Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T23:10:06.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of energy and protein concentration in the diet on the performance of growing pigs 2. Differing nutrient density at a constant energy: protein ratio

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

G. A. Lodge ,
M. E. Cundy ,
R. Cooke  and
D. Lewis
G. A. Lodge
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, Leicestershire
M. E. Cundy
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, Leicestershire
R. Cooke
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, Leicestershire
D. Lewis
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, Leicestershire
Get access

Summary

Forty-eight gilts by Landrace sires on Large White × Landrace females were randomly allocated to eight pens and within pens to six treatment groups involving three diets and two levels of feeding from 23 to 59 kg live weight. All diets were formulated to have approximately the same ratio of digestible energy to crude protein (160 kcal DE/unit % CP) but different energy and protein concentrations: (A) 3500 kcal/kg DE and 21 % CP, (B) 3150 kcal/kg DE and 19% CP, and (C) 2800 kcal/kg DE and 17% CP. Amino acid balance was maintained relatively constant with synthetic lysine, methionine and tryptophan. The levels of feeding were such that the lower level of diet A allowed an intake of energy and protein similar to the higher level of diet B, and the lower level of B was similar to the higher level of C.

On the lower level of feeding, growth rate, efficiency of feed conversion and carcass fat content increased linearly with each increment in nutrient concentration; on the higher level of feeding growth rate and EFC increased from diet C to B but not from B to A, whereas carcass fat content increased linearly with diet from the lowest to the highest concentration. There was a non-significant tendency for the higher density diets at a similar level of nutrient intake to give better EFC and fatter carcasses than the lower density diets.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , February 1972 , pp. 47 - 55
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1972

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

Adam, J. L. and Smith, W. C. 1966. The use of sample joints in predicting the composition of the pig carcass. Anim. Prod. 8: 85–94.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council. 1965. The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No, 2. Ruminants. Technical Reviews and Summaries. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Cooke, R. 1969. Protein nutrition of the growing pig. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Nottingham.Google Scholar
Cooke, R., Lodge, G. A. and Lewis, D. 1972. Influence of energy and protein concentration in the diet on the performance of growing pigs. 1. Response to protein intake on a high-energy diet. Anim. Prod. 14: 35–46.Google Scholar
Cuthbertson, A. and Pease, A. H. R. 1965. Interrelations of various measurements. visual assessments and dissection results of pigs of 200 lb live weight. Anim. Prod. 10: 249–255.Google Scholar
Harrington, G. 1966. The relative accuracy and cost of alternative methods of pig carcass evaluation. Z. Tierzücht. ZüchtBiol. 82: 187–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joblin, A. D. H. 1966. The estimation of carcass composition of bacon weight pigs. 3. The use of butcher's dissections and full dissections of sample joints. N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 9: 241–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roach, A. G. 1966. Techniques in Amino Acid Analysis, p 86. Technicon Instruments Co Ltd, Chertsey, England.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. 1956. Statistical Methods. 5th ed. Iowa State College Press, Ames, la.Google Scholar
Vanschoubroek, F., De Wilde, R. and Lampo, P. H. 1967. The quantitative effects of feed restriction in fattening pigs on weight gain, efficiency of feed utilization and backfat thickness. Anim. Prod. 9: 67–74.Google Scholar