Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:37:46.443Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Physical and chemical composition of the body of breeding sows with differing body subcutaneous fat depth at parturition, differing nutrition during lactation and differing litter size

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. T. Whittemore  and
H. Yang
C. T. Whittemore
Affiliation:
Edinburgh School of Agriculture, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
H. Yang
Affiliation:
Edinburgh School of Agriculture, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
Get access

Abstract

The physical and chemical composition of sows was determined at first mating (no. = 6), weaning the first litter (12) and 14 days after weaning the fourth litter (24). The sows were from 108 Large White/Landrace Fl hybrid gilts allocated in a factorial arrangement according to two levels of subcutaneous fatness at parturition (12 v. 22 mm P2), two levels of lactation feeding (3 v. 7 kg) and two sizes of sucking litter (six v. 10). Treatments significantly influenced the composition of dissected carcass fat and chemical lipid, but not composition of dissected lean and chemical protein. The final body protein mass of well fed sows at the termination of parity 4 was 41 kg, and the total content of gross energy (GE) in excess of 3000 MJ, with an average of 12·4 MJ GE per kg live weight; equivalent values for the less well fed sows were 33 kg and 9·4 MJ GE per kg live weight respectively. The weights of chemical lipid and protein could be predicted from the equations: lipid (kg) = -20·4 (s.e. 4·5) + 0·21 (s.e. 0·02) live weight + 1·5 (s.e. 0·2) P2; protein (kg) = -2·3 (s.e. 1·6) + 0·19 (s.e. 0·01) live weight - 0·22 (s.e. 0·07) P2. On average, sows lost 9 kg lipid and 3 kg protein in the course of the 28-day lactation; these being proportionately about 0·16 and 0·37 of the live-weight losses respectively. Maternal energy requirement for maintenance was estimated as 0·50 MJ digestible energy (DE) per kg M0·75, while the efficiency of use of DE for energy retention was 0·28.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 48 , Issue 1 , February 1989 , pp. 203 - 212
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1989

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, J. D., Britt, J. H. and Kraeling, R. R. 1986 Effect of restriction of energy during lactation on body condition, energy metabolism, endocrine changes and reproductive performance in primiparous sows. Journal of Animal Science 63: 1915–1925.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brooks, P. H. 1982. Feeding the reproducing female. Proceedings of the Pig Veterinary Society 9: 84–112.Google Scholar
Chigaru, P. R. N. and Topps, J. H. 1981. The composition of body-weight changes in underfed lactating beef cows. Animal Production 32: 95–103.Google Scholar
Cole, D. J. A. 1982. Nutrition and reproduction. In Control of Pig Reproduction (ed. Cole, D. J. A. and Foxcroft, G. R.), pp. 603–619. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, R. H. 1987. Nutrition anoestrus in young sows. Pig News and Information 8: 15–22.Google Scholar
King, R. H., Sphirs, E. and Eckerman, P. 1986. A note on the estimation of the chemical body composition of sows. Animal Production 43: 167–170.Google Scholar
Mof, P. W., Tyrrell, M. F. and Flatt, W. P. 1971. Energetics of body tissue mobilization. Journal of Dairy Science 54: 548–553.Google Scholar
Noblet, J. and Etienne, M. 1987a. Metabolic utilization of energy and maintenance requirement in lactating sows. Journal of Animal Science 64: 774–781.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noblet, J. and Etiennie, M. 1987b. Metabolic utilization of energy and maintenance requirements in pregnant sows. Livestock Production Science 16: 243–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmon-Legagneur, E. and Rerat, A. 1962. Nutrition of the sow during pregnancy. In Nutrition of Pigs and Poultry (ed. Morgan, J. T. and Lewis, D.), pp. 207–223. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
Shields, R. G. and Mahan, D. C. 1983. Effects of pregnancy and lactation on the body condition of first-litter female swine. Journal of Animal Science 57: 594–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shields, R. G., Mahan, D. C. and Byers, F. M. 1984. In vivo body composition estimation in non-gravid and reproducing first-litter sows with deuterium oxide. Journal of Animal Science 59: 1239–1246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shields, R. G., Mahan, D. C. and Maxson, P. F. 1985. Effect of dietary gestation and lactation protein levels on reproductive performance and body composition of first-litter female swine. Journal of Animal Science 60: 179–189.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whittemore, C. T., Aumaitre, A. and Williams, I. H. 1978. Growth of body components in young weaned pigs. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 91: 681–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, C. T., Franklin, M. F. and Pearce, B. S. 1980. Fat changes in breeding sows. Animal Production 31: 183–190.Google Scholar
Yang, H., Eastham, P. R., Phillips, P. and Whittemore, C. T. 1989. Reproductive performance, body weight and body condition of breeding sows with differing body fatness at parturition, differing nutrition during lactation and differing litter size. Animal Production 48: 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar