Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T07:40:16.100Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A note on the effect of white-flowered peas on sow reproductive performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. B. Ogle  and
K. Annér
R. B. Ogle
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, S-750 07, Uppsala, Sweden
K. Annér
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, S-750 07, Uppsala, Sweden
Get access

Abstract

The effect on sow reproductive performance of including 100 g white-flowered peas (Pisum sativum hortense, cv. Vreta and Lotta) per kg, replacing barley, wheat and soya-bean meal in gestation and lactation diets, was studied over four parities using 24 pairs of crossbred littermate sows. Net sow weight gains and changes in backfat thickness over the complete reproductive cycle were similar for both treatments. Piglet live-weight gains and mean litter size at birth were not influenced by treatment, although litter size at weaning was 0·5 pigs higher (P > 0·05) for the control sows, due to higher post-natal mortality rate in the litters from the sows given the pea diets. It can be concluded that inclusion of white-flowered peas at a rate of 100 g/kg had no adverse effect on reproductive performance, with the exception of slightly higher post-natal piglet mortality.

Keywords

peasreproductionsows
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 56 , Issue 1 , February 1993 , pp. 155 - 158
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1993

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. 1977. Official methods of analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (ed. Horwitz, W.). Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Bingefors, S. 1975. Om antinutritionella substanser i ärter. Sveriges utsädesförenings Tidskrift 85: 211–219.Google Scholar
Christiansen, M. P., Bach-Knudsen, K. E., Jacobsen, I. and Eggum, B. O. 1985. Naeringsvaerden i forskellige aertsorter. Meddelelse 587, Statens Husdyrbrugsforsog, Kobenhavn.Google Scholar
Gatel, F., Grosjean, F. and Leuillet, M. 1988. Utilization of white-flowered smooth-seeded spring peas (Pisum sativum hortense, cv Amino) by the breeding sow. Animal Feed Science and Technology 22: 91–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Håkansson, J. and Agerhem, H. 1987. Foder - och matärter till slaktsvin. Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet, konsulentavdelningens rapporter, husdjur 65.Google Scholar
Hansen, V. and Wulff, J. 1972. Aerter som foder till slakterisvin. Afskallede aerter og afskallede hestebonner. 397, Beretning fra forsogslaboratoriet Statens Husdyrbrugsudvalg KobenhaunGoogle Scholar
Hlödversson, R. 1987. Comparison of the nutritive value of dark and white flowered cultivars of peas for growing finishing pigs. Swedish journal of Agricultural Research 17: 97–101.Google Scholar
Landsudvalget for svin. 1989. Aerter till soer. Meddelelse 153. Danske slagterier, Axelborg, Kobenhavn.Google Scholar
Leterme, P., Beckers, Y. and Thewis., A. 1990. Trypsin inhibitors in peas: varietal effect and influence on digestibility of crude protein by growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 29: 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linneman, F., Laursen, B., Danielsen, V. and Nielsen, H. E. 1975. Aerter til draegtige og digivende soer. Meddelelse 27, Statens Husdyrbrugsforsog, Kobenhavn.Google Scholar
Sjödin, J., Mårtensson, P. and Magyarosi, T. 1981. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1985 SAS User's Selection for antinutritional substances in field beans (Vicia Faba L). Zeitschrift fur Pflanzenzuchtung 86: 231–247.Google Scholar
Skorkin, G. K. 1965. Effect of peas on the digestibility of the rations and metabolism in pregnant sows. Zvinotnovodstvo 7: 63–74.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1985 SAS User's Guide. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
Suomi, K 1985 Palkokasvit emakoiden rehuna. Koetoiminta ja käytäntö 42: 43.Google Scholar