Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:40:36.442Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of alginate and resistant starch on feeding patterns, behaviour and performance in ad libitum-fed growing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 August 2014

C. Souza da Silva ,
G. Bosch ,
J. E. Bolhuis ,
L. J. N. Stappers ,
H. M. J. van Hees ,
W. J. J. Gerrits  and
B. Kemp
C. Souza da Silva*
Affiliation:
Adaptation Physiology Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
G. Bosch
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
J. E. Bolhuis
Affiliation:
Adaptation Physiology Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
L. J. N. Stappers
Affiliation:
Adaptation Physiology Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
H. M. J. van Hees
Affiliation:
Nutreco Research and Development, P.O. Box 220, 5830 AE Boxmeer, The Netherlands
W. J. J. Gerrits
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
B. Kemp
Affiliation:
Adaptation Physiology Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This study assessed the long-term effects of feeding diets containing either a gelling fibre (alginate (ALG)), or a fermentable fibre (resistant starch (RS)), or both, on feeding patterns, behaviour and growth performance of growing pigs fed ad libitum for 12 weeks. The experiment was set up as a 2×2 factorial arrangement: inclusion of ALG (yes or no) and inclusion of RS (yes or no) in the control diet, resulting in four dietary treatments, that is, ALG−RS− (control), ALG+RS−, ALG−RS+, and ALG+RS+. Both ALG and RS were exchanged for pregelatinized potato starch. A total of 240 pigs in 40 pens were used. From all visits to an electronic feeding station, feed intake and detailed feeding patterns were calculated. Apparent total tract digestibility of energy, dry matter (DM), and CP was determined in week 6. Pigs’ postures and behaviours were scored from live observations in weeks 7 and 12. Dietary treatments did not affect final BW and average daily gain (ADG). ALG reduced energy and DM digestibility (P<0.01). Moreover, ALG increased average daily DM intake, and reduced backfat thickness and carcass gain : digestible energy (DE) intake (P<0.05). RS increased feed intake per meal, meal duration (P<0.05) and inter-meal intervals (P=0.05), and reduced the number of meals per day (P<0.01), but did not affect daily DM intake. Moreover, RS reduced energy, DM and CP digestibility (P<0.01). Average daily DE intake was reduced (P<0.05), and gain : DE intake tended to be increased (P=0.07), whereas carcass gain : DE intake was not affected by RS. In week 12, ALG+RS− increased standing and walking, aggressive, feeder-directed, and drinking behaviours compared with ALG+RS+ (ALG×RS interaction, P<0.05), with ALG−RS− and ALG−RS+ in between. No other ALG×RS interactions were found. In conclusion, pigs fed ALG compensated for the reduced dietary DE content by increasing their feed intake, achieving similar DE intake and ADG as control pigs. Backfat thickness and carcass efficiency were reduced in pigs fed ALG, which also showed increased physical activity. Pigs fed RS changed feeding patterns, but did not increase their feed intake. Despite a lower DE intake, pigs fed RS achieved similar ADG as control pigs by increasing efficiency in DE use. This indicates that the energy utilization of RS in pigs with ad libitum access to feed is close to that of enzymatically digestible starch.

Keywords

dietary fibredigestibilityfeeding behaviourgrowthpigs
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 8 , Issue 12 , December 2014 , pp. 1917 - 1927
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

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

Achour, L, Flourie, B, Briet, F, Franchisseur, C, Bornet, F, Champ, M, Rambaud, J and Messing, B 1997. Metabolic effects of digestible and partially indigestible cornstarch: a study in the absorptive and postabsorptive periods in healthy humans. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 66, 1151–1159.Google Scholar
Aller, R, de Luis, DA, Izaola, O, La Calle, F, del Olmo, L, Fernandez, L, Arranz, T, Hernandez, JMG 2004. Effect of soluble fiber intake in lipid and glucose levels in healthy subjects: a randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 65, 7–11.Google Scholar
Anderson, GH, Catherine, NLA, Woodend, DM and Wolever, TMS 2002. Inverse association between the effect of carbohydrates on blood glucose and subsequent short-term food intake in young men. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 76, 1023–1030.Google Scholar
Bindelle, J, Leterme, P and Buldgen, A 2008. Nutritional and environmental consequences of dietary fibre in pig nutrition: a review. Biotechnology, Agronomy, Society and Environment 12, 69–80.Google Scholar
Bolhuis, JE, van den Brand, H, Staals, S and Gerrits, WJJ 2007. Effects of pregelatinized vs. native potato starch on intestinal weight and stomach lesions of pigs housed in barren pens or on straw bedding. Livestock Science 109, 108–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolhuis, JE, van den Brand, H, Staals, STM, Zandstra, T, Alferink, SJJ, Heetkamp, MJW and Gerrits, WJJ 2008. Effects of fermentable starch and straw-enriched housing on energy partitioning of growing pigs. Animal 2, 1028–1036.Google Scholar
Bolhuis, JE, van den Brand, H, Bartels, AC, Oostindjer, M, van den Borne, J, Kemp, B and Gerrits, WJJ 2010. Effects of fermentable starch on behaviour of growing pigs in barren or enriched housing. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 123, 77–86.Google Scholar
Bosch, G, Verbrugghe, A, Hesta, M, Holst, JJ, van der Poel, AFB, Janssens, GPJ and Hendriks, WH 2009. The effects of dietary fibre type on satiety-related hormones and voluntary food intake in dogs. British Journal of Nutrition 102, 318–325.Google Scholar
Centraal Veevoeder Bureau 2007. CVB table pigs. Centraal Veevoeder Bureau, Product Board Animal Feed, The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Cole, DJA, Duckworth, JE, Holmes, W and Cuthbertson, A 1968. 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. Animal Production 10, 345–357.Google Scholar
Collins, SM, Surette, M and Bercik, P 2012. The interplay between the intestinal microbiota and the brain. Nature Reviews. Microbiology 10, 735–742.Google Scholar
Darzi, J, Frost, GS and Robertson, MD 2011. Postgraduate symposium do SCFA have a role in appetite regulation? Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 70, 119–128.Google Scholar
De Haer, LCM and Merks, JWM 1992. Patterns of daily food intake in growing pigs. Animal Production 54, 95–104.Google Scholar
De Leeuw, JA, Bolhuis, JE, Bosch, G and Gerrits, WJJ 2008. Effects of dietary fibre on behaviour and satiety in pigs. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 67, 334–342.Google Scholar
Georg Jensen, M, Pedersen, C, Kristensen, M, Frost, G and Astrup, A 2013. Review: efficacy of alginate supplementation in relation to appetite regulation and metabolic risk factors: evidence from animal and human studies. Obesity Reviews 14, 129–144.Google Scholar
Gerrits, WJJ, Bosch, MW and van den Borne, JJGC 2012. Quantifying resistant starch using novel, in vivo methodology and the energetic utilization of fermented starch in pigs. Journal of Nutrition 142, 238–244.Google Scholar
Haenen, D, Souza da Silva, C, Zhang, J, Koopmans, SJ, Bosch, G, Vervoort, J, Gerrits, WJJ, Kemp, B, Smidt, H, Müller, M and Hooiveld, GJEJ 2013. Resistant starch induces catabolic but suppresses immune and cell division pathways and changes the microbiome in the proximal colon of male pigs. Journal of Nutrition 143, 1889–1898.Google ScholarPubMed
Henry, Y 1985. Dietary factors involved in feed intake regulation in growing pigs: a review. Livestock Production Science 12, 339–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higgins, JA 2004. Resistant starch: metabolic effects and potential health benefits. Journal of AOAC International 87, 761–768.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoebler, C, Guillon, F, Darcy-Vrillon, B, Vaugelade, P, Lahaye, M, Worthington, E, Duée, P-H and Barry, J-L 2000. Supplementation of pig diet with algal fibre changes the chemical and physicochemical characteristics of digesta. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 80, 1357–1364.Google Scholar
Jonathan, MC, van den Borne, JJGC, van Wiechen, P, Souza da Silva, C, Schols, HA and Gruppen, H 2012. In vitro fermentation of 12 dietary fibres by faecal inoculum from pigs and humans. Food Chemistry 133, 889–897.Google Scholar
Jørgensen, H, Zhao, XQ and Eggum, BO 1996. The influence of dietary fibre and environmental temperature on the development of the gastrointestinal tract, digestibility, degree of fermentation in the hind-gut and energy metabolism in pigs. British Journal of Nutrition 75, 365–378.Google Scholar
Manocha, M and Khan, WI 2012. Serotonin and GI disorders: an update on clinical and experimental studies. Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology 3, e13.Google Scholar
Martinez-Puig, D, Perez, JF, Castillo, M, Andaluz, A, Anguita, M, Morales, J and Gasa, J 2003. Consumption of raw potato starch increases colon length and fecal excretion of purine bases in growing pigs. Journal of Nutrition 133, 134–139.Google Scholar
Noblet, J and Le Goff, G 2001. Effect of dietary fibre on the energy value of feeds for pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 90, 35–52.Google Scholar
Noblet, J and van Milgen, J 2004. Energy value of pig feeds: effect of pig body weight and energy evaluation system. Journal of Animal Science 82, E229–E238.Google Scholar
Nofrarías, M, Martínez-Puig, D, Pujols, J, Majó, N and Pérez, JF 2007. Long-term intake of resistant starch improves colonic mucosal integrity and reduces gut apoptosis and blood immune cells. Nutrition 23, 861–870.Google Scholar
Nugent, AP 2005. Health properties of resistant starch. Nutrition Bulletin 30, 27–54.Google Scholar
Raben, A, Tagliabue, A, Christensen, N, Madsen, J, Holst, J and Astrup, A 1994. Resistant starch: the effect on postprandial glycemia, hormonal response, and satiety. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 60, 544–551.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Regmi, PR, van Kempen, T, Matte, JJ and Zijlstra, RT 2011. Starch with high amylose and low in vitro digestibility increases short-chain fatty acid absorption, reduces peak insulin secretion, and modulates incretin secretion in pigs. Journal of Nutrition 141, 398–405.Google Scholar
Rérat, A 1996. Influence of the nature of carbohydrate intake on the absorption chronology of reducing sugars and volatile fatty acids in the pig. Reproduction, Nutrition, Development 36, 3–19.Google Scholar
Schrama, JW and Bakker, GCM 1999. Changes in energy metabolism in relation to physical activity due to fermentable carbohydrates in group-housed growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 77, 3274–3280.Google Scholar
Schrama, JW, Verstegen, MWA, Verboeket, PHJ, Schutte, JB and Haaksma, J 1996. Energy metabolism in relation to physical activity in growing pigs as affected by type of dietary carbohydrate. Journal of Animal Science 74, 2220–2225.Google Scholar
Schrama, JW, Bosch, MW, Verstegen, MW, Vorselaars, AH, Haaksma, J and Heetkamp, MJ 1998. The energetic value of nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to physical activity in group-housed, growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 76, 3016–3023.Google Scholar
Shields, R Jr, Mahan, D and Graham, P 1983. Changes in swine body composition from birth to 145 kg. Journal of Animal Science 57, 43–54.Google Scholar
Shriver, JA, Carter, SD, Sutton, AL, Richert, BT, Senne, BW and Pettey, LA 2003. Effects of adding fiber sources to reduced-crude protein, amino acid-supplemented diets on nitrogen excretion, growth performance, and carcass traits of finishing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 81, 492–502.Google Scholar
Souza da Silva, C, Van den Borne, JJGC, Gerrits, WJJ, Kemp, B and Bolhuis, JE 2012. Effects of dietary fibers with different physicochemical properties on feeding motivation in adult female pigs. Physiology & Behavior 107, 218–230.Google Scholar
Souza da Silva, C, Bolhuis, JE, Gerrits, WJJ, Kemp, B and Van den Borne, JJGC 2013. Effects of dietary fibers with different fermentation characteristics on feeding motivation in adult female pigs. Physiology & Behavior 110, 148–157.Google Scholar
Souza da Silva, C, Haenen, D, Koopmans, SJ, Hooiveld, GJEJ, Bosch, G, Bolhuis, JE, Kemp, B, Müller, M and Gerrits, WJJ 2014. Effects of resistant starch on behaviour, satiety-related hormones and metabolites in growing pigs. Animal 8, 1402–1411.Google Scholar
Topping, DL and Clifton, PM 2001. Short-chain fatty acids and human colonic function: roles of resistant starch and nonstarch polysaccharides. Physiological Reviews 81, 1031–1064.Google Scholar
Torrallardona, D and Roura, E (ed.) 2009. Voluntary feed intake in pigs. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaugelade, P, Hoebler, C, Bernard, F, Guillon, F, Lahaye, M, Duee, P-H and Darcy-Vrillon, B 2000. Non-starch polysaccharides extracted from seaweed can modulate intestinal absorption of glucose and insulin response in the pig. Reproduction, Nutrition, Development 40, 33–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wanders, AJ, Jonathan, MC, van den Borne, JJGC, Mars, M, Schols, HA, Feskens, EJM and de Graaf, C 2013. The effects of bulking, viscous and gel-forming dietary fibres on satiation. British Journal of Nutrition 109, 1330–1337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wanders, AJ, van den Borne, JJGC, de Graaf, C, Hulshof, T, Jonathan, MC, Kristensen, M, Mars, M, Schols, HA, Feskens, EJM 2011. Effects of dietary fibre on subjective appetite, energy intake and body weight: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Obesity Reviews 12, 724–739.Google Scholar
Wikoff, WR, Anfora, AT, Liu, J, Schultz, PG, Lesley, SA, Peters, EC and Siuzdak, G 2009. Metabolomics analysis reveals large effects of gut microflora on mammalian blood metabolites. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106, 3698–3703.Google Scholar
Wiseman, T, Mahan, D, Peters, J, Fastinger, N, Ching, S and Kim, Y 2007. Tissue weights and body composition of two genetic lines of barrows and gilts from twenty to one hundred twenty-five kilograms of body weight. Journal of Animal Science 85, 1825–1835.Google Scholar
Woods, SC, Seeley, RJ, Porte, D and Schwartz, MW 1998. Signals that regulate food intake and energy homeostasis. Science 280, 1378–1383.Google Scholar
Zijlstra, RT, Jha, R, Woodward, AD, Fouhse, J and van Kempen, TATG 2012. Starch and fiber properties affect their kinetics of digestion and thereby digestive physiology in pigs. Journal of Animal Science 90, 49–58.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Souza da Silva Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material

Download Souza da Silva Supplementary Material(File)
File 86 KB
Supplementary material: File

Souza da Silva Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material

Download Souza da Silva Supplementary Material(File)
File 31.3 KB