Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T01:42:21.893Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors affecting voluntary feed intake in pigs. 3. The effect of a period of feed restriction, nutrient density of the diet and sex on intake, performance and carcass characteristics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

D. J. A. Cole ,
J. E. Duckworth ,
W. Holmes  and
A. Cuthbertson
D. J. A. Cole
Affiliation:
Wye College (University of London), Ashford, Kent
J. E. Duckworth
Affiliation:
Wye College (University of London), Ashford, Kent
W. Holmes
Affiliation:
Wye College (University of London), Ashford, Kent
A. Cuthbertson
Affiliation:
Pig Industry Development Authority, Hitchin, Herts
Get access

Extract

1. Over the weight range 23–50 kg live weight, pigs were fed either ad libitum or to a restricted scale. From 59 to 91 kg live weight, eight pairs of barrows and eight pairs of gilts were fed on each of two diets varying in nutrient density. The effects of feed restriction, nutrient density of the diet and sex on voluntary feed intake, performance and carcass characteristics were studied.

2. Pigs which had been restricted grew more slowly and contained less fat and more lean at 50 kg live weight.

3. When restricted pigs were offered feed ad libitum from 59 to 91 kg live weight they ate more and had higher daily intakes of digestible energy than pigs liberally fed in early life.

4. There was evidence of compensatory growth in pigs which had received the restricted diet, but there was no significant difference in feed utilization between restricted and ad libitum pigs. It was concluded that the compensatory growth was largely the result of increased appetite.

5. Pigs finally fed on a low energy diet, in comparison with those on a high energy diet, ate more feed but less digestible energy indicating that appetite was physically limited. Efficiency of conversion of digestible energy to live weight was similar on both treatments. A higher proportion of acetic acid was produced in the caecum of pigs fed the low energy diet. Pigs receiving the low energy diet had lower killing-out percentages not entirely caused by differences in the weight of the gut and its contents. The carcasses of pigs on the low energy diet were leaner than those on the high energy diet.

6. Barrows consumed more digestible energy per day than gilts, required more feed and digestible energy per unit live-weight gain, had lower killing-out percentages, shorter carcasses, larger backfat measurements and smaller eye-muscle areas as estimated by A × B measurements. Barrow carcasses contained less dissected lean and more fat than gilts' carcasses.

7. The results are discussed in relation to other work and it is concluded that voluntary feed intake is influenced by the nutrient density of the diet and the level of energy requirement of the pig, which may be affected by previous nutritional history.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , November 1968 , pp. 345 - 357
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1968

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

REFERENCES

Armstrong, D. G. and Blaxter, K. L. 1957. The utilisation of acetic, propionic and butyric acids by fattening sheep. Brit. J. Nutr. 11: 413–415.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Axelsson, J. and Eriksson, S. 1953. The optimum crude fibre level in rations for growing pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 12: 881–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beacom, S. E. 1964. The influence of sex on the response of self fed pigs to ration dilution during the finishing period. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 44: 281–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohman, V. R., Kidwell, J. F. and McCormick, J. A. 1953. High levels of alfalfa in the rations of growing-fattening swine. J. Anim. Sci. 12: 876–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowland, J. P. and Berg, R. T. 1959. Influence of strain and sex on the relationship of protein to energy in rations of growing and finishing pigs. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 39: 102–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buck, S. F. 1963. A comparison of pigs slaughtered at three different weights. 1. Carcass quality and performance. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 60: 19–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, D. J. A., Duckworth, J. E. and Holmes, W. 1967a. Factors affecting voluntary feed intake in pigs. 1. The effect of digestible energy content of the diet on the intake of castrated male pigs housed in holding pens and in metabolism crates. Anim. Prod, 9: 141–148.Google Scholar
Cole, D. J. A., Duckworth, J. E. and Holmes, W. 1967b. Factors affecting voluntary feed intake in pigs. 2. The effect of two levels of crude fibre in the diet on the intake and performance of fattening pigs. Anim. Prod. 9: 149–154.Google Scholar
Crampton, E. W., Ashton, G. C. and Lloyd, L. E. 1954. Improvement of bacon carcass quality by the introduction of fibrous feeds into the hog finishing ration. J. Anim. Sci. 13: 327–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duckworth, J. E. 1965. The influence of pre-weaning nutrition on subsequent growth and development of bacon pigs. Anim. Prod. 7: 165–171.Google Scholar
Friend, D. W., Cunningham, H. M. and Nicholson, J. W. 1963. The production of organic acids in the pig. II. The effect of diet on levels of volatile fatty acids and lactic acid in sections of the alimentary tract. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 43: 156–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friend, D. W., Cunningham, H. M. and Nicholson, J. W. 1964. Volatile fatty acid and lactic acid content of pig blood. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 44: 303–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, G. C. 1953. The role of depot fat in the hypothalamic control of food intake in the rat. Proc. Roy. Soc. (B) 140: 578–592.Google ScholarPubMed
Lucas, I. A. M., Livingstone, R. M. and McDonald, I. 1961. The effects of growth checks on the performance and carcase quality of pigs. Proc. 8th int. Congr. Anim. Husb., Hamburg.Google Scholar
Lucas, I. A. M., Livingstone, R. M. and Mcdonald, I. 1962. Further observations on the effects of growth checks in pigs of 50 lb live weight and over. Anim. Prod. 4: 195–202.Google Scholar
Osbourn, D. F. and Wilson, P. N. 1960. Effects of different patterns of allocation of a restricted quantity of food upon growth and development in cockerels. J. agric. Sci. Camb. 54: 278–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quimby, F. H. 1948. Food and water economy of the young rat during chronic starvation and recovery. J. Nutr. 36: 177–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, D. W. 1964. The plane of nutrition and compensatory growth in pigs. Anim. Prod. 6: 227–236.Google Scholar
Sheehy, E. J. and Senior, B. J. 1942. Storing cattle at different levels of nutrition. J. Dep. Agric. Eire, 39: 245–262.Google Scholar
Tanner, J. M. 1963. Regulation of growth in size in mammals. Nature, 199: 845–850.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, P. N. and Osbourn, D. F. 1960. Compensatory growth after a period of under-nutrition in mammals and birds. Biol. Rev. 35: 324–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar