dr. ken stalder - industry productivity analysis

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYDepartment of Animal Science

U.S. 2007 – 2012 Pork Industry

Productivity Analysis

C. E. Abell1, C. Hostetler2, and K. J. Stalder1

1Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-3150 and

National Pork Board, Des Moines, IA 50325

2013 Pork Academy

Des Moines, IA

June 5 & 6 , 2013


Data Description

Production data obtained from a large U.S.

data record keeping organization

Agreement with the National Pork Board to share limited

information.

Uses:

1. Quantify the annual production levels and variation

associated for several key productivity indicators

2. Establish industry benchmarks for all swine production

phases

Breeding herd

Nursery

Wean – to – finish

Conventional finishing


Data Description

Production data obtained from a large U.S.

data record keeping organization

Agreement with the National Pork Board to share limited

information.

Uses:

3. Quantify seasonal affects associated with the key productivity

indicators

4. Identify research opportunities that would improve the U.S.

pork industry production efficiency


Data description

Statistical process

Industry Trends

Raw means and standard deviations were used

Seasonality evaluation

Linear model was used

Fixed effects

Company

Month

Year

Covariates – for nursery, grow-finish, and wean-to-finish

Start age

Start days

Days in facility

Covariates – Sow farm

Weaning age


Data description cont’

Data (records) reported monthly for each

production phase

Nursery and finishing data –

Monthly averages are based on animals exiting the facility that

month

Sow farm data –

Monthly averages are based on litters weaned in that month


Table 1. Number of companies and farms used in analysis for each facility type by year.a

Year Conventional Finisher Wean-to-Finish Nursery Sow

2007 Companies 29 17 29 31

Farms 849 251 398 507

2008 Companies 46 23 41 39

Farms 1339 385 719 708

2009 Companies 49 20 41 40

Farms 1376 334 679 683

2010 Companies 43 19 36 33

Farms 1350 527 571 526

2011 Companies 44 21 35 33

Farms 1382 775 594 564

2012 Companies 50 28 45 40

Farms 1744 830 796 766

aMore than one farm can be managed by the same company. A farm represents a single production site.


Company / farm summary

Increase in the number of companies and

farms represented

Tremendous increase in the data volume evaluated

Results in improved information and interpretations that

can be made

Companies becoming much more data driven

in their decision making process


Company / farm summary

Grow-finish and wean-to-finish becoming farms

becoming more like their sow farm counterparts

Farm level decisions much more data driven

Continue greater use of data when guiding

company decision process regarding:

Employee

Financial

Health

Nutritional

Genetic

Some combination


Benchmarking - What is it?

Definition of benchmark:

a standard of excellence, achievement, etc., against which similar

things must be measured or judged

(Dictionary.com)

Definition of benchmarking:

the process of using benchmarks to identify areas for

improvement, strategies to achieve improvement and

implementation of those processes

(Common Industry)


Why do we do it?

Compare with other businessesWithin species

Across species

Compare herd performanceWithin company

Within country

Etc.

Set goals for improving herdFor a specific trait or several traits


Overall Averages


Key productivity indicators

Sow farm KPIs

Pigs/mated sow/ year

Litters/mated sow/year

Total born

Still born and mummies

Number born alive

Number weaned

Pre-weaning mortality %

Weaning weight

Weaning age


Key productivity indicators cont’

Nursery KPIs

Nursery mortality %

Nursery out weight

Days in nursery

Nursery feed conversion


Key productivity indicators cont’

Conventional finishers and wean-to-finish

facilities KPIs

Finisher (wean-to-finish) mortality %

Finishing weight

Days in finisher (wean-to-finish)

Finisher feed conversion (wean-to-finish)


Key Productivity Indicator Averages

Means and standard deviations across all

farms and operations.

Sow, nursery, wean-to-finish, and conventional grow-

finish data

Developed to examine yearly trends across the

U.S. Swine industry.

Operations can compare one or a number of

KPIs to see if they are above or below average


Table 2. Conventional finisher average (±standard deviation) productivity from 2007 to 2012a

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Percent

Mortality 6.98 (±5.61) 6.29 (±4.60) 5.12 (±3.44) 4.70 (±3.05) 4.48 (±2.49) 5.03 (±3.30)

Finishing

Weight (lbs) 260.1 (±17.0) 261.2 (±16.1) 265.0 (±14.9) 268.7 (±13.4) 271.5 (±12.8) 269.2 (±14.1)

Days in Finisher 124.2 (±11.0) 125.7 (±11.0) 124.3 (±11.4) 124.6 (±10.3) 122.7 (±9.7) 121.5 (±10.8)

Average Daily

Gain (lbs) 1.71 (±0.16) 1.69 (±0.16) 1.75 (±0.15) 1.76 (±0.14) 1.81 (±0.14) 1.81 (±0.15)

Feed

Conversionb

2.75 (±0.26) 2.82 (0.32) 2.76 (±0.27) 2.77 (±0.25) 2.71 (±0.24) 2.68 (±0.23)

aAll farms were given equal weighting.

bFeed conversion is defined as feed to gain.


Table 3. Wean-to-finish average (±standard deviation) productivity from 2007 to 2012a

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Percent

Mortality 8.25 (±4.64) 7.92 (±4.91) 7.61 (±4.79) 6.30 (±3.55) 6.33 (±3.96) 6.39 (±4.79)

Finishing

Weight (lbs) 262.2 (±12.5) 261.7 (±12.5) 264.2 (±11.0) 270.5 (±13.5) 273.6 (±12.8) 270.1 (±12.9)

Days in Finisher 161.5 (±10.8) 162.5 (±11.4) 164.2 (±10.7) 167.9 (±10.3) 166.4 (±9.0) 164.3 (±9.9)

Average Daily

Gain (lbs) 1.55 (±0.12) 1.54 (±0.13) 1.54 (±0.11) 1.54 (±0.11) 1.57 (±0.10) 1.57 (±0.11)

Feed

Conversionb

2.52 (±0.17) 2.51 (±0.17) 2.54 (±0.18) 2.52 (±0.20) 2.50 (±0.20) 2.50 (±0.18)




Table 4. Nursery average (±standard deviation) productivity from 2007 to 2012a

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Percent

Mortality 4.42 (±4.12) 5.82 (±5.71) 4.68 (±4.41) 4.12 (±3.62) 4.32 (±4.32) 3.80 (±3.01)

Exit

Weight 48.0 (±7.5) 49.0 (±9.2) 49.4 (±8.4) 50.7 (±9.1) 50.3 (±9.3) 50.7 (±8.4)

Days in Nursery 47.1 (±5.0) 47.4 (±6.8) 46.2 (±5.4) 46.2 (±5.5) 46.0 (±6.1) 46.0 (±5.1)

Average Daily

Gain (lbs) 0.76 (±0.12) 0.78 (±0.14) 0.80 (±0.13) 0.82 (±0.14) 0.81 (±0.14) 0.82 (±0.13)

Feed

Conversionb

1.51 (±0.23) 1.54 (±0.30) 1.53 (±0.29) 1.52 (±0.28) 1.53 (±0.25) 1.48 (±0.19)




Table 5. Sow farm average (±standard deviation) productivity from 2007 to 2012a

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Pigs/Mated

Sow/Year 22.6 (±2.8) 22.8 (±2.9) 23.2 (±3.0) 23.5 (±2.7) 24.1 (±3.1)

23.9 (±2.8)

Litters/Mated

Sow/Year 2.36 (±0.22) 2.35 (±0.23) 2.34 (±0.21) 2.33 (±0.20) 2.33 (±0.22) 2.31 (±0.22)

Total Born 12.3 (±0.9) 12.5 (±0.9) 12.8 (±0.9) 13.0 (±1.0) 13.4 (±1.1) 13.4 (±1.0)

Stillborn and

Mummies 1.19 (±0.42) 1.23 (±0.49) 1.20 (±0.46) 1.22 (±0.48) 1.24 (±0.49) 1.17 (±0.46)

Number Born

Alive 11.1 (±0.8) 11.3 (±0.8) 11.6 (±0.9) 11.8 (±0.9) 12.1 (±1.0) 12.3 (±0.9)

Number Weaned 9.5 (±0.7) 9.7 (±0.7) 9.9 (±0.8) 10.0 (±0.7) 10.2 (±0.7) 10.3 (±0.7)

Pre-weaning

Mortality % 14.2 (±5.6) 14.2 (±5.5) 14.5 (±5.6) 14.6 (±5.8) 15.5 (±5.9) 15.5 (±5.7)

Weaning Weight

(lbs) 12.3 (±1.3) 12.4 (±1.3) 12.8 (±1.5) 13.0 (±1.4) 13.1 (±1.4) 13.2 (±1.6)

Weaning Age

(d) 19.5 (±1.7) 19.7 (±1.8) 20.5 (±2.0) 20.8 (±2.1) 20.9 (±2.5) 21.5 (±2.8)



Overall data summary

Finishing mortality has declined over time

while market weight has continued to increase

Improving mortality by 2% for a 1000 hd. finishing

facility would be equivalent to adding $3,240 each barn

turn assuming 270 lb. market hog and $60/cwt.

Days in the finisher have remained relatively

constant over time

Average daily gain has increased slightly over time

Feed conversion has improved slightly across

both finishing facility types


Overall data summary cont’

Nursery performance has change little across

the reporting time period

Pigs/mated sow/ year has increased by almost

2 pigs from 2007 to 2012.

Litters/mated sow/year has changed little

during the time period

Most of the improvement in PSY is a result of improved

litter size

Some of the PSY increase is greater stillborns and

mummies

Number weaned has increased by 0.8 pigs


Overall data summary cont’

Percent pre-weaning mortality has increased.

Represents lost opportunity

Easy to improve??

Weaning age has increased by 2 days from

2007 to 2012.

Weaning weight has increased by 1 lb.


Plots of Averages


Description of figures

Figures 1 -24 graphically depict the change for

the top 25%, overall, and bottom 25% for each

KPI for the 2007 to 2012 time period.

Top 25% represented by red lines

Overall average represented by black lines

Bottom 25% represented by blue lines

More easily view the rate of change for each

KPI across the 2007 to 2012 time period


Figure summary

KPIs are changing at the same direction for all

three groups

Each group slope or rate of change may slightly differ

Examples:

1. Litter size averages have increased at almost the same

rate across the top 25%, overall average, and bottom

25%.

Litter size limit not reached yet for any group


Figure summary cont’

Examples:

2. Percent finisher mortality variation among the 3 groups

has changed substantially across the 2007 to 2012 time

period for the three groups.

Result from increased importance or focus placed on reducing

mortality by owners, barn managers, and barn workers

New vaccines

Better herd health status


Seasonality Estimates


Seasonality graph description

Least squares means were used to obtain the

month estimates using the model previously

described.


Seasonality graph

Graphs clearly show the months when

decreased performance occurs for each KPI

Decreased performance represents substantial

productivity and economic losses for the US

swine industry

Identifying causes and methods to mitigate

seasonality effects on the KPIs would have a

large economic impact on the entire swine

industry.


Seasonality graph cont’

In general lowest finishing performance was

seen during the summer months

Sow farms had the lowest production during

winter months (sows experience hot weather

and then express the effects during the winter

months).

Except for nursery mortality, seasonality has

less impact on nursery performance relative to

other production phases.


Summary

The US swine industry has been successful at

improving production efficiency

Some traits (mortality) still represent future opportunities

Increasing the pounds of pork produced in a given

period of time and reduced finishing mortality has

improved finishing throughput.

Combining improved litter size and pounds of pork

produced, the throughput of the US swine industry has

increased as a whole.


Summary

Key productivity indicator trait improvements may be

the result of –

Better genetics

Improved health

Superior management

Other

The results from this analysis can be used to

determine when management practices need to be

improved and/or maintained to ensure optimal

performance level for each swine production phase.


Thank you for your time and

attention !

Do you have any questions or

comments?

dr. ken stalder - industry productivity analysis

Business

stalder11iowa state

data volume evaluatedresults

andnational pork board

pork academydes moines

production phasenursery

limited information

company decision process

improved information