Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T16:11:04.855Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of dietary protein level on milk yield and composition and piglet growth and composition of the Meishan synthetic and European White breeds of sow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

A. G. Sinclair ,
J. M. Shaw ,
S.A. Edwards ,
S. Hoste  and
A. McCartney
A. G. Sinclair
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA
J. M. Shaw
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA
S.A. Edwards*
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA
S. Hoste
Affiliation:
Pig Improvement Company, Fyfield Wick, Abington, Oxfordshire OX13 5NA
A. McCartney
Affiliation:
Pig Improvement Company, Fyfield Wick, Abington, Oxfordshire OX13 5NA
*
† Present address: University of Aberdeen, MacRobert Building, 581 King Street, Aberdeen AB9 1UD.
Get access

Abstract

Current feeding recommendations for lactating sows may be inappropriate for modern genotypes with high milk production. The introduction of the prolific but obese Meishan breed into sow lines also necessitates a review of nutrient requirements. A 2 × 2 factorial experiment was used to investigate the influence of breed type (Meishan synthetic 50% (M) and purebred European White (W) on response to dietary protein level (L = 140 g crude protein (CP) per kg, 6 g lysine per kg; H = 181 g CP per kg, 9 g lysine per kg) over a 5-week lactation. Milk yield (days 5, 9, 13,17, 21 and 28), milk composition and piglet growth and body composition were measured to quantify aspects of lactational performance. M had higher litter sizes throughout lactation (P < 0·001) and produced more milk than W(M = 10·04 W = 7·85 (s.e.d. 0·521) kg/day, P < 0·001) and milk of a higher fat content (M = 79·6 W = 75·0 (s.e.d. 5·71 g/kg, P < 0·05). Total solids were not significantly different between treatments. H produced higher milk protein content than L (L = 43·0 H = 55·7 (s.e.d. 3.01) g/kg, P = 0·05). Litter growth rates showed a breed effect (P < 0·001), diet effect (P < 0·001) and a breed × diet interaction (ML = 2·41 MH = 3·21 WL = 2·07 WH = 2·07 (s.e.d. 0·658) kg/day, P < 0·001). M piglets had higher fat deposition rates (M = 37 W = 24 (s.e.d. 4.5) g/day, P < 0·05). L piglets had a lower protein (P < 0·05) and fat (P < 0·05) deposition rate compared with H piglets. Higher litter growth rates of M sows resulted from a combination of increased milk yield and f at content and this was further enhanced by additional dietary protein. W sows showed no milk yield response to dietary protein but reduced maternal tissue catabolism.

Keywords

dietary proteinmilk compositionmilk yieldpigletssows
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 68 , Issue 4 , June 1999 , pp. 701 - 708
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1999

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

Agricultural Research Council. 1981. The nutrient requirements of pigs. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Beyer, M. 1986. Untersuchungen zum energie- und Stoffumsatz von graviden und laktierenden sauen sowie saugferkeln- ein beitrug zur prazisierrung des energie und proteinbedarf es. Promotionsarbeit, aus dem Forschungszentrum fur Tierproduktion, Dummerstorf-Rostock.Google Scholar
Beyer, M., Hoffman, L., Schiemann, R., Jentsch, W., Búriacu, G., Iliescu, M., Machajew, E. C, Babinszky, L., Gundel, H., Lassota, L., Walach-Janick, M. and Zeman, L 1988. Biological basics for the factorial derivation of the energy and protein requirements for pregnant and lactating sows and suckling piglets. Fifth international symposium on protein metabolism and nutrition. E.A.A.P. publication no. 35. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Wilhelm-Pieck-Universität Rostock 37: 92–93.Google Scholar
Búriacu, G., Iliescu, M. and Caramida, P. 1986. Efficiency of food utilisation by pregnant and lactating sows. 2. The influence of isocaloric diets with different protein-levels on pregnancy and lactation. Archive for Animal Nutrition 36: 803–825.Google Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H. 1971. Nutrition and lactation in the sow. Lactation (ed. Faulkner, I. R.), pp. 393–411. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
King, R. H., Killeen, I. D. and Vercoe, J. 1990. Efficiency of exogenous gonadotrophic-hormones to induce estrus in anestrous gilts. Theriogenology 34: 761–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, R. H., Rayner, C. J. and Kerr, M. 1993a. A note on the amino acid composition of sow’s milk. Animal Production 57: 500–502.Google Scholar
King, R. H., Toner, M. S. and Dove, M. 1989. Pattern of milk production in sows. In Manipulating pig production U (ed. Barnett, J. L. and Hennesey, D. P.), p. 98. Australian Pig Science Association.Google Scholar
King, R. H., Toner, M.S., Dove, H, Atwood, C. S. and Brown, W. G. 1993b. The response of first litter sows to dietary protein level during lactation. Journal of Animal Science 71: 2457–2463.Google Scholar
Klaver, J., Kempen, G. J. M.van, DeLange, P. G.B., Verstegen, M. W. A. and Boer, H. 1981. Milk composition and daily yield of different milk components as affected by sow condition and lactation feeding regimen. Journal of Animal Science 52: 1091–1097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, A. J., Speer, V. C. and Haught, D. G. 1978. Relationship between yield and composition of sow’s milk and weight gain of nursing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 47: 634–638.Google Scholar
Lodge, G. A. 1959. The composition of sows milk during lactation with particular reference to the relationship with protein and lactose. Journal of Dairy Research 26:134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1991. The feedingstuffs regulations 1991. Statutory instrument no. 2840. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Mullan, B.P., Close, W. H. and Cole, D. J. A. 1989. Predicting nutrient responses of the lactating sows. In Recent advances in animal nutrition (ed. Haresign, W. and J.A.|Cole, D.), pp. 229–243. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1988. Nutrient requirements of swine, ninth edition. National Academy Press, Washington.Google Scholar
Noblet, J. and Etienne, M. 1986. Effect of energy level in lactating sows on yield and composition of milk and nutrient balance of piglets. Journal of Animal Science 63: 1888–1896.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Grady, J.F., Elsley, F. W. H., MacPherson, R. M. and MacDonald, I. 1973. The response of lactating sows and their litters to different dietary energy allowances. Animal Production 17: 65–74.Google Scholar
O’Grady, J. F. and Hanrahan, T. J. 1975. Influence of protein level and amino-acid supplementation of diets fed in lactation on the performance of sows and their litters. Irish Journal of Agricultural Science 14: 127–135.Google Scholar
Raison, J.J., Edwards, S.A., English, P. R., MacPherson, O. and Thomson, K. 1991. The effect of dietary energy source during lactation on sow milk production and piglet performance. Animal Production 52: 598 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Reiner, G., Grun, D., Gauly, M. and Dzapo, V. 1995. Why we milk sows. Pig International 25: 13–14.Google Scholar
Sinclair, A. G., Edwards, S. A., Hoste, S. and McCartney, A. 1998. Evaluation of the influence of maternal and piglet breed differences on behaviour and production of Meishan synthetic and European White breeds during lactation. Animal Science 66: 423–430.Google Scholar
Sinclair, A. G., Edwards, S. A., Hoste, S., McCartney, A. and Fowler, V. R. 1996. Partitioning of dietary protein during lactation in the Meishan synthetic and European White breeds of pig. Animal Science 62: 355–362.Google Scholar
Spinka, M., Illmann, G. and Stetkova, Z. 1995. The influence of interval duration between nursings on piglet milk intake, weight gain and udder massage. Proceedings of the 29th international congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology (ed. Rutter, S. M., Rushan, J., Randle, H.D. and Eddison, J. C.), p. 139.Google Scholar
Toner, M. S., King, R. H., Dunshea, F. R., Dove, H. and Atwood, C. S. 1996. The effect of exogenous somatotropin on lactation performance of first-litter sows. Journal of Animal Science 74: 167–172.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C.T. and Yang, H. 1989. Physical and chemical composition of the body of breeding sows with differing body subcutaneous fat depth at parturition, differing nutrition during lactation and differing litter size. Animal Production 48: 203–212.Google Scholar
Zou, S., McLaren, D. G. and Hurley, W. L. 1992. Pig colostrum and milk composition: comparisons between Chinese Meishan and US breeds. Livestock Production Science 30: 115–127.Google Scholar