Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T23:15:53.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of progressive feed restriction on the growth and carcass composition of pigs: comparative responses of gilts and castrates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

M. F. Fuller  and
R. M. Livingstone
M. F. Fuller
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
R. M. Livingstone
Affiliation:
Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A barley-based diet, containing 16% protein, was given at average daily rates of 1·2–2·5 kg (16–32 MJ, metabolizable energy (ME)) to 32 female and 32 castrated male pigs during their growth from 25 to 90 kg. At high intakes there was no difference in growth rate between the sexes, but with progressive feed restriction the growth of males was more severely retarded than that of the females. Both sexes achieved their minimum feed conversion ratios at approximately 25 MJ. The reductions of fat thickness with progressive feed restriction were greater by approximately 20% in the females than in the males. The two sexes had the same mean back fat thickness when the gilts had 4·7 MJ more ME per day than the castrates. It was inferred that the energy requirement for maintenance was 15% greater in the males than in the females.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 91 , Issue 2 , October 1978 , pp. 337 - 341
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

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

Agricultural Research Council (1967). The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock, No. 3, Pigs. London: Agricultural Research Council.Google Scholar
Franke, E.-R. & Weniger, J. H. (1958). Der Stickstoff-, Kohlenstoff- und Energiegehalt des Fleisches und der Wannerwert des Fettes verschiedener Nutztierarten. Archivfilr Tierernahrung 8, 81–94.Google Scholar
Fuller, M. F. & Livingstone, R. M. (1975). The responses in the growth and carcass quality of gilts and castrates to progressive reductions in food intake. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production 4, 117 (new series).Google Scholar
Garrett, W. N. (1970). The influence of sex on the energy requirements of cattle for maintenance and growth. In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals (ed. by Schürch, A. & Wenk, C.). European Association for Animal Production, publication no. 13, pp. 101–104.Google Scholar
Harrington, G. (1958). Pig Carcass Evaluation. Technical Communication of the Commonwealth Bureau of Animal Breeding and Genetics, no. 12, p. 5.Google Scholar
Houseman, R. A. (1972). Estimation of body composition in the living pig. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Kotarbinska, M. (1969). Badania nad Przemiana Energii u Rosnacych Swin. Wlasne Institut Zootechniki, Wroclaw, no. 238.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission (1971). Pig Carcass Classification. M.L.C.Google Scholar
Rattray, P. V., Garrett, W. N., Hlnman, N. & Garcia, I. (1973). A system for expressing the net energy requirement and net energy content of feeds for young sheep. Journal of Animal Science 36, 115–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharma, V. D., Young, L. G., Smith, G. C. & Saison, R. (1972). Effects of crossbreeding and sex on energy requirements and utilization by young pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 52, 751–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanschoubroek, F., De Wilde, R. & Lampo, Ph. (1967). The quantitative effects of feed restriction in fattening pigs on weight gain, efficiency of feed utilization and baekfat thickness. Animal Production 9, 67–74.Google Scholar