This will turn all images back on. Ok?

 

Would you like to always disable images?
(This requires cookies to be enabled.)

 

By coordinator | April 18, 2018
By Keith | February 9, 2018
By Keith | January 18, 2018

OSU Junior Swine Day

OSU  Junior Swine Day – registration form attached.

http://origin.ohiopork.org/media/2018-junior-swine-day/2018-jr-swine-day-brochure.pdf

Saturday, March 24, 2018
OSU Columbus or OSU ATI Wooster

Location ____OSU Columbus ____OSU ATI Wooster

Registration Fee: $10 per person

This form can be used for multiple members of a family. Adults are welcome to register.    Please pre-register by March 16 by sending name(s), address, email and payment to OSU Extension Putnam County.

Mail registration & check to: OSU Extension – Putnam County 1206 East Second St / PO Box 189 Ottawa, OH  45875

Registration is limited. To ensure your registration and your preferred location please mail early.

By Keith | August 26, 2017

OSU Article for Swine Project Members

Dear Stark County 4H Advisors and Friends. Please link to and review the article regarding fairs and keeping the public and swine members safe/healthy.  There is some great information on keeping everyone healthy at county fairs.  Thanks to Dan Biller, 4H Advisor for sharing this important information. Please share with your 4H swine project members and families.

OSU article on being safe and proactive at county fairs regarding swine project members, safety and working with the public.

https://www.morningagclips.com/?s=Osu+swine+flu

Let’s have a great, safe, fun fair while we positively educate the public regarding Ohios number one industry- Agriculture!!

See you at the fair!

David Crawford

By Keith | July 28, 2017

Attention all Swine Exhibitors

From Stark County Fair Board-

Attention all Swine Exhibitors at the Stark County Fair:

Recently in Clinton County, H3N2 (more commonly known as “Swine Flu”) was discovered at the fair.  The Clinton County Fair officials worked with the Ohio Department of Agriculture and State Veterinarian to determine the best course of action to contain a potential outbreak and declared the show a “Terminal” show.  This meant that all hogs went to slaughter after the show and the barn was quarantined.

Stark County Fair has been in contact with the ODA and State Vet.  While we do not anticipate any issues, we must be prepared and the following will take place:
(1)  All swine will be checked by the local veterinarian prior to entering the swine barn.  If an animal is found to be sick at time of unloading, they will be sent home.
(2)  If an animal is found to be sick at the fair, the Stark County Fair and Local Veterinarian will work with state officials to determine the cause.  If H3N2 is confirmed, then the barn will be shut down and the show will be terminal.  This means that any animal in the barn will go to slaughter including open class entries and breeding class entries.
(3)  Signs will be posted in and around the barn on hand washing, no eating/drinking and other good hygiene practices around animals.

The safety of our exhibitors, visitors, guests and general public is of the utmost importance to the fair.  Exhibitors, be aware that if a terminal show is declared, no animal will allowed return home and all swine will go to slaughter.

We look forward to seeing you at the Stark County Fair.

Dale W. Wells, MBA,CHCE

By Keith | March 11, 2016

Swine Health Symposium

The Ohio Swine Health Symposium registration deadline is TODAY March 11th and the Symposium is March 16th. Here is the link for the agenda and registration form: http://origin.ohiopork.org/media/ohio-swine-health-symposium-2016.pdf

By Keith | January 29, 2016

Pork Checkoff Research Review Jan-Feb 2016

ResearchReview

You are receiving this e-newsletter from the Pork Checkoff because you subscribe to other Pork Checkoff information vehicles. You will continue to receive this e-newsletter
about every 60 days unless you wish to opt-out.

Welcome to this issue of
Research REVIEW brought to you by Pork Checkoff. The purpose of this e-newsletter is to give you a user-friendly way to learn more about research funded by the Pork Checkoff, what it means to
the industry, and where to go if you want more information. We hope you find this publication useful. Feel free to forward to others. Archived issues are found

here
.

ANIMAL SCIENCE

Includes pork quality, reproduction, nutrition and genetics

ANIMAL WELL-BEING

Includes animal assessment, handling and transportation, sow housing, euthanasia and animal space requirements

ENVIRONMENT

Includes manure management, air quality, water quality, water use/conservation and carbon footprint

HUMAN NUTRITION

Includes dietary nutrition, food preparation technology and ingredient health implications

PORK SAFETY

Includes pre- and post-harvest safety issues, pathogens and intervention technologies

PUBLIC HEALTH

Includes antibiotic use and resistance, disease transmission, risk assessment and worker health and safety

SWINE HEALTH

Includes domestic and foreign swine diseases, swine ID, biosecurity, disease surveillance and emergency preparedness

Peter DaviesRESEARCHER
SPOTLIGHT:

Dr. Peter Davies

Professor of Swine Health and Production,

University of Minnesota

What is your current role at the U of M? How did your career bring you to the university?

I graduated as a veterinarian from Melbourne University in Australia in 1975, and spent most of the first half of my career outside of academia (practice, government, and international development) in several countries (Australia, New Zealand, the U.K. and
Brazil). I began specializing in swine in 1987, which brought me to Minnesota in 1991 as a research associate in swine health. My first faculty position was at North Carolina State from 1994 to 1999, where I worked mostly on
Salmonella epidemiology. I was recruited to the EpiCentre (a prominent veterinary epidemiology group) at Massey University in New Zealand in 1999, and then returned to Minnesota in 2003, initially
as the Leman Chair (2003–2009).

How long have you been involved in livestock and swine industry research?

Since 1987, predominantly in swine, but also in ruminants and poultry when in New Zealand.

What Pork Checkoff–funded research are you most proud of and why?

Rather than any specific project, the general direction of my work has been to address emerging issues in swine production relevant to public health, with a goal of providing the industry and broader public with a better factual basis for reacting to issues
as they arise. Over 20 years, these projects have mainly been about pork safety. During the 1990s, this was mostly on
Salmonella, but more recently has been about antibiotic resistance. This was brought about to some extent because of Methicillin-resistant
Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in pigs internationally and the entire concern about antibiotic resistance in swine production and human health. While all of these issue are very complex, I like
to think I have made a contribution in integrating and communicating this complexity to constructively support industry responses. For example, my Checkoff-funded research on the impact of intensive production on pork safety (“Intensive swine production and
pork safety” FOODBORNE PATHOGENS AND 8: 189-201, 2011”) is what I consider both comprehensive and objective and documented some of the progress the industry has made in food safety that typically gets ignored (willfully or not) by critics of the industry.

How do pork producers (and fellow researchers) benefit from your research?

Most of the benefit for producers has been indirect as the focus has been less on farm–level issues than on broader pork safety issues. The Checkoff research on
Salmonella carried out by a group of researchers including myself from 1995 onward (Paula Cray, Scott Hurd, Julie Funk, Jim McKean, Peter Bahnson, Wondwossen Gebreyes, et al.) greatly advanced
our understanding of Salmonella at the farm level and helped the industry take a defensible position to not follow the European example of implementing an on–farm
Salmonella control program. Although well–intentioned, the Europeans themselves now realize that this approach has not been cost–effective compared to focusing resources on improving hygiene
at the processing level.

Why do you think it’s important for pork producers to continue to fund swine research?

First, from the researchers’ perspective, funding generally is increasingly difficult to obtain, and Checkoff funding is an important source to attract new researchers into working on problems of importance to the swine industry. The number of swine researchers
has diminished globally and in the U.S., so this funding helps ensure that a critical mass of research expertise is maintained. From the industry perspective, the funding demonstrates a commitment to a science–based approach to problem solving that is important
for communicating industry positions and policies. Furthermore, investment in problems of concern to the broader public (such as food safety or antimicrobial resistance) indicates a commitment by the industry to be part of the solution to these issues.

What else would you like producers to know?

For me it’s simply appreciation to all the producers who have facilitated field research for myself and others over the years. It is always an inconvenience and cost, and potentially a biosecurity hazard) to have people on the farm. Producers are indispensable
partners in applied research and I want them to know that this is valued by the research community.

To view some of Dr. Davies’s work, click

here
.

Study Name: Evaluation of an
in vitro digestibility
procedure for dietary fiber in
high-fiber
feed ingredients fed to growing pigs

Principal Researcher: Dr. Jerry Shurson, University of Minnesota

Key Points:

  • Dietary fiber digestibility affects the concentration of metabolizable energy among sources of corn distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS).
  • In vitro procedures can be used to measure digestibility and fermentability of fiber among corn DDGS sources.
  • Differences in goblet cells and mucin production among pigs fed diets with insoluble dietary fiber suggest the effect on gut physiology and function is related to the fiber
    concentration and source.

Summary:
The objective was to develop and validate a nutritional tool to measure
in vitro digestibility of fiber among high-fiber ingredients. Also to measure changes in gut physiology and function of growing pigs fed diets with different fiber types and concentrations.
We selected DDGS, wheat straw (WS) and soybean hulls (SBH) as feed ingredients with high insoluble dietary fiber levels. We utilized an in vitro dry matter digestibility assay that mimics the
gastric and small intestine hydrolysis and large intestine fermentation of pigs. We fed growing pigs three sources of WS, SBH and DDGS, and observed that apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of total digestible fiber (TDF) was least in WS, intermediate
for DDGS and greatest in SBH. These observations agreed with predictions from the
in vitro gas production results, suggesting that the technique is a reliable way to measure ATTD of TDF. There were large differences in ATTD of TDF among high-fiber ingredient sources. Also,
dietary fiber from these ingredients affects gut physiology and function in a way that is not predicted by the concentration of TDF or non-digestible fiber in the diet. More details on carbohydrate structure and interaction with the gut epithelium are needed
to improve utilization of high-fiber ingredients in growing pigs’ diets.

To learn more, click here.
Click Here

Back To Top

Study Name: Weaning Sows into Groups: Effects on Aggression, Physiology
and Productivity

Principal Researcher:
Dr. Jennifer Brown, Prairie Swine Center

Key Points:

  • No significant differences in aggression, cortisol levels or lameness occurred between three weaned–sow mixing treatments (early, late or pre–socialization).
  • Sows mixed into groups immediately after weaning had improved conception rates and reduced stillborn numbers.
  • Key factors are management, housing sows in static groups and feeding individually.

Summary:
This study compared the effects of three mixing strategies on sow performance. A total of 252 sows were studied over six replicates, in groups of 14 sows
per pen. Treatments involved 1) sows mixed at weaning (early mix = EM), 2) sows weaned into stalls and mixed at five weeks gestation (late mix = LM), 3) sows mixed for two days post–weaning then moved into stalls for up to five weeks gestation and re–mixed
into original groups (pre–socialization = PS). All treatment groups were housed in free–access stall pens in one gestation room. Sows were fed each morning in free–access stalls, after which they were locked out of the stalls, ensuring that sows spent up to
22 hours a day in the loafing area. Aggression, sow welfare and reproductive performance were measured among treatments. Results show the EM treatment had the highest conception rate, followed by PS, with LM recording the lowest. EM also showed a significant
reduction in stillborn piglets. There were no other differences in production performance among the treatments. For the PS treatment, although production levels were acceptable, mixing sows twice did not result in reduced aggression or provide any obvious
advantage.

To learn more, click here. Click Here

Back To Top

Study Name: A Life Cycle Analysis of Land Use

in U.S. Pork Production

Principal Researcher:
Dr. Greg Thoma, University of Arkansas

Key Points:

  • Feed rations exceed all other inputs in land use to produce 1 kg of live swine, and can vary greatly depending on the ingredients.
  • Typical corn/soybean meal rations using optimal synthetic amino acids showed promise to reduce feed cost and land use; however, it had an increased carbon footprint.
  • Tradeoffs between costs and profitability pose challenges in using ration manipulation as a way to minimize land-use impacts.
  • Additional work to evaluate weighted multi–criteria approaches may provide better understanding of the opportunities.

Summary:
The goal was to analyze land use in the production of U.S. pork using Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), which is a comprehensive methodology to quantitatively
analyze potential environmental impacts associated with complex systems. Identifying processes that contribute to high environmental impacts often highlights opportunities for efficiency gains, which can increase U.S. pork’s profitability and sustainability.
This assessment analyzed land use. After a review of existing information regarding land use in agriculture and livestock production, analysis for U.S. pork production was performed at two scales: 1) cradle–to–grave and 2) cradle–to–farm–gate. Cradle–to–grave
provides a scan–level overview of land use associated with the production and consumption of lean pork at an aggregated national level. Cradle–to–farm–gate provides a more granular assessment of the land use required for live swine production. It also evaluates
the use of alternate ration formulation as a tool to reduce its environmental impacts. This report summarizes the results of this project.

To learn more, click here.Click Here

Back To Top

Study Name: Evaluating the Role of Protein in Public Health: A Research
Summary

Principal Researcher:
Protein Summit 2.0 Report

Key Points:

  • Scientific evidence presented at Protein Summit 2.0 supports enhancing high–quality protein intake to achieve positive health outcomes for adults.
  • Recommended to consume 1.0 to 1.6 g/kg/day, which is above the Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) but well within the Acceptable Macronutrient Distribution Range (AMDR) for protein.
  • Evenly distribute protein intake throughout the day (20 to 30 g per meal).

Summary:
Protein Summit 2.0 provided an opportunity for more than 60 food and nutrition experts from several countries to review and discuss the latest research on
protein’s role in human health. Discussions focused on proposed new terminology for protein recommendations. Participants also worked on identifying effective strategies to help health professionals translate protein science to optimize their clients’ protein
intake for health and combat misperceptions. The evidence presented in these reviews underscores the importance of optimal intakes of high–quality protein, as well as distributing protein intake throughout the day to achieve and maintain a healthy body weight,
improve metabolic function and support healthy aging.

To learn more, click here.Click Here

Back To Top

Pork Safety

Study Name: National Animal Health Monitoring Survey for
Toxoplasma gondii
and
Trichinella spiralis

Principal Researcher:
Dr. Dolores Hill, USDA, Agricultural Research Service

Key Points:

  • Pigs with access to the outdoors are at greater risk for acquiring both
    Toxoplasma gondii and
    Trichinella spiralis.
  • Good production practices can be implemented to greatly reduce exposure risk to
    Toxoplasma and
    Trichinella in confinement–raised pigs.

Summary:
The purpose was to determine the national seroprevalence of
Toxoplasma gondii and
Trichinella spiralis in grow/finish pigs using sera collected during USDA’s National Animal Health Monitoring System (NAHMS) 2012 Swine Study. Sera was collected during the voluntary survey
of 202 grow/finish production sites in 13 states, accounting for ~90 percent of U.S. swine production. Data on management practices also were collected. Sera were analyzed for antibodies to
T. gondii and
T. spiralis
using 2 commercially available kits, with 5,688 sera samples tested.
Toxoplasma seroprevalence was found to be 3.79 percent. A single sera was found to be positive for
Trichinella. Further investigation found that sera was collected from a poorly managed farm where pigs were kept outdoors with potential access to wildlife. Previous studies have shown that
increased risk of infection with Toxoplasma is associated with the presence of domestic cats, feral cats and wildlife; swine with access to outdoors; poor swine carcass disposal practices;
and the lack of barn–only boots in infected production sites. Increased risk of infection with
Trichinella is known to be associated with access to wildlife and poor swine carcass disposal practices.

To learn more, click here.Click Here

Back To Top

Study Name: Impact of Cetiofur Use on the Dissemination of Resistant Enteric
Bacteria in Finishing Swine Populations

Principal Researcher:
Dr. Thomas Wittum, Ohio State University

Key Points:

  • Ceftiofur–based products are widely used in finishing pigs.
  • E. coli
    is found widely in manure, but not with resistance genes.
  • Antibiotic use alone is poor predictor of increased resistance genes.

Summary:
The antibiotics Exceed and Excenel are two formulations of the cephalosporin drug, ceftiofur. They are commonly used to treat finishing pigs in the United
States. Our object was to understand the relationship between the use of ceftiofur and the spread of important cephalosporin–resistant genes in swine finishing barns. To do this, we collected about 30 fecal samples from each of 50 finishing barns located in
five states and then tested them for the presence of E. coli or
Salmonella that were resistant to ceftiofur and other important antibiotics. Any isolates resistant to ceftiofur were then tested for specific genes that provide resistance to important cephalosporins.
Of the fecal samples tested, 109 (7.3 percent) were positive for Salmonella, but only two were resistant to ceftiofur. A total of 78.5 percent of the fecal samples contained
E. coli, but only 1.6 percent contained
E. coli or other bacteria with the resistant gene. This result suggests that the spread of resistant bacteria in swine finishing barns cannot be fully explained by simply measuring antibiotic
use. Attempts to reduce resistance will likely require that complex relationships of factors be identified that promote the spread of resistant organisms and resistance genes.

To learn more, click here.
Click Here

Back To Top

Study Name: Identify Genetic Signatures for African Swine Fever Virus Serologic
Group Specificity

Principal Researcher:
Dr. Daniel Rock, University of Illinois

Key Points:

  • Important to African swine fever (ASF) vaccine design and development, viruses within serogroups provide cross–protection.
  • Once viral diversity circulating in natural reservoirs has been determined, vaccines could be developed to address relevant ASFV strains.
  • These factors will facilitate vaccine design, development and emergency use.

Summary:
No ASF vaccine is available; however, vaccination is possible since protection against homologous reinfection has been definitively demonstrated. Vaccine
progress is hindered by lack of knowledge about ASFV strain variation and the viral antigens responsible for protective immunity. Eight ASFV serogroups have been identified, although more likely exist. ASFV is a DNA virus and presents little variability over
time. In this study, we used a collection of serologically grouped ASFV isolates and a large and diverse collection of ASF viruses to identify genetic signature(s) and to define ASFV strain variability. Through gene sequencing and comparative analysis of ASFV
strains, we demonstrated a correlation between the genotype of the ASFV CD2v gene and virus grouping based on serospecificity. This provides a predictive value of CD2v locus genotyping in predicting serologic and potentially cross-protective virus groups.
These results will have broad impact on vaccine–orientated approaches for ASF control. .

To learn more, click here. Click Here

Back To Top

Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea Virus (PEDV) Information

The
National Pork Board has Checkoff-funded research underway right now to help find solutions to PEDV. To get the latest research updates and resources, go to

www.pork.org/pedv
.

Online
Tool for Finding Checkoff-Funded Research

To search for additional Pork Checkoff-funded research studies,

click here.

If you know someone who would like to receive
Research REVIEW or you want to be removed from this newsletter distribution, call the Pork Checkoff Service Center at (800) 456-7675 or email Mike King, editor, at
mking@pork.org


©2016 National Pork Board, Des Moines, IA USA.

This message funded by America’s Pork Producers and the Pork Checkoff.

privacy policy

By Keith | January 25, 2016

Tri-State Sow Housing Symposium

The Tri-State Sow Housing Symposium and the Ohio Pork Congress pre-registration deadline is rapidly approaching. For complete program details and registration information click on this link: http://www.ohiopork.org/pork-council-information/ohio-pork-congress.aspx

By Keith | January 8, 2016

OSU Junior Swine Day

The program agenda and registration information for the OSU Junior Swine Day at OSU Columbus and OSU ATI Wooster on March 19, 2016 is now posted on the Ohio Pork Information Center website.

Registration deadline is March 11, 2016, but space is limited. To ensure your registration and your preferred location please mail early. Please forward to others that you think might like to attend.

Thanks for your past interest in the Junior Swine Day.

 

Welcome!

Have Questions?
Email a committee member.