Using an economic simulation model to identify key drivers of profitability and estimate the environmental sustainability impact of immunization against gonadotropin-releasing factor (GnRF) in male and female pigs intended for market.

Environmental sustainability Immunization against GnRF Improvac® Key drivers of profitability

Journal

Research in veterinary science
ISSN: 1532-2661
Titre abrégé: Res Vet Sci
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0401300

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 Jan 2024
Historique:
received: 07 09 2022
revised: 07 01 2024
accepted: 10 01 2024
medline: 31 1 2024
pubmed: 31 1 2024
entrez: 30 1 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

An existing model was used to identify key drivers of profitability and estimate the impact on environmental sustainability when immunizing finishing pigs against GnRF with Improvac®. The model estimated performance and economic differences between immunized (IM) and non-IM pigs from the perspective of producers and packers, based on two recent meta-analyses in male and female pigs. It was populated with data from 9 countries in four continents (Europe, Asia, North and Latin-America). One-way sensitivity analyses (OWSA) were used to define key drivers of profitability. When changing the country specific input data over a range of ±20%, most OWSA did not reverse the mathematical sign of incremental net return between IM and non-IM pigs as calculated in base case analyses. Only the difference in feed conversion rate between IM and untreated female pigs was a key driver of profitability. The parameters with the highest impact on outcomes were similar across countries and expectable (feed costs), or explainable (parameters with statistical differences between IM and non-IM pigs in meta-analyses). In both single-gender herds, Improvac® reduced the environmental impact of pig production by improving feed efficiency (FE), the key driver of environmental burden. In a 50/50 mixed gender herd, IM pigs consumed less feed and gained more weight in 7 out of 9 countries; in the other two countries the FE calculated for the additional weight gain in IM pigs was >1.00, i.e., each additional kilogram of weight gain was associated with less than one additional kilogram of feed consumed.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38290405
pii: S0034-5288(24)00020-1
doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2024.105154
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

105154

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest This study was supported by an unrestricted grant from Zoetis. At the time the study was conducted, Barbara Poulsen Nautrup and Ilse Van Vlaenderen were paid external consultants to Zoetis. ChoewKong Mah and Alvaro Aldaz were employees of Zoetis.

Auteurs

B Poulsen Nautrup (B)

EAH-Consulting, Aachen, Germany. Electronic address: bpn@EAH-Consulting.de.

I Van Vlaenderen (I)

CHESS, Bonheiden, Belgium.

C K Mah (CK)

Zoetis, Parsippany, NJ, USA.

A Aldaz (A)

Zoetis, Parsippany, NJ, USA.

Classifications MeSH