Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T23:31:51.498Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The effects of plane of nutrition and environmental temperature on the energy metabolism of the growing pig

1. Heat loss and critical temperature

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

W. H. Close
Affiliation:
ARC Institute of Animal Physiology, Babraham, Cambridge CB2 4AT
L. E. Mount
Affiliation:
ARC Institute of Animal Physiology, Babraham, Cambridge CB2 4AT
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 heat losses and energy balances of thirty-eight individually housed pigs (initial body-weights 21–38 kg) were measured continuously for periods of 14 d when they were maintained at environmental temperatures of 10, 15, 20, 25 or 30°. At each temperature four levels of feeding were given approximating to once, twice and three times the maintenance energy intake and the ad lib. level. The minimal maintenance energy requirement (M) was calculated to be 440 kJ metabolizable energy (me)/kg0.75 per d at 25°.

2. me intake at the ad lib. level decreased from 1965 kJ/kg0.75 per d at 10° to 1202 at 30°.

3. Heat loss calculated from multiple regression analysis decreased to minimum levels between 20 and 25° 30° was within the hyperthermic zone at each plane of nutrition.

4. The partition of heat loss into its sensible and evaporative components showed that evaporation increased from 25% at 10° to 78% at 30°.

5. Critical temperature was dependent upon food intake and decreased from 23.1° at M to 20.7° at 2M, 18.0° at 3M and 16.7° at 4M.

6. The extra food required to meet extra thermoregulatory heat production per 1° below the effective critical temperature was 0.65 g/kg body-weight per d.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1978

References

Blaxter, K. L. (1977). In Nutrition and the Climatic Environment, p. 1 [Haresign, W., Swan, H. and Lewis, D., editors]. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Breirem, K. (1935). Beretn. Forsøgslab. no. 162.Google Scholar
Close, W. H. (1978). Br. J. Nutr. 40, 433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Close, W. H. & Mount, L. E. (1975). Br. J. Nutr. 34, 279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Close, W. H. & Mount, L. E. (1976). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 35, 60A.Google Scholar
Close, W. H., Mount, L. E. & Start, I. B. (1971). Anim. Prod. 13, 285.Google Scholar
Fuller, M. F. & Boyne, A. W. (1972). Br. J. Nutr. 28, 373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, N. McC., Wainman, F. W., Blaxter, K. L. & Armstrong, D. G. (1959). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 52, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, C. W. & Close, W. H. (1977). In Nutrition and the Climatic Environment, p. 51 [Haresign, W., Swan, H. and Lewis, D., editors]. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Holmes, C. W. & Mount, L. E. (1967). Anim. Prod. 9, 435.Google Scholar
McCracken, K. J. & Gray, R. (1972). Proc. Br. Soc. Anim. Prod. 1, 139.Google Scholar
Monteith, J. L. & Mount, L. E. (editors) (1974). In Heat Loss from Animals and Man. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Mount, L. E. (1974). In Heat Loss from Animals and Man, p. 425 [Monteith, J. L. and Mount, L. E., editors]. London: Butterworths.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mount, L. E. (1976). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 35, 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mount, L. E., Close, W. H. & Verstegen, M. W. A. (1973). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 32, 71A.Google Scholar
Mount, L. E., Holmes, C. W., Start, I. B. & Legge, A. J. (1967). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 68, 47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nehring, K., Schiemann, R., Hoffman, L. & Klippel, W. (1960). Archs Tierernähr. 10, 275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verstegen, M. W. A. (1971). Meded. LandbHogesch., Wageningen p. 71.Google Scholar
Verstegen, M. W. A., Close, W. H., Start, I. B. & Mount, L. E. (1973). Br. J. Nutr. 30, 21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verstegen, M. W. A. & van der Hel, W. (1974). Anim. Prod. 18, 1.Google Scholar