Energy and protein nutrition of early-weaned pigs. 1. effect of energy intake and energy: protein on growth, efficiency and nitrogen utilization of pigs between 8–32 d | British Journal of Nutrition | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Abstract
References

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 effect of energy and protein intake on the growth, food efficiency and nitrogen retention of artificially-reared pigs was studied over three 8 d periods between 8–32 d of age in an experiment employing a 5×3×2 factorial design. The factors were initial energy: N value (I; 250, 355, 460, 565 or 670 kJ/g N), rate of increase of 1 at 8 d intervals (0, 12.5 or 25%) and plane of nutrition (three times daily to appetite or 75% of this intake).

2. The range of energy: N values was obtained by formulating five diets based on dried skim milk, lactose and casein and feeding appropriate combinations of two diets. The diets, which were pelleted, contained 100 g maize oil/kg and the gross energy content was approximately 20 MJ/kg.

3. N digestibility was high at all three age intervals, reaching 0.99 on the diet containing the highest dietary crude protein (N × 6.25) level. Metabolic faecal N excretion was found to be 1.1 g/kg dry matter (DM) intake.

4. Growth rate, feed conversion ratio (kg food intake/kg wt gain; FCR), N retention (NR) and the proportion of digested N retained (NR:apparent digested N (ADN)) were significantly (P < 0.001) affected by I values at all age intervals and the responses were quadratic. Response curves were calculated by the least squares method and optimum values of I determined for each of the criteria.

A constant energy:N value of approximately 400 kJ/g N was indicated by growth, FCR and NR optima but the NR:ADN value fell from 0.77 for the 8–16 d period to 0.60 for the 24–32 d period at this I value. It is concluded that a suitable compromise would be an I value of 470 kJ/g N increasing by 10%/week.

5. There was a significant interaction between plane of nutrition and I values on FCR between 16–24 d (P < 0.001) and 8–32 d (P < 0.01) indicating that FCR was better at high protein levels and worse at low protein levels when the diets were fed on the lower plane of nutrition.

Information

Type

Papers on General Nutrition

References

Alexander, V. A. W. (1969). Studies on the nutrition of the neonatal pig. PhD Thesis, Edinburgh University.Google Scholar

Bohme, H., Gadeken, D. & Oslage, J. J. (1976). Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod. publ. no. 19. p. 165.Google Scholar

Braude, R., Mitchell, K. G., Newport, M. J. & Porter, J. W. G. (1970). Br. J. Nutr. 24, 501.CrossRef Google Scholar

Eddie, S. M. & McCracken, K. J. (1972). 48th A. Rep. Agric. Res. Inst. N. Ireland, p. 27.Google Scholar

Eddie, S. M. & McCracken, K. J. (1973). Eur. Nutr. Conf., Cambridge, July 1973.Google Scholar

Klatt, G. & Wullbrandt, H. (1975). Archs. Tierz. 18, 47.Google Scholar

Lucas, I. A. M. & Lodge, G. A. (1961). Tech, Commun. Commonw. Bur. Anim. Nutr. no. 22.Google Scholar

McCracken, K. J. & Eddie, S. M. (1973). Eur. Nutr. Conf., Cambridge, July 1973.Google Scholar

McCracken, K. J., Eddie, S. M. & Walker, N. (1979). Anim. Prod. (In the Press.)Google Scholar

Manners, M. J. & McCrea, M. R. (1963). Br. J. Nutr. 17, 493.Google Scholar

Martin, J. & Van der Hyde, H. (1969). Rev. Agric., Brux. 2, 269.Google Scholar

Muller, H. L. & Kirchgessner, M. (1974). Z. Tierphysiol. Tierernähr. u. Futtermittelk. 33, 98.Google Scholar

Nehring, K., Lambe, W., Schwerdtfeger, E., Schiemann, R., Haesler, E. & Hoffmann, L. (1957). Biochem. Z. 328, 549.Google Scholar

Vanschoubroek, F. X., De Wilde, R. & Lampo, P. (1967). Anim. Prod. 9, 67.Google Scholar