C, JOHANNSEN J C, et al. Dietary supplementation with lysine (protein) in late pregnancy does not enhance mammary development in multiparous sows[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2023, 101:skad385.

[45]
YE H, LANGENDIJK P, JAWORSKI N W, et al. Protein digestion kinetics influence maternal protein loss,litter growth,and nitrogen utilization in lactating sows[J]. Frontiers in Nutrition, 2022, 9:862823.

DOI

[46]
FACCIN J E G, TOKACH M D, GOODBAND R D, et al. Gilt development to improve offspring performance and survivability[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2022, 100(6):skac128.

[47]
BARTOL F F, WILEY A A, GEORGE A F, et al. Physiology and endocrinology symposium:postnatal reproductive development and the lactocrine hypothesis[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2017, 95(5):2200-2210.

[48]
JOHANNSEN J C, SØRENSEN M T, THEIL P K, et al. Optimal protein concentration in diets for sows during the transition period[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2024, 102:skae082.

[49]
AZNAR B, GRANDIA J, TEJEDOR M T, et al. Effect of vitamin C and iron supplementation in pregnant hyper-prolific sows[J]. Livestock Science, 2024, 280:105404.

DOI

[50]
BURLET H, SAUVÉ B, CLOUTIER L, et al. 5 Impacts of high levels of vitamins during two gestational cycles on the reproductive performance of gilts and sows,litter performance and the immunoglobulins concentrations in dams and piglets[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2025,103 (Suppl.1):63-64.

[51]
ELEFSON S K, ROSS J W, RADEMACHER C J, et al. Evaluation of oxidized beta-carotene on sow and piglet immune systems,sow reproductive performance,and piglet growth[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2023, 101:skad066.

[52]
KNAUER M. PSIV-2 impact of vitamins C and E on sow mortality and stillborn rate[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2023, 101(Suppl.2):352-353.

[53]
SOLYANIK A V, SEMENOV V G, TYURIN V G, et al. The effect of fumaric acid,dipromonium and vitamin C on the productivity of sows[J]. IOP Conference Series:Earth and Environmental Science, 2021, 935(1):012023.

DOI

[54]
ZHANG L H, PIAO X S. Use of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 in diets for sows:a review[J]. Animal Nutrition, 2021, 7(3):728-736.

DOI

[55]
WANG L X, ZHANG S, JOHNSTON L J, et al. A systematic review and Meta-analysis of dietary fat effects on reproductive performance of sows and growth performance of piglets[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2022, 13(1):12.

DOI PMID

[56]
DE OLIVEIRA A M A, FREITAS E R, NOGUEIRA D B, et al. Beta-carotene supplementation for sows:reproductive parameters and productive performance of piglets[J]. Animals, 2023, 13(23):3730.

DOI

[57]
HEURTAULT J, HISCOCKS S, LÉTOURNEAU-MONTMINY M P, et al. Dynamics of bone mineralization in primiparous sows as a function of dietary phosphorus and calcium during lactation[J]. Animal, 2024, 18(4):101130.

DOI

[58]
SANTOS R K S, NOVAIS A K, BORGES D S, et al. Increased vitamin supplement to sows,piglets and finishers and the effect in productivity[J]. Animal, 2020, 14(1):86-94.

DOI

[59]
SMOLUCHA G, STEG A, OCZKOWICZ M. The role of vitamins in mitigating the effects of various stress factors in pigs breeding[J]. Animals, 2024, 14(8):1218.

DOI

[60]
JOHNSON J S, BAUMGARD L H. PHYSIOLOGY SYMPOSIUM:postnatal consequences of in utero heat stress in pigs[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2019, 97(2):962-971.

DOI

[61]
SABÉS-ALSINA M, LUNDEHEIM N, JOHANNISSON A, et al. Relationships between climate and sperm quality in dairy bull semen:a retrospective analysis[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 2019, 102(6):5623-5633.

DOI

[62]
LIU L S, TAI M, YAO W, et al. Effects of heat stress on posture transitions and reproductive performance of primiparous sows during late gestation[J]. Journal of Thermal Biology, 2021, 96:102828.

DOI

[63]
FREITAS P H F, JOHNSON J S, CHEN S, et al. Definition of environmental variables and critical periods to evaluate heat tolerance in Large White pigs based on single-step genomic reaction norms[J]. Frontiers in Genetics, 2021, 12:717409.

DOI

[64]
HUYNH T T T, AARNINK A J A, VERSTEGEN M W A, et al. Effects of increasing temperatures on physiological changes in pigs at different relative humidities[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2005, 83(6):1385-1396.

PMID

[65]
LIMESAND S W, CAMACHO L E, KELLY A C, et al. Impact of thermal stress on placental function and fetal physiology[J]. Animal Reproduction, 2018, 15(S1):886-898.

DOI

[66]
HANNAN F M, LEOW M K S, LEE J K W, et al. Endocrine effects of heat exposure and relevance to climate change[J]. Nature Reviews Endocrinology, 2024, 20(11):673-684.

DOI

[67]
KNOX R V. Swine fertility in a changing climate[J]. Animal Reproduction Science, 2024, 269:107537.

DOI

[68]
IIDA R, KOKETSU Y. Delayed age of gilts at first mating associated with photoperiod and number of hot days in humid subtropical areas[J]. Animal Reproduction Science, 2013, 139(1/2/3/4):115-120.

DOI

[69]
LI C Y, SHU H, GU X H. Photoperiod management in farm animal husbandry:a review[J]. Animals, 2025, 15(4):591.

DOI

[70]
NIEKAMP S R, SUTHERLAND M A, DAHL G E, et al. Photoperiod influences the immune status of multiparous pregnant sows and their piglets[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2006, 84(8):2072-2082.

PMID

[71]
CHOU J Y, PARSONS T D. A systematic review of the impact of housing on sow welfare during post-weaning and early pregnancy periods[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2022, 9:903822.

DOI

[72]
LI Q Q, YUAN X L, CHEN Z T, et al. Heritability estimates and effect on lifetime reproductive performance of age at puberty in sows[J]. Animal Reproduction Science, 2018, 195:207-215.

DOI PMID

[73]
IIDA R, PIÑEIRO C, KOKETSU Y. High lifetime and reproductive performance of sows on southern European union commercial farms can be predicted by high numbers of pigs born alive in parity one[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2015, 93(5):2501-2508.

DOI PMID

[74]
PELTONIEMI O, YUN J, BJÖRKMAN S, et al. Coping with large litters:the management of neonatal piglets and sow reproduction[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Technology, 2021, 63(1):1-15.

DOI

[75]
BLAVI L, SOLÀ-ORIOL D, LLONCH P, et al. Management and feeding strategies in early life to increase piglet performance and welfare around weaning:a review[J]. Animals, 2021, 11(2):302.

DOI

[76]
VARGAS-BERMÚDEZ D S, VARGAS-PINTO M A, MOGOLLÓN J D, et al. Field infection of a gilt and its litter demonstrates vertical transmission and effect on reproductive failure caused by porcine circovirus type 3 (PCV3)[J]. BMC Veterinary Research, 2021, 17(1):150.

DOI

[77]
VARGAS-BERMUDEZ D S, POLO G, MOGOLLON J D, et al. Longitudinal monitoring of mono- and coinfections involving primary porcine reproductive viruses (PCV2,PPV1,and PRRSV) as well as emerging viruses (PCV3,PCV4,and nPPVs) in primiparous and multiparous sows and their litters[J]. Pathogens, 2025, 14(6):573.

DOI

[78]
LI P, MACHADO I, PETZNICK T, et al. PRRSV RNA detection and predictive values between different sow and neonatal litter sample types[J]. Veterinary Sciences, 2025, 12(2):150.

DOI

[79]
SUN C S, SONG R, ZHOU J Y, et al. Fermented bamboo fiber improves productive performance by regulating gut microbiota and inhibiting chronic inflammation of sows and piglets during late gestation and lactation[J]. Microbiology Spectrum, 2023, 11(3):e0408422.

DOI

[80]
CHEN M X, ZHAO Y, LI S, et al. Maternal malic acid may ameliorate oxidative stress and inflammation in sows through modulating gut microbiota and host metabolic profiles during late pregnancy[J]. Antioxidants, 2024, 13(2):253.

DOI

[81]
MA T, HUANG W Q, LI Y L, et al. Probiotics alleviate constipation and inflammation in late gestating and lactating sows[J]. NPJ Biofilms and Microbiomes, 2023, 9(1):70.

DOI PMID

[82]
MELÉNDEZ-ARCE R, VARGAS-LEITÓN B, STEENEVELD W, et al. Stochastic model to assess bioeconomic impact of PRRS on pig farms in Costa Rica[J]. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 2023, 220:106032.

DOI

[83]
NEUMANN E J, KLIEBENSTEIN J B, JOHNSON C D, et al. Assessment of the economic impact of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome on swine production in the United States[J]. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 2005, 227(3):385-392.

DOI

[84]
HOLTKAMP D J, KLIEBENSTEIN J B, NEUMANN E J, et al. Assessment of the economic impact of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus on United States pork producers[J]. Journal of Swine Health and Production, 2013, 21(2):72-84.

DOI

[85]
OLANRATMANEE E O, KUNAVONGKRIT A, TUMMARUK P. Impact of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus infection at different periods of pregnancy on subsequent reproductive performance in gilts and sows[J]. Animal Reproduction Science, 2010, 122(1/2):42-51.

DOI

[86]
LANGEL S N, WANG Q H, VLASOVA A N, et al. Host factors affecting generation of immunity against porcine epidemic diarrhea virus in pregnant and lactating swine and passive protection of neonates[J]. Pathogens, 2020, 9(2):130.

DOI

[87]
SASAKI Y, KAWABATA T, NOGUCHI M. The effect of porcine epidemic diarrhea (PED) on ovarian function and reproductive performance after weaning in Berkshire sows[J]. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 2017, 49(4):879-882.

DOI PMID

[88]
HE J Q, ZHENG J, HUANG Y Y, et al. Benefits of maternal pectin supplementation in gestation diet on vaginal microbiota of sows and intestinal health of newborn piglets[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2024, 11:1392399.

DOI

[89]
CONWAY E, O’DOHERTY J V, MUKHOPADHYA A, et al. Maternal and/or direct supplementation with a combination of a casein hydrolysate and yeast β-glucan on post-weaning performance and intestinal health in the pig[J]. PLoS One, 2022, 17(7):e0265051.

DOI

[90]
WANG X T, FANG T T, CHEN D W, et al. Maternal chitosan oligosaccharide supplementation during late gestation and lactation optimizes placental function in sows and intestinal function in 21-day-old IUGR suckling piglets[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2024, 11:1463707.

DOI

[91]
MONTEIRO M S, POOR A P, MURO B B D, et al. The sow microbiome:current and future perspectives to maximize the productivity in swine herds[J]. Journal of Swine Health and Production, 2022, 30(4):238-250.

DOI

[92]
GALLI G M, ANDRETTA I, LEVESQUE C, et al. Using probiotics to improve nutrient digestibility and gut-health of weaned pigs:a comparison of maternal and nursery supplementation strategies[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2024, 11:1356455.

DOI

[93]
CHEN Y L, WANG Y, SHAOYONG W K, et al. High-fertility sows reshape gut microbiota:the rise of serotonin-related bacteria and its impact on sustaining reproductive performance[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2025, 16(1):73.

DOI

[94]
LIU M, ZHANG J, ZHOU Y Y, et al. Gut microbiota affects the estrus return of sows by regulating the metabolism of sex steroid hormones[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2023, 14(1):155.

DOI PMID

[95]
AAGAARD K, MA J, ANTONY K M, et al. The placenta harbors a unique microbiome[J]. Science Translational Medicine, 2014, 6(237):237ra65.

[96]
FU Z C, WANG J, ZHAO Y Q, et al. Dietary glyceryl monolaurate supplementation during pregnancy enhances fetal intrauterine development and antioxidant capacity in sows via microbiota modulation[J]. Antioxidants, 2025, 14(7):783.

DOI

[97]
HUANG S B, WU Z F, HUANG Z H, et al. Maternal supply of cysteamine alleviates oxidative stress and enhances angiogenesis in porcine placenta[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2021, 12(1):91.

DOI PMID

[98]
HU C J, YANG Y Y, DENG M, et al. Placentae for low birth weight piglets are vulnerable to oxidative stress,mitochondrial dysfunction,and impaired angiogenesis[J]. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity, 2020, 2020(1):8715412.

[99]
SHENG W M, WANG M M, LI Y Q, et al. Oxidative stress controls lncRNA-mediated sow granulosa cell functions in a FoxO1-dependent manner[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2024, 15(1):171.

DOI PMID

[100]
WANG M M, ZHANG J Y, SHENG W M, et al. A variant in long noncoding RNA NORSF affects granulosa cells response to transcription factor RFX7[J]. Journal of Cellular Physiology, 2024, 239(11):e31414.

DOI

[101]
LI Q H, YANG S W, CHEN F, et al. Nutritional strategies to alleviate oxidative stress in sows[J]. Animal Nutrition, 2022, 9:60-73.

DOI PMID

[102]
LANGENDIJK P. Latest advances in sow nutrition during early gestation[J]. Animals, 2021, 11(6):1720.

DOI

[103]
敖江涛, 郑溜丰, 彭健. 进程性氧化应激对母猪繁殖性能的影响及其营养调控[J]. 动物营养学报, 2016, 28(12):3735-3741.

DOI

AO J T, ZHENG L F, PENG J. Impact of progressive oxidative stress on sow reproductive performance and its nutritional manipulation[J]. Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, 2016, 28(12):3735-3741. (in Chinese)

[104]
HERVE L, QUESNEL H, GREUTER A, et al. Effect of the supplementation with a combination of plant extracts on sow and piglet performance and physiology during lactation and around weaning[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2023, 101:skad282.

[105]
ROSZKOS R, TÓTH T, BAZAR G, et al. Effect of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation on oxidative stress parameters and sex hormone levels of modern genotype sows[J]. Veterinary Medicine and Science, 2023, 9(1):191-202.

DOI

[106]
BOGADO PASCOTTINI O, LEBLANC S J, GNEMI G, et al. Genesis of clinical and subclinical endometritis in dairy cows[J]. Reproduction, 2023, 166(2):R15-R24.

[107]
STASSI A F, DÍAZ P U, GASSER F B, et al. A review on inflammation and angiogenesis as key mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of bovine cystic ovarian disease[J]. Theriogenology, 2022, 186:70-85.

DOI

[108]
KAISER M, DAHL J, JACOBSEN S, et al. Changes of adenosine deaminase activity in serum and saliva around parturition in sows with and without postpartum dysgalactia syndrome[J]. BMC Veterinary Research, 2021, 17(1):352.

DOI PMID

[109]
WANG X Y, GUO X F, HE X Y, et al. Effects of FecB mutation on estrus,ovulation,and endocrine characteristics in small tail Han sheep[J]. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 2021, 8:709737.

DOI

[110]
JOHANNSEN J C, SØRENSEN M T, BRUUN T S, et al. Dietary protein requirement of hyper-prolific sows in late gestation[J]. Livestock Science, 2024, 290:105596.

DOI

[111]
KEATING A F, ROSS J W, BAUMGARD L H. Impact of real-life environmental exposures on reproduction:systemic and ovarian impacts of heat stress in the porcine model[J]. Reproduction, 2024, 168(6):e240217.

DOI

[112]
ZHONG Z Q, LI R, WANG Z, et al. Genome-wide scans for selection signatures in indigenous pigs revealed candidate genes relating to heat tolerance[J]. Animal, 2023, 17(7):100882.

DOI

[113]
ZHENG X R, ZHAO P J, YANG K J, et al. CNV analysis of Meishan pig by next-generation sequencing and effects of AHR gene CNV on pig reproductive traits[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2020, 11(1):42.

DOI

[114]
HONG Y F, HE X Y, WU D, et al. Genome selection and genome-wide association analyses for litter size traits in Large White pigs[J]. Animals, 2025, 15(12):1724.

DOI

[115]
FAN Y, XING Y U, ZHANG Z Y, et al. A further look at porcine chromosome 7 reveals VRTN variants associated with vertebral number in Chinese and western pigs[J]. PLoS One, 2013, 8(4):e62534.

DOI

[116]
TU C F, CHUANG C K, YANG T S. The application of new breeding technology based on gene editing in pig industry-a review[J]. Animal Bioscience, 2022, 35(6):791-803.

DOI

[117]
AZZU V, VACCA M, VIRTUE S, et al. Adipose tissue-liver cross talk in the control of whole-body metabolism:implications in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease[J]. Gastroenterology, 2020, 158(7):1899-1912.

DOI

[118]
LI J, BI Q Y, PI Y, et al. Dietary supplementation with 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 on reproductive performance and placental oxidative stress in primiparous sows during mid-to-late gestation[J]. Antioxidants, 2024, 13(9):1019.

DOI

[119]
CAI W T, COLE J B, GODDARD M E, et al. Mammary gland multi-omics data reveals new genetic insights into milk production traits in dairy cattle[J]. PLoS Genetics, 2025, 21(4):e1011675.

DOI

[120]
GONDRET F, BATONON-ALAVO D I, et al. Flash dietary methionine supply over growth requirements in pigs:multi-facetted effects on skeletal muscle metabolism[J]. Animal, 2021, 15(7):100268.

DOI

[121]
TIMME K, INYANG I, WHITE H E, et al. Diet-induced obesity alters the ovarian chemical biotransformation and oxidative stress response proteins both basally and in response to 7,12-dimethylbenz[a]anthracene exposure[J]. Toxicological Sciences, 2025, 204(1):9-19.

DOI

[122]
KING R H, WILLIAMS I H. The effect of nutrition on the reproductive performance of first-litter sows 1.Feeding level during lactation,and between weaning and mating[J]. Animal Science, 1984, 38(2):241-247.

DOI

[123]
CLOIX L, REVERCHON M, CORNUAU M, et al. Expression and regulation of INTELECTIN1 in human granulosa-lutein cells:role in IGF-1-induced steroidogenesis through NAMPT[J]. Biology of Reproduction, 2014, 91(2):50.

[124]
ZHOU Y F, ZHANG X M, WANG C, et al. Effects of north American and Danish feeding strategies on the reproductive performance of American Landrace-Yorkshire crossbred sows during gestation[J]. Livestock Science, 2019, 228:67-71.

DOI

[125]
AMPODE K M B, MUN H S, LAGUA E B, et al. Bump feeding improves sow reproductive performance,milk yield,piglet birth weight,and farrowing behavior[J]. Animals, 2023, 13(19):3148.

DOI

[126]
HOVING L L, SOEDE N M, GRAAT E A M, et al. Effect of live weight development and reproduction in first parity on reproductive performance of second parity sows[J]. Animal Reproduction Science, 2010, 122(1/2):82-89.

DOI

[127]
THAKER M Y C, BILKEI G. Lactation weight loss influences subsequent reproductive performance of sows[J]. Animal Reproduction Science, 2005, 88(3/4):309-318.

DOI

[128]
COSTERMANS N G J, TEERDS K J, MIDDELKOOP A, et al. Consequences of negative energy balance on follicular development and oocyte quality in primiparous sows[J]. Biology of Reproduction, 2020, 102(2):388-398.

DOI

[129]
SHI M, SHI C X, LI Y K, et al. Estimation of the standardized ileal digestible lysine requirement for primiparous pregnant sows[J]. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 2016, 100(2):287-293.

DOI PMID

[130]
TOKACH M D, MENEGAT M B, GOURLEY K M, et al. Review:nutrient requirements of the modern high-producing lactating sow,with an emphasis on amino acid requirements[J]. Animal, 2019, 13(12):2967-2977.

DOI

[131]
JI Y J, GUO Q P, YIN Y L, et al. Dietary proline supplementation alters colonic luminal microbiota and bacterial metabolite composition between days 45 and 70 of pregnancy in Huanjiang mini-pigs[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2018, 9(1):18.

DOI

[132]
KROGH U, OKSBJERG N, PURUP S, et al. Colostrum and milk production in multiparous sows fed supplementary arginine during gestation and lactation[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2016, 94(Suppl.3):22-25.

[133]
WEI H K, ZHAO X C, XIA M, et al. Different dietary methionine to lysine ratios in the lactation diet:effects on the performance of sows and their offspring and methionine metabolism in lactating sows[J]. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2019, 10(1):76.

DOI

[134]
WANG C X, CHEN F, ZHANG W F, et al. Leucine promotes the growth of fetal pigs by increasing protein synthesis through the mTOR signaling pathway in longissimus dorsi muscle at late gestation[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2018, 66(15):3840-3849.

DOI

[135]
CAI S, ZHU J L, ZENG X Z, et al. Maternal N-carbamylglutamate supply during early pregnancy enhanced pregnancy outcomes in sows through modulations of targeted genes and metabolism pathways[J]. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2018, 66(23):5845-5852.

DOI PMID

[136]
ANDRADE T S, WATANABE P H, DE MENDONÇA I B, et al. Organic selenium and vitamin E for gilts and sows bred in equatorial climate[J]. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 2024, 108(1):234-242.

DOI

[137]
KNAUER M, BERGSTROM J R, HOUGH S D. 115 Sow supplementation with vitamin C enhances pig throughput[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2023, 101(Suppl.2):68-69.

[138]
TITOVA N V, BELOOKOV A A, BELOOKOVA O V, et al. Advantages of feeding pregnant sows with biologically active substances based on folic acid and trace elements[J]. IOP Conference Series:Earth and Environmental Science, 2021, 677:052082.

DOI

[139]
SURAI P F, FISININ V I. Selenium in sow nutrition[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2016, 211:18-30.

DOI

[140]
ZHANG S, LAI C H, ZHAO J B, et al. Big data and AI-powered modeling:a pathway to sustainable precision animal nutrition[J]. Advanced Science, 2025, 12(41):e07564.

DOI

[141]
VARGOVIC L, HERMESCH S, ATHORN R Z, et al. Feed intake and feeding behavior traits for gestating sows recorded using electronic sow feeders[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2021, 99(1):skaa395.

[142]
张志勇, 曹姗姗, 孔繁涛, 等. 母牛发情精准感知与智能鉴定技术研究进展、问题与挑战[J]. 智慧农业(中英文), 2025, 7(3):48-68.

ZHANG Z Y, CAO S S, KONG F T, et al. Advances,problems and challenges of precise estrus perception and intelligent identification technology for cows[J]. Smart Agriculture (Chinese and English), 2025, 7(3):48-68. (in Chinese)

[143]
MOURA L C S, MENDES J P, FERREIRA Y M, et al. Combined infrared thermography and agitated behavior in sows improve estrus detection when applied to supervised machine learning algorithms[J]. Animals, 2025, 15(19):2798.

DOI

[144]
CHANG S C, WU X R, KUAN H Y, et al. Using deep learning to accurately detect sow vulva size in a group pen with a single camera[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2024, 102:skad407.

[145]
XUE H X, CHEN J X, DING Q A, et al. Automatic detection of sow posture and estrus based on convolutional neural network[J]. Frontiers in Physics, 2022, 10:1037129.

DOI

[146]
REMUS A, HAUSCHILD L, LÉTOURNEAU-MONTMINY M P, et al. Estimating amino acid requirements in real-time for precision-fed pigs:the challenge of variability among individuals[J]. Animals, 2021, 11(12):3354.

DOI

[147]
ALEXY M, PAI R R, FERENCI T, et al. The potential of RFID technology for tracking mangalica pigs in the extensive farming system-a research from Hungary[J]. Pastoralism:Research,Policy and Practice, 2024, 14:12854.

DOI

[148]
CHEN C, LIU X Q, LIU C J, et al. Development of the precision feeding system for sows via a rule-based expert system[J]. International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, 2023, 16(2):187-198.

DOI

[149]
GALIOT L, CLOUTIER L, GUAY F, et al. 219 Effects of precision feeding and the “bump feeding” strategy in gestating sows on performances and body condition in sows monitored for the first two gestation-lactation cycles[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 2023, 101(Suppl.2):125-126.

[150]
DURAND M, DOURMAD J Y, LARGOUET C, et al. Precision feeding of gestating sows:considering health,welfare and environmental conditions[J]. INRAE Productions Animales, 2022, 34(4):293-304.

DOI

[151]
中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局, 中国国家标准化管理委员会. 规模猪场环境参数及环境管理:GB/T 17824.3—2008[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2008.

General Administration of Quality Supervision,Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s Republic of China,Standardization Administration of the People’s Republic of China. Environmental parameters and environmental management for intensive pig farms:GB/T 17824.3—2008[S]. Beijing: China Standards Press, 2008. (in Chinese)

[152]
SAHA C K, ZHANG G Q, KAI P, et al. Effects of a partial pit ventilation system on indoor air quality and ammonia emission from a fattening pig room[J]. Biosystems Engineering, 2010, 105(3):279-287.

DOI

[153]
ZHANG Y Q, ZHANG W J, WU C X, et al. Prediction model of pigsty temperature based on ISSA-LSSVM[J]. Agriculture, 2023, 13(9):1710.

DOI

[154]
JIN H, MENG G, PAN Y Z, et al. An improved intelligent control system for temperature and humidity in a pig house[J]. Agriculture, 2022, 12(12):1987.

DOI

[155]
LI H P, LI H M, LI B G, et al. Smart temperature and humidity control in pig house by improved three-way K-means[J]. Agriculture, 2020, 13(10):2020.

DOI

[156]
WANG S L, JIANG H H, QIAO Y L, et al. The research progress of vision-based artificial intelligence in smart pig farming[J]. Sensors, 2022, 22(17):6541.

DOI

[157]
KIM J H, NI J Q, OGUNDARE W, et al. Sow and piglet behavior characterization using visual observation,sensor detection,and video recording[J]. Applied Sciences, 2025, 15(6):3018.

DOI

[158]
YAMSAKUL P, YANO T, NA LAMPANG K, et al. Infrared temperature sensor for use among sow herds[J]. Veterinary Integrative Sciences, 2022, 21(1):49-59.

DOI

[159]
ZHANG Z Q, WANG H, LIU T H, et al. Accurate detection method of pig’s temperature based on non-point source thermal infrared image[J]. CAAI Transactions on Intelligence Technology, 2021, 6(3):312-323.

DOI

[160]
DURAND M, LARGOUËT C, BONNEAU DE BEAUFORT L, et al. A dataset to study group-housed sows’ individual behaviours and production responses to different short-term events[J]. Animal-Open Space, 2023, 2:100039.

DOI

[161]
SONG S, KANG T, LIM K, et al. Sow posture analysis and estrus prediction using closed-circuit television cameras[J]. IEEE Access, 2024, 12:17460-17466.

DOI

[162]
TSAI Y J, HUANG Y C, LIN E C, et al. Monitoring the lactation-related behaviors of sows and their piglets in farrowing crates using deep learning[J]. Frontiers in Animal Science, 2024, 5:1431285.

DOI

[163]
VAN ERP-VAN DER KOOIJ E, DE GRAAF L F, DE KRUIJFF D A, et al. Using sound location to monitor farrowing in sows[J]. Animals, 2023, 13(22):3538.

DOI

[164]
PEDERSEN K, KRISTENSEN C S, KVISGAARD L K, et al. Impacts of quarterly sow mass vaccination with a porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus type 1 (PRRSV-1) modified live vaccine in two herds[J]. Vaccines, 2021, 9(10):1057.

DOI

[165]
PLEGUEZUELOS P, SIBILA M, CUADRADO R, et al. Exploratory field study on the effects of porcine circovirus 2 (PCV-2) sow vaccination at different physiological stages mimicking blanket vaccination[J]. Porcine Health Management, 2021, 7(1):35.

DOI PMID

[166]
RYT-HANSEN P, NIELSEN H G, SØRENSEN S S, et al. The role of gilts in transmission dynamics of swine influenza virus and impacts of vaccination strategies and quarantine management[J]. Porcine Health Management, 2022, 8(1):19.

DOI

[167]
JIANG L, YU Z Z, ZHAO W D, et al. Self-assembled MXene-Au multifunctional nanomaterials with various shapes for label-free SERS detection of pathogenic bacteria and photothermal sterilization[J]. Analytical Chemistry, 2023, 95(2):1721-1730.

[168]
CHEN Q, SONG Y L, WU Q T, et al. Dietary Angelica sinensis enhances sow lactation and piglet development through gut microbiota and metabolism[J]. Veterinary Sciences, 2025, 12(4):370.

DOI

[169]
HONG C M, HUANG Y J, YANG G, et al. Maternal resveratrol improves the intestinal health and weight gain of suckling piglets during high summer temperatures:the involvement of exosome-derived microRNAs and immunoglobin in colostrum[J]. Animal Nutrition, 2024, 17:36-48.

DOI

[170]
CHAI J, WEN Z H, CHEN L, et al. Multi-omics analysis of chronic heat stress-induced biological effects,liver injury,and heat tolerance mechanisms via oxidative and anti-inflammatory pathways in early-pregnancy sows[J]. Antioxidants, 2025, 14(6):623.

DOI

[171]
KAUR S, SINGH A K, HONPARKHE M, et al. Effect of flaxseed supplementation in the maternal diet during early lactation on the oxidative status of sows and growth of piglets[J]. Indian Journal of Animal Reproduction, 2023, 44(2):18-26.

DOI

Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉

京ICP备17050989号-2
Copyright © Chinese Journal of Animal Nutrition, All Rights Reserved.
Tel: 010－62817823　E-mail: cjan@vip.163.com
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co., Ltd.