Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T09:04:49.021Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison between feeding a single diet or phase feeding a series of diets, with either the same or reduced crude protein content, to growing finishing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

M. K. O'Connell ,
P. B. Lynch  and
J. V. O'Doherty
M. K. O'Connell
Affiliation:
Pig Production Department, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland Department of Animal Science, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
P. B. Lynch
Affiliation:
Pig Production Department, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland
J. V. O'Doherty*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
*
†Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Abstract A study was designed to determine if pig performance and lysine conversion ratio would be improved by phase feeding a series of diets with either the same, or with reduced overall mean crude protein (lysine) content, compared with providing a single diet throughout the growing-finishing period. Four hundred and forty-eight group-penned pigs (no. = 32 groups) were assigned at random to one of four treatments: single diet (SD: 11·1 g lysine per kg), high lysine (HL: 12·2, 11·6, 11·1, 10·5 and 10·0 g lysine per kg), medium lysine (ML: 11·1, 10·5, 10·0, 9·5 and 8·9 g lysine per kg) and low lysine series of diets (LL: 10·0, 9·5, 8·9, 8·4 and 7·8 g lysine per kg). The mean lysine contents of the treatments were 11·1, 11·1, 10·0 and 8·9 g/kg for SD, HL, ML and LL respectively. There were five 2-week phases from 38·3 kg to slaughter at 97·3 kg live weight. LL pigs had lower carcass average daily gain (709 v. 742 g/day; P < 0·05) and poorer carcass FCR (P < 0·05: 2·95 v. 2·84 kg/kg) than SD pigs. Daily lysine intake was lower for pigs on HL (P < 0·05: 22·5 g/day), ML (P < 0·001: 20·9 g/day) and LL (P < 0·001: 18·2 g/day) compared with SD (23·4 g/day). Live weight lysine conversion ratio was better for HL (P < 0·05: 26·9 g/kg), ML (P < 0·001: 24·5 g/kg) and LL (P < 0·001: 22·6 g/kg) pigs compared with SD pigs (27·6 g/kg), but carcass lysine conversion ratio was only better for pigs on the ML (P < 0·001: 27·9 g/kg) and LL (P < 0·001: 25·7 g/kg) treatments compared with SD (31·6 g/kg). Nitrogen intake was lower for LL pigs than SD pigs (P < 0·001: 3·45 v. 4·03 kg). Estimated nitrogen excretion was lower for ML (P < 0·01: 2·16 kg) and LL (P < 0·001: 1·85 kg) pigs than SD pigs (2·47 kg). Nitrogen deposition rate was lower for pigs on the LL compared with the SD treatment (P < 0·05: 22·3 v. 23·2 g/day). Although phase feeding diets with the same mean lysine content (11·1 g/kg) as a single diet over the growing-finishing period resulted in similar pig performance, reduced overall daily lysine intake and improved lysine conversion ratio, there was no effect on carcass characteristics or carcass lysine conversion ratio. Reducing the overall mean lysine content to either 10·0 or 8·9 g/kg improved lysine conversion ratio and reduced nitrogen excretion. However, reducing the overall mean lysine content of the diet to 8·9 g/kg had a negative effect on pig growth performance.

Keywords

lysinenitrogen metabolismpigs
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 81 , Issue 2 , October 2005 , pp. 297 - 303
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1990. Official methods of analysis (15th edition). AOAC, Arlington, VA.Google Scholar
Batterham, E. S., Giles, L. R. and Dettmann, E. B. 1985. Amino acid and energy interactions in growing pigs. 1. Effects of food intake, sex and live weight on the responses of growing pigs to lysine concentration. Animal Production 40: 331–343.Google Scholar
Bikker, P., Verstegen, M. W. A. and Bosch, M. W. 1994. Amino acid composition of growing pigs is affected by protein and energy intake. Journal of Nutrition 124: 1961–1969.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boisen, S., Fernandez, J. A. and Madsen, A. 1991. Studies on the ideal protein requirement of pigs from 20 to 95 kg live weight. Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition, Herning, Denmark, 9–14 06 1991, pp. 299–302.Google Scholar
Campbell, R. G., Taverner, M. R. and Curic, D. M. 1988. The effects of sex and live weight on the growing pig's response to dietary protein. Animal Production 46: 123–130.Google Scholar
dit Bailleul, P. J., Rivest, J., Dubeau, F. and Pomar, C. 2001. Reducing the nitrogen excretion in pigs by modifying the traditional least-cost formulation algorithm. Livestock Production Science 72: 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Agriculture and Food (Ireland). 1994. European Communities (pig carcass grading) (amendment) Regulations SI 216. Irish Statue Book database. S. I. no. 365/1988: Pig Carcase (Grading) Regulations, 1988.Google Scholar
European Communities ( Marketing of Feedingstuffs). 1984a. Regulation, part 4 (oils and fats, 4·1 determination of crude oils and fats, 5·2 method B). Department of Agriculture and Food, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
European Communities ( Marketing of Feedingstuffs). 1984b. Regulation S. I. no. 200 part 1 (moisture 2·1 and ash 6·1). Department of Agriculture and Food, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
European Communities ( Marketing of Feedingstuffs). 1993. Regulation S. I. no. 261 (crude fibre determination). Department of Agriculture and Food, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
Fabian, J., Chiba, L. I., Kuhlers, D. L., Frobish, L. T., Nadarajah, K., Kerth, C. R., McElhenney, W. H. and Lewis, A. J. 2002. Degree of amino acid restrictions during the grower phase and compensatory growth in pigs selected for lean growth efficiency. Journal of Animal Science 80: 2610–2618.Google ScholarPubMed
Fabian, J., Chiba, L. I., Frobish, L. T., McElhenney, W. H., Kuhlers, D. L. and Nadarajah, K. 2004. Compensatory growth and nitrogen balance in grower-finisher pigs. Journal of Animal Science 82: 2579–2587.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friesen, K. G., Nelssen, J. L., Goodband, R. D., Tokach, M. D., Unruh, J. A., Kropf, D. H. and Kerr, B. J. 1994. Influence of dietary lysine on growth and carcass composition of high-lean-growth gilts fed from 34 to 72 kilograms. Journal of Animal Science 72: 1761–1770.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuller, M. F., Franklin, M. F., McWilliam, R. and Pennie, K. 1995. The responses of growing pigs of different sex and genotype, to dietary energy and protein. Animal Science 60: 291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, B. P. 1998. Phase-feeding: effects on production efficiency and meat quality. MLC Livestock and Meat Science Department Technical Division, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
Greef, K. H. de and Verstegen, M. W. A. 1993. Partitioning of protein and lipid deposition in the body of growing pigs. Livestock Production Science 35: 317–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, I. K., Kim, J. H., Chu, K. S., Xuan, Z. N., Sohn, K. S. and Kim, M. K. 1998. Effect of phase-feeding on the growth performance and nutrient utilisation in finishing pigs. American Journal of Animal Science 11: 559–565.Google Scholar
Jongbloed, A. W. and Lenis, N. P. 1992. Alteration of nutrition as a means to reduce environmental pollution by pigs. Livestock Production Science 31: 75–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanis, E. 1990. Effect of food intake capacity on production traits in growing pigs with restricted feeding. Animal Production 50: 333–341.Google Scholar
Kerr, B. J., McKeith, F. K. and Easter, R. A. 1995. Effect on performance and carcass characteristics of nursery to finisher pigs fed reduced crude protein, amino acid-supplemented diets. Journal of Animal Science 73: 433–440.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kyriazakis, I. and Emmans, G. C. 1991. Diet selection in pigs: dietary choices made by growing pigs following a period of underfeeding with protein. Animal Production 52: 337–346.Google Scholar
Latimer, P. and Chatelier, C. 1992. Effect of three strategies of protein supply on performances and slurry production in fattening pigs. Journal of French Pig Research 24: 227–236.Google Scholar
Lee, J. H., Kim, J. D., Kim, J. H., Jin, J. and Han, I. K. 2000. Effect of phase-feeding on the growth performance, nutrient utilisation and carcass characteristics in finishing pigs. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science 13: 1137–1146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leek, A. B. G. 1999. The lysine: energy requirements of the growing and finishing pig: the effect of feeding strategy on growth performance and carcass characteristics. M. Sc. (Agric), National University of Ireland.Google Scholar
Lenis, N. P. 1989. Lower nitrogen excretion in pig husbandry by feeding: current and future possibilities. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 37: 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynch, P. B., Allen, P. and Lawlor, P. 1998. Comparison of sirelines for production of slaughter pigs. End of project report 4129/4130, Teagasc, Ireland.Google Scholar
Noblet, J., Henry, Y. and Dubois, S. 1987. Effect of protein and lysine levels in the diet on body gain composition and energy utilisation in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 65: 717–726.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 2001. Statistical analysis systems. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Susenbeth, A. 1995. Review. Factors affecting lysine utilization in growing pigs: an analysis of literature data. Livestock Production Science 43: 193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Therkildsen, M., Riis, B., Karlsson, A., Kristensen, L., Ertbjerg, P., Purslow, P. P., Dall Aaslyng, M. and Oksbjerg, N. 2002. Compensatory growth response in pigs, muscle protein turn-over and meat texture: effects of restriction/realimentation period. Animal Science 75: 367–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tokach, M., Dritz, S., Goodband, B. and Nelssen, J. 1999. Phase-feeding of finishing pigs. http: //www.teagasc.ie/publications/pig1999/paper06.htm accessed 19/01/04.Google Scholar
Tuitoek, J. K., Young, L. G., De Lange, C. F. M. and Kerr, B. J. 1997. Body composition and protein and fat accretion in various body components in growing gilts fed diets with different protein levels but estimated to contain similar levels of ileal protein. Journal of Animal Science 75: 1584–1590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whang, K. Y., Kim, S. W., Donovan, S. M., McKeith, F. K. and Easter, R. A. 2003. Effects of protein deprivation on subsequent growth performance, gain of body components, and protein requirements in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 81: 705–716.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whittemore, C. T., Green, D. M. and Knap, P. W. 2001. Technical review of the energy and protein requirements of growing pigs: protein. Animal Science 73: 363–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, C. T., Hazzledine, M. J. and Close, W. H. 2003. Nutrient requirement standards for pigs. British Society of Animal Science, Penicuik.Google Scholar
Yen, H. T., Cole, D. J. A. and Lewis, D. 1986. Amino acid requirements of growing pigs. 8. The response of pigs from 50 to 90 kg live weight to dietary ideal protein. Animal Production 43: 155–165.Google Scholar