Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T22:12:06.974Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of energy intake and dietary protein on nitrogen retention, growth performance, body composition and some aspects of energy metabolism of baby pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

R. G. Campbell  and
A. C. Dunkin
R. G. Campbell
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia
A. C. Dunkin
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, 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. The effects of level of feeding of either a protein-adequate or a protein-deficient diet on nitrogen retention (NR), growth performance, body composition and some aspects of energy utilization in pigs growing from 1·8 to 6·5 kg live weight (LW) were investigated in two experiments.

2. In Expts 1 and 2 piglets were given a protein-adequate diet at four levels of intake (0·93, 1·44, 1·83 and 2·30 MJ gross energy (GE)/kg LW0·75 per d) and a protein-deficient diet at five levels of intake (1·14, 1·38, 1·68, 1·95 and 2·30 MJ GE/kg LW0·75 per d) respectively.

3. For pigs given the protein-adequate diet (Expt 1) NR was linearly (P < 0·001) related to energy intake (EI) and independent of N intake (NI). NR in pigs given the protein-deficient diet (Expt 2) was linearly (P < 0·001) related to NI and independent of EI.

4. Average daily LW gain responded linearly to increases in EI in both experiments. However, at equivalent levels of EI pigs given the protein-adequate diet exhibited more rapid and efficient growth than those given the protein-deficient diet. The results also indicated an interaction between the effects of EI and dietary protein content for feed conversion efficiency.

5. Body fat at 6·5 kg LW increased in a curvilinear fashion with increasing EI in both experiments. However, over the range of EI tested (from approximately 1·8 to 4·6 times energy for maintenance) body fat increased by 153% in Expt 1 and by only 27% in Expt 2. Pigs given the protein-deficient diet were also markedly fatter than those given the protein-adequate diet. Body protein at 6·5 kg LW decreased (P < 0·01) with increasing EI in Expt 1 but was unaffected by EI in Expt 2.

6. As estimated by multiple regression analysis, the values for the efficiency of energy utilization for protein (kp) and fat (kf) deposition were 0·76 and 0·78 respectively in Expt 1 and 0·42 and 0·89 resepctively in Expt 2. The estimates of metabolizable energy required for maintenance were 445 and 532 kJ/kg LW0·75 per d for Expts 1 and 2 respectively.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , March 1983 , pp. 221 - 230
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1983

References

REFERENCES

Agricultural Research Council (1967). The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock, No. 3, Pigs. London: Agricultural Research Council.Google Scholar
Black, J. L. (1974). Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 20, 211.Google Scholar
Black, J. L. & Griffiths, D. A. (1975). Br. J. Nutr. 33, 399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. & Wood, W. A. (1952). Br. J. Nutr. 6, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, J. & McCracken, K. J. (1979). Publs. Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. no. 26, 111.Google Scholar
Braude, R. & Newport, M. J. (1973). Br. J. Nutr. 29, 447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breirem, K. & Homb, T. (1972). In Handbuch der Tierernahrung, Vol. 2, p. 547 [Lenkeit, W.Breirem, K. and Crasemann, E., editors]. Hamburg and Berlin: Verlag Paul Parey.Google Scholar
Burlacu, G., Baia, G., Ionila, D., Moisa, D., Tascenco, V., Visan, I. & Stoica, J. (1973). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 81, 295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, R. G. & Dunkin, A. C. (1983). Br. J. Nutr. 49, 109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Close, W. H. & Berschauer, F. (1981). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 40, 33A.Google Scholar
Close, W. H., Stainer, M. W. & Sanz Sampelayo, M. R. (1979). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 38, 47A.Google Scholar
Fuller, M. R., Webster, A. J. F., MacPherson, R. M. & Smith, J. S. (1976). Publs. Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. no. 19, 177.Google Scholar
Jordan, J. W. & Brown, W. O. (1970). Publs. Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. no. 13, 161.Google Scholar
Kielanowski, J. (1965). Publs. Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. no. 11, 13.Google Scholar
Lodge, G. A., Sarkar, N. K. & Kramer, J. K. G. (1978). J. Anim. Sci. 47, 497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCracken, K. J., Eddie, S. M. & Stevenson, W. G. (1980). Br. J. Nutr. 43, 289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manners, M. J. & McCrae, M. R. (1963). Br. J. Nutr. 17, 495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. S. & Payne, P. R. (1963). J. theor. Biol. 5, 398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muller, H. L. & Kirchgessner, M. (1974). Publs Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. no. 14.Google Scholar
Newport, M. J. (1979). Br. J. Nutr. 41, 95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeds, P. J., Fuller, M. F., Cadenhead, A., Lobley, G. E. & McDonald, J. D. (1981). Br. J. Nutr. 45, 539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, C. T., Aumaitre, A. & Williams, I. H. (1978). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 91, 681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, I. H. (1976). Nutrition of the young pig in relation to body composition. Ph.D thesis, University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
Wood, A. J. & Groves, T. D. D. (1965). Can. J. Anim. Sci. 45, 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar