1. Projeto Financiado pelo Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico(CNPq)
2. Graduando de Zootecnia-UFRPE, Recife-PE. E-mail: clmarquezin@yahoo.com.br
3. Pofessor do Departamento de Zootecnia- UFRPE, Recife-PE. E-mail: dutrajr@ufrpe.br
4. Biologa, UFRPE, Recife-PE. E-mail: anac.souto@bol.com.br
5. Graduando de Agronomia -UFRPE, Recife-PE. E-mail: clemensonsaire@.com.br

Resumo: Realizou-se visitas in loco a 140 propriedades da região Agreste de Pernambuco distribuídas nos núcleos: urbano e rural. Os tipos de instalação utilizados em 22,14 % dos planteis tinham áreas de reprodução, 7,14 % tinham instalações para gestação, 10,71 % tinham lactação/maternidade, 10 % tinham desmame/creche, 65,7 % tinham terminação, 2,86 % das propriedades criavam os animais soltos, 0,71 % tinham embarcadouro, 7,14 % tinham a instalação em galpões, 14,28 % tinham instalações multiuso, 0,71 % tinham fabrica de ração e 9,28 % tinham piquetes a pasto. Constatou-se que 80,71 % tinham o piso de cimento, 3,57 % tinham piso de pedra, 10 % tinham piso de barro, 2,85 % tinham o piso de pedra e cimento e 2,85 % tinham piso de barro e cimento. No telhado 50 % eram de telha de barro, 26,43 % eram telha de cimento amianto, 1,43 % eram de palha de coqueiro, 3,57 % tinham as instalações cobertas com lonas plásticas, 6,43 % eram de barro e cimento amianto, 9,28 % eram descoberto, 0,71 % tinham o telhado com lona e telha de barro, 0,71 % tinham como lona e telha de cimento amianto e 1,43 % tinham o telhado de lata. As paredes 83,57 % eram de alvenaria, 4,29 % eram de madeiras, 1,43 % eram de ferro, 2,86 % eram de arame e 7,85 % eram de alvenaria e madeira. Os grandes problemas encontrados nas criações foram os relacionados à falta de infraestrutura e conhecimentos técnicos dos produtores.

Palavras-chave: creche, piso, paredes, suínos, telhado.

Profile of suinocultura with relationship to the types of facilities is material used in the construction, rural area of Pernambuco 1

Abstract: Whare visits in loco to 140 properties of the Agrestic Region of Pernambuco distributed in the nuclei: urban and rural. The types of installation 22,14% of the farmer had reproduction service, 7,14% had facilities for gestation, 10,71% had lactação/maternidade, 10% had desmame/creche, 65,7% had termination, 2,86% of the properties created the free animals, 0,71% had wharf, 7,14% had the installation in hangars, 14,28% had as multiuso, 0,71% had it manufactures of ration and 9,28% had pickets to I graze on. It was verified that 80,71% had the cement floor, 3,57% had stone floor, 10% had mud floor, 2,85% had the stone floor and cement and 2,85% had mud floor and cement. In the roof 50% they were of mud tile, 26,43% were tile of cement amianthus, 1,43% were of coconut tree straw, 3,57% had the facilities covered with plastic canvases, 6,43% were made of mud and I cement amianthus, 9,28% were discovered, 0,71% had the roof with canvas and it roofs of mud, 0,71% had as canvas and it roofs of cement amianthus and 1,43% had the can roof. The walls 83,57% were of masonry, 4,29% were made of wood, 1,43% were made of iron, 2,86% were of wire and 7,85% were made of masonry and wood. The great problems found in the creations they are related to the infrastructure lack and technical knowledge of the producers.

Keywords: day care, floor, walls, swines, roof.

Artigo na Íntegra

Associe-se ou efetue o login de associado para baixar o artigo na íntegra (PDF).