Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T14:54:10.583Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Digestion in the pig between 7 and 35 d of age

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

R. H. Wilson  and
Jane Leibholz
R. H. Wilson
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney, Camden, New South Wales 2570, Australia
Jane Leibholz
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney, Camden, New South Wales 2570, Australia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. In two separate experiments, forty-four pigs weaned at 4–5 d of age were given diets containing milk or soya-bean proteins until slaughtered at 14, 28 or 35 d of age.

2. The retention times of digesta in the stomach and the entire gastro-intestinal tract did not differ between pigs given pelleted diets containing milk or soya-bean protein.

3. Digesta retention times in the stomach were shorter (61 v. 146 min) in pigs given a milk-protein diet in a liquid form than in pigs given the same diet in a pelleted form. The retention times in the whole gastro-intestinal tract were 42.8 v. 29.6 h on the respective diets.

4. The total retention time of digesta in the gastro-intestinal tract increased with age of pigs between 14–35 d of age when given pelleted diets but not when given a liquid diet.

5. The daily amount of digesta flowing through the anterior small intestine was unaffected by the source of protein. Greater endogenous secretions into the anterior small intestine were observed when pigs were fed ad lib. than when fed at 2 g nitrogen (45 g dry matter (DM))/kg live weight0.75 per d.

6. The apparent digestion of DM to the ileum of pigs given milk, isolated soya-bean protein (ISP) (Promine D) or soya-bean meal (SBM) protein at 28 d of age was 0.826, 0.825 and 0.644 respectively.

7. The apparent digestion of DM to the ileum of pigs given ISP (Supro 610) significantly increased with age of pigs from 0.851 at 14 d of age to 0.883 at 35 d of age. No increase was observed for pigs given milk protein.

8. Differences in the digestibility of DM between protein sources were greater to the ileum than over the entire gastro-intestinal tract. The greatest increase in DM digestion from the ileum to the faeces occurred in pigs given SBM (0.644–0.874).

9. Neither the protein source nor age of pigs influenced gastric pH values, the mean value being 4.05. pH increased along the small intestine and was not affected by the protein source or age of pig.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 45 , Issue 2 , March 1981 , pp. 321 - 336
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1981

References

REFERENCES

Badawy, A. M. (1964). In The Role of the Gastro-intestinal Tract in Protein Metabolism, p. 175 [Munro, H. S., editor[. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Braude, R., Fulford, R. J. & Low, A. G. (1976). Br. J. Nutr. 36, 497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braude, R., Newport, M. J. & Porter, J. W. G. (1970). Br. J. Nutr. 24, 827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cranwell, P. D., Noakes, D. E. & Hill, K. J. (1976). Br. J. Nutr. 36, 71.Google Scholar
Cranwell, P. D. & Titchen, D. A. (1976). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 35, 28A.Google Scholar
Decuypere, J. A., Henderickx, K. H. & Bossuyt, R. (1978). Br. J. Nutr. 40, 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downes, A. M. & McDonald, I. W. (1964). Br. J. Nutr. 18, 153.Google Scholar
Entringer, R. P., Blumlee, M. P., Conrad, J. H., Cline, T. R. & Wolfe, S. (1975). J. Anim. Sci. 40, 486.Google Scholar
Faichney, G. J. (1975). In Digestion and Metabolism in the Ruminant, p. 277 [McDonald, I. W. and Warner, A. C. I., editors]. Armidale: University of New England Publishing Unit.Google Scholar
Hamilton, D. L. & Roe, W. E. (1977). Can. J. comp. Med. 41, 241.Google Scholar
Hays, V. W., Speer, V. C., Hartman, P. A. & Catron, D. V. (1959). J. Nutr. 69, 179.Google Scholar
Hecker, J. F. & Grovum, W. L. (1975). Aurt. J. biol. Sci. 28, 161.Google Scholar
Holmes, J. H. G., Bayley, H. S., Leadbeater, P. A. & Homey, F. D. (1974). Br. J. Nutr. 32, 479.Google Scholar
Horszczaruk, F. (1962). Roczn. Nauk roln. Ser. B 80, 115.Google Scholar
Horszczaruk, F. (1971). Biul. Inst. Genet. Hodow. Zwierz. pol. Akad. Nauk no. 21, p. 117.Google Scholar
Ivan, M. & Farrell, D. J. (1976). Anim. Prod. 23, 111.Google Scholar
Iwai, H., Ishihara, Y., Yamanaka, J. & Ito, T. (1973). Jap. J. exp. Biol. 43, 297.Google Scholar
Kidder, D. E. & Manners, M. J. (1968). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 27, 46A.Google Scholar
Kidder, D. E. & Manners, M. J. (1978). Digestion in the Pig. Bristol: Scientechnica.Google Scholar
Kidder, D. E., Manners, M. J. & McCrea, M. R. (1961). Res. vet. Sci. 2, 227.Google Scholar
Kidder, D. E., Manners, M. J., McCrea, M. R. & Osborne, D. E. (1968). Br. J. Nutr. 22, 501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Low, A. G. (1977). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 36, 189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maner, J. H., Pond, W. G., Loosli, J. K. & Lowry, R. S. (1962). J. Anim. Sci. 21, 49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manners, M. J. (1970). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 21, 333.Google Scholar
Rolls, B. A., Porter, J. W. G. & Westgarth, D. R. (1972). Br. J. Nutr. 28, 283.Google Scholar
Searley, R. W., Miller, E. R. & Hoefer, J. A. (1962). J. Anim. Sci. 21, 834.Google Scholar
Smith, H. W. & Jones, J. E. T. (1963). J. Path. Bact. 86, 387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. H. & Hill, W. B. (1967). A. Rep. natl Inst. Res. Dairying, p. 132.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D. & Torrie, J. H. (1960). Principles of Statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.Google Scholar
Tan, T. N., Weston, R. H. & Hogan, J. P. (1971). Int. J. appl. Radiat. Isot. 22, 301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Der Heyde, H. (1969). Rev. Agric. 22, 1419.Google Scholar
Varga, F. (1976). Digestion 14, 319.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. H. & Leibholz, J. (1979). Anim. Prod. 28, 391.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. H. & Leibholz, J. (1981). Br. J. Nutr. 45, 301.Google Scholar
Zebrowska, T. (1973). Roczn. Nauk roln. Ser. B 95, 115.Google Scholar
Zebrowska, T. & Buraczewska, L. (1972). Roczn. Nauk roln. Ser. B 94, 81.Google Scholar
Zebrowska, T., Buraczewska, L., Buraczewski, S. & Horszczaruk, F. (1975). Roczn. Nauk roln. Ser. B 96, 79.Google Scholar