THE BRAZILIAN SWINE INDUSTRY

Maria Nazaré T. Simões LisboaDVM

Campinas São Paulo Brasilnazare@consuitec.com.br

BRAZIL: Great Opportunity in South America

Brazil: Competitive Advantages• Lands availability

• Cost of competitive facilities• Good human resources

• Low production costs (grains)• Good grains production• Strong industrial plant

• PRRS Free• Favorable weather

• Good technology adoption

BRAZILIAN PRODUCTION COST

In Euros $

€ 1,0 – 1,20

SALES COST PER KG OF PIG

In Euros $€ 1,2 – 1,30

Distribution of the Technified Housed Sows

Southeast - 381 thousand dams

Midwest - 273 thousand dams

South - 980 thousand dams

Northeast - 18 thousand dams

North – 2 thousand dams

SC - 420.000RS - 290.000PR - 270.000MG - 241.490SP - 120.000MT- 110.000GO - 100.000MS - 51.749ES - 18.660DF - 11.000CE - 8.000BA - 6.000Other – 7.101Total = 1.654.000

Pork Exports (thousand tons)

Source: ABIPECS, 2011.

Evolution of Pork Brazilian Consumption Per Capita

Beginning of the program to stimulate domestic pork consumption of ABCS (BASP).

Source: ABCS, 2011.

Destination of Pork Production in Brazil in 2007

Destination of Pork Production in Brazil in 2010

Source: ABIPECS, 2011.

83%

17%

Domestic Market International Market

Sows per region in 2010

Source: Abipecs, Sips, Sindicates RS and PR, Embrapa

Number of industrial sows per regionSouthern

RegionSoutheast

RegionMidwest Region

948.055 310.563 216.873

4% increase in 2010

Main Destinations of Brazilian Exports of Pork 2010

Volume: 540.417 ton.

Income: U$$ 1.340.714

Production System of Swine Brazilian Farms

Main producers per category

• Agribusiness;

• Cooperatives;

• Independents

FARMS’ PROFILE Large groups with 26 - 28 weaned/ sow/year Good labor Nº of sow/person between 80 -120 sows The cost of labor is near 8 -12 % in most of the farms Some with costs like 5 – 8%

Several farms are improving their results

Table: Data from farms assisted by Consuitec. Evaluation from the last 12 months (April to March - source Pig Champ).

ISSUES 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Total Born

11,5 11,9 12,7 13,3 14,4 14,8

Born Alive 10,6 10,7 11,7 12,1 13,0 13,3Weaned 9,4 9,5 10,8 11,4 12,0 12,5

PPU - FARM UPL

NATURAL VENTILATION

CONTROLLED VENTILATION

INTEGRATION (SITE 3)

Biosecurity Measures

LABOR QUALITY

The farrowing are assisted in most of

the pig farms

The weaning age is between 21 – 24 daysWeight = 6,0 -7,0 kg

Depending on the region and market, the animals are sold between 90 and 126 kg of weight

CONCLUSIONS• The costs of production in Brazil are very

competitive• There are a lot of opportunities• It is a growing country• It has a population of de 190 million people

and counting• The purchasing power is improving• There is room for more pork consumption in Brazil and in the world

Efficacy and safety of 0.5ml Circovac® in the control of PCVD (Porcine

Circovirus Disease) under Brazilian field conditions.

“A field observation”

BRAZILIAN SITUATIONPMWS is significant in the 2000 decade.Present in all Brazilian territory.In the beginning autogenous vaccines were used for

a long time.In the first program only sows were vaccinated.Currently there are commercial vaccines that are

used in the control programs: Sows and Piglets

PCVD control is based on:– Nutritional strategies;– Medical strategies;– Management strategies, and above all:

• The use of vaccines can contribute to the effective control of Postweaning Multisystemic Wasting Syndrome -> Great benefits:

Increase productivity;

Sanitary control of affected farms.

CONTROL

A Field Observation

Piglets vaccinated at weaning with 0,5ml Circovac® had lower wasting rates and lower field mortality, showing marked

performance improvement of the vaccinated herd

GOAL

To evaluated Circovac® vaccination effect on:– Wasting rate;– Mortality;– Weight Gain;– Lung Lesions.

NOTE: Animals were naturally challenged with porcine Circovirus type 2 (PCV-2)

Materials and Methods

Evaluations were performed with piglets of different ages, from immunization to

slaughter. Results between the vaccinated and control groups were always compared

This study was one of the various evaluations which supported product claim for piglets in

Brazil in 2008

Animals selection

– 1200 piglets were used, divided into two replicates, subdivided into 2 treatments:

»T1 – Vaccinated group (0,5ml Circovac®) at 21 days of age

»T2 – Non-vaccinated group (control group)

Materials and Methods

Farms selection:

– Each replicate was conducted in a farm with history and confirmed PCVD diagnosis

NOTE: Both with mortality higher than 6% in the last 6 months.

For Circovirus disease confirmation, piglets with clinical signs were euthanized and clinical samples were sent to the lab for histopathological and immunohistochemical tests

Materials and Methods

Treatments/Observations:– 1200 animals randomly allocated into two

groups (30 or 15 animals/pen);– DWG (gaily weight gain), mortality and

wasting rates evaluation -> the experimental unity was each animal;

– FC (Feed conversion) evaluation -> the experimental unity was the pen;

– Feed intake, wasting and mortality rates were weekly evaluated.

Materials and Methods

• Productive parameters evaluated:• Weighing at 65 and 138 days of age (R1) and at 0, 47, 70 and 137 days of age (R2)• DWG (Daily weight gain);• FC (Feed Conversion);• Wasting and mortality rates;• Post-vaccine local or systemic reactions.

• Slaughter evaluation:110 animals randomly selected were evaluated at

slaughter. Half of this number corresponds to vaccinated animals

Materials and Methods

RESULTS : TWG R1 & R2

Figure 1. From 21 to 65 days there was no significant weight gain difference. Although at the final, weight animals from vaccinated group (Circovac®) was bigger( 3,09 Kgs), when compared to the control group.

Figure 1. From 21 to 65 days there was no significant weight gain difference. Although at the final, weight animals from vaccinated group (Circovac®) was bigger( 3,09 Kgs), when compared to the control group.

Weight Gain R1

91,1

26,8 26,8

88,1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

65 138Days

Wei

ght

Vac. groupNon vac. group

RESULTS Replicates 1&2 Total Weight Gain R2

Figure 2. In the evaluated period there was no significant weight gain difference. At day 137 animals from the Circovac® vaccinated group had considerable advantage in feed conversion.

Figure 2. In the evaluated period there was no significant weight gain difference. At day 137 animals from the Circovac® vaccinated group had considerable advantage in feed conversion.

6,815,6

32,7

90,1

6,815,6

32,6

89,7

0102030405060708090

100

0 47 70 137

Days

Wei

ght

Vac. groupNon vac. group

AWG in for both replicates

Figure 5. At weaning and nursery there was no significant difference in the ADG. Later there was an ADG of 37 gr/day more meat for the groups of piglets vaccinated with Circovac®, totaling in the study period to 3,09 Kg for the vaccinated group.

Figure 5. At weaning and nursery there was no significant difference in the ADG. Later there was an ADG of 37 gr/day more meat for the groups of piglets vaccinated with Circovac®, totaling in the study period to 3,09 Kg for the vaccinated group.

RESULTS

Average Daily Gain

0,466

0,8760,839

0,466

00,10,20,30,40,50,60,70,80,9

1

21-65 65-138Period

Aver

age

gain

in k

g/da

y

Vac. groupNon vac. group

Wasting rate•The groups vaccinated with Circovac® showed more uniformity in the batches;

•On replicate 1, the vaccinated group had 5,5% vs. 8%;

•The wasting rate for replicate 2 of the vaccinated group was 9,6% vs. 18% reported for the non vaccinated group;

•The reduction for the control group is inclusive due to the fact that vaccinated animals excrete less virus, reducing the environmental challenge.

RESULTS

Figure 6. In replicate 1 there was no significant statistical difference (P>0,05), only numeric. In replicate 2 there was a statistical difference (p<0,05) in the mortality rate between treatments.

Figure 6. In replicate 1 there was no significant statistical difference (P>0,05), only numeric. In replicate 2 there was a statistical difference (p<0,05) in the mortality rate between treatments.

RESULTS

Rate of Average Mortality1200

70 1110

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

100011001200

Tota

l de

Ani

maa

ls

Total AnimalsDeaths in vac. groupDeaths in non vac. group

Mortality Rate

Considering the mortality rate of replicate 1, we noticed only a numeric difference between treatments. In replicate 2 the control group lost 30 animals more than the group of piglets vaccinated with Circovac®.

Considering the mortality rate of replicate 1, we noticed only a numeric difference between treatments. In replicate 2 the control group lost 30 animals more than the group of piglets vaccinated with Circovac®.

• Mortality RateDeaths R1 Deaths R2

Treatment Live Dead Treatment Live Dead

T1 576 24 T1 554 46

T2 565 35 T2 524 76

RESULTS

• Lung Lesions and Pneumonia Rate

Índice de lesões pulmonares

78

63

17

32

05

101520253035404550556065707580859095

Sem lesões lesões

Nº d

e a

nim

ais

ab

ati

do

s

Grupo vacinadoGrupo não vacinado

Figure 7. From the 95 slaughtered animals per treatment, the group of piglets vaccinated with Circovac® had 17,9% of lung lesions vs. 33,7% of the control group.

In the further study of lesions, the vaccinated group had less impairment of lung lobes (lower index of pulmonary hepatization lungs).

Some animals from the control group showed pericarditis and adherence (indicating manifestation of secondary agents)

Figure 7. From the 95 slaughtered animals per treatment, the group of piglets vaccinated with Circovac® had 17,9% of lung lesions vs. 33,7% of the control group.

In the further study of lesions, the vaccinated group had less impairment of lung lobes (lower index of pulmonary hepatization lungs).

Some animals from the control group showed pericarditis and adherence (indicating manifestation of secondary agents)

RESULTS

Local reactions

In the assessment of possible post-vaccine local or systemic reactions, no alteration was observed (behavior and body temperature), as well as lack of appetite.

RESULTS

CONCLUSIONSUnder the conditions that the experiments were conducted it was concluded•Between treatments there was no influence in the performance of piglets at pre´-nursery and nursery stages•Weaned piglets vaccinated with 0,5ml Circovac®

intramuscular rout significantly reduced the wasting and mortality rates;•The vaccination of weaned piglets with 0,5ml Circovac® via intramuscular rout increased the average daily gain in 37gr and improved the feed conversion in 100gr of ration/kg of aggregate meat.

• The vaccination of weaned piglets with 0,5ml Circovac® via intramuscular rout did not cause any systemic or local reaction.

• The vaccination of weaned piglets with 0,5ml Circovac® via intramuscular rout decreased significantly pleural and lung lesions at slaughter.

CONCLUSIONS

Thank you forpaying attention