Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Do not neglect calcium: a systematic review and meta-analysis (meta-regression) of its digestibility and utilisation in growing and finishing pigs

  • Maciej M. Misiura (a1), João A. N. Filipe (a1), Carrie L. Walk (a2) and Ilias Kyriazakis (a1)

Abstract

Ca digestibility and utilisation in growing pigs are not well understood, and are usually neglected in diet formulation. This has implications not only for the accurate determination of its requirements but also for its interactions with other nutrients. A systematic review and meta-analysis (meta-regression) of published trials was carried out to quantify factors affecting Ca absorption and utilisation, and to derive an estimate of Ca endogenous excretion. The analysis was carried out on the data from forty studies, corresponding to 201 treatments performed on 1204 pigs. The results indicated that although Ca absorption and retention (g/kg of body weight per d) increased with increasing Ca intake (P<0·001), non-phytate-P intake (P<0·001) and exogenous phytase supplementation (P<0·001), these values decreased with increasing phytate-P intake (P<0·05). Interactions between exogenous phytase and Ca intake, indicating reduced efficacy of this enzyme (P<0·001), and between phytate-P intake and exogenous phytase, counteracting the direct negative effect of phytate-P (P<0·05) on Ca absorption and retention, were also detected. There were no effects of animal-related characteristics, such as pig genotype in Ca absorption and retention. The large amount of variance explained in Ca absorption (90 %) and retention (91 %) supported our choice of independent variables. Endogenous Ca losses obtained via linear regression were 239 mg/kg of DM intake (95 % CI 114, 364). These outcomes advance the current understanding of Ca digestibility and utilisation, and should contribute towards establishing requirements for digestible Ca. Consequently, pig diets will be more correctly formulated if digestible Ca values are used in estimating requirements for Ca.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Do not neglect calcium: a systematic review and meta-analysis (meta-regression) of its digestibility and utilisation in growing and finishing pigs
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Do not neglect calcium: a systematic review and meta-analysis (meta-regression) of its digestibility and utilisation in growing and finishing pigs
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Do not neglect calcium: a systematic review and meta-analysis (meta-regression) of its digestibility and utilisation in growing and finishing pigs
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

* Corresponding author: M. M. Misiura, email m.m.misiura@ncl.ac.uk

References

Hide All
1. Peo, ER (1976) Calcium in Swine Nutrition. West Des Moines, IA: National Feed Ingredients Ass.
2. Crenshaw, TD (2001) Swine nutrition. In Calcium, Phosphorous, Vitamin D, and Vitamin K in Swine Nutrition, pp. 187209 [LL Southern and AJ Lewis, editors]. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
3. Suttle, NF (2010) Mineral Nutrition of Livestock. Wallingford, Oxfordshire: CABI.
4. Honeyman, MS (1993) Environment-friendly swine feed formulation to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus excretion. Am J Altern Agric 8, 128132.
5. Fan, MZ, Archbold, T, Sauer, WC, et al. (2001) Novel methodology allows simultaneous measurement of true phosphorus digestibility and the gastrointestinal endogenous phosphorus outputs in studies with pigs. J Nutr 131, 23882396.
6. Abelson, PH (1999) A potential phosphate crisis. Science 283, 20152015.
7. Forsberg, CW, Golovan, SP, Ajakaiye, A, et al. (2005) Genetic opportunities to enhance sustainability of pork production in developing countries: a model for food animals. In Applications of Gene-Based Technologies for Improving Animal Production and Health in Developing Countries, pp. 429446 [HPS Makkar and GJ Viljoen, editors]. Dordrecht: Springer.
8. Mallin, MA & Cahoon, LB (2003) Industrialized animal production – a major source of nutrient and microbial pollution to aquatic ecosystems. Popul Environ 24, 369385.
9. Maguire, RO, Dou, Z, Sims, JT, et al. (2005) Dietary strategies for reduced phosphorus excretion and improved water quality. J Environ Qual 34, 20932103.
10. Mackenzie, SG, Leinonen, I, Ferguson, N, et al. (2015) Accounting for uncertainty in the quantification of the environmental impacts of Canadian pig farming systems. J Anim Sci 93, 31303143.
11. Hall, DD, Cromwell, GL & Stahly, TS (1991) Effects of dietary calcium, phosphorus, calcium: phosphorus ratio and vitamin K on performance, bone strength and blood clotting status of pigs. J Anim Sci 69, 646655.
12. Stein, HH, Merriman, LA & González-Vega, JC (2016) Establishing a digestible calcium requirement for pigs. In Phytate Destruction-Consequences for Precision Animal Nutrition, pp. 207216 [CL Walk, I Kuhn, HH Stein, MT Kidd and M Rodehutscord, editors]. Wageningen, the Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers.
13. González-Vega, JC (2016) Digestibility of calcium and digestible calcium requirements in pigs. PhD Thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
14. González-Vega, JC, Walk, CL, Liu, Y, et al. (2013) Determination of endogenous intestinal losses of calcium and true total tract digestibility of calcium in canola meal fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 91, 48074816.
15. González-Vega, JC, Walk, CL & Stein, HH (2015) Effect of phytate, microbial phytase, fiber, and soybean oil on calculated values for apparent and standardized total tract digestibility of calcium and apparent total tract digestibility of phosphorus in fish meal fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 93, 48084818.
16. Merriman, LA & Stein, HH (2016) Particle size of calcium carbonate does not affect apparent and standardized total tract digestibility of calcium, retention of calcium, or growth performance of growing pigs. J Anim Sci 94, 38443850.
17. González-Vega, JC, Walk, CL, Murphy, MR, et al. (2016) Requirement for digestible calcium by 25 to 50 kg pigs at different dietary concentrations of phosphorus as indicated by growth performance, bone ash concentration, and calcium and phosphorus balances. J Anim Sci 94, 52725285.
18. Kemme, PA, Jongbloed, AW, Mroz, Z, et al. (1997) The efficacy of Aspergillus niger phytase in rendering phytate phosphorus available for absorption in pigs is influenced by pig physiological status. J Anim Sci 75, 21292138.
19. National Research Council (2012) Nutrient Requirements of Swine, 11th rev. ed. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
20. Selle, PH, Cowieson, AJ & Ravindran, V (2009) Consequences of calcium interactions with phytate and phytase for poultry and pigs. Livest Sci 124, 126141.
21. Singh, PK (2008) Significance of phytic acid and supplemental phytase in chicken nutrition: a review. Worlds Poult Sci J 64, 553580.
22. Koricheva, J, Gurevitch, J & Mengersen, K (2013) Handbook of Meta-Analysis in Ecology and Evolution. Woodstock, Oxfordshire: Princeton University Press.
23. Mark, WL & Wilson, DB (2001) Practical Meta-Analysis, vol. 49. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
24. Stewart, GB, Pullin, AS & Tyler, C (2007) The effectiveness of asulam for bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) control in the United Kingdom: a meta-analysis. Environ Manage 40, 747760.
25. Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (2013) Guidelines for systematic review and evidence synthesis in environmental management. Version 4.2. Environmental Evidence. http://environmentalevidence.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Review-guidelinesversion-4.2-finalPRINT.pdf (accessed September 2017).
26. Cohen, J (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 20, 3746.
27. Edwards, P, Clarke, M, DiGuiseppi, C, et al. (2002) Identification of randomized controlled trials in systematic reviews: accuracy and reliability of screening records. Stat Med 21, 16351640.
28. Pullin, AS & Stewart, GB (2006) Guidelines for systematic review in conservation and environmental management. Conserv Biol 20, 16471656.
29. Landis, JR & Koch, GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 159174.
30. Greenhalgh, T & Peacock, R (2005) Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources. BMJ 331, 10641065.
31. Moher, D, Liberati, A, Tetzlaff, J, et al. (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6, e1000097.
32. St-Pierre, NR (2001) Invited review: integrating quantitative findings from multiple studies using mixed model methodology1. J Dairy Sci 84, 741755.
33. McPhee, MJ, Oltjen, JW, Famula, TR, et al. (2006) Meta-analysis of factors affecting carcass characteristics of feedlot steers. J Anim Sci 84, 31433154.
34. Petersen, GI & Stein, HH (2006) Novel procedure for estimating endogenous losses and measurement of apparent and true digestibility of phosphorus by growing pigs. J Anim Sci 84, 21262132.
35. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination & University of York (2009) Systematic Reviews: CRD’s Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care. York: CRD and University of York.
36. Hooijmans, CR, Rovers, MM, de Vries, RBM, et al. (2014) SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool for animal studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 14, 43.
37. Higgins, JPT, Altman, DG, Gøtzsche, PC, et al. (2011) The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 343, d5928.
38. Sauvant, D, Perez, JM & Tran, G (2004) Tables of Composition and Nutritional Value of Feed Materials. Wageningen, the Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers.
39. Averós, X, Brossard, L, Dourmad, J-Y, et al. (2012) Meta-analysis on the effects of the physical environment, animal traits, feeder and feed characteristics on the feeding behaviour and performance of growing-finishing pigs. Animal 6, 12751289.
40. Douglas, SL, Szyszka, O, Stoddart, K, et al. (2015) Animal and management factors influencing grower and finisher pig performance and efficiency in European systems: a meta-analysis. Animal 9, 12101220.
41. Bolker, BM, Brooks, ME, Clark, CJ, et al. (2009) Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 24, 127135.
42. Laird, NM & Ware, JH (1982) Random-effects models for longitudinal data. Biometrics, 963974.
43. Pinheiro, JC & Bates, DM (1995) Mixed Effects Models, Methods, and Classes for S and Splus. Madison, WI: Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin.
44. Nelson, JP & Kennedy, PE (2009) The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and natural resource economics: an assessment. Environ Res Econ 42, 345377.
45. Pinheiro, J, Bates, D, DebRoy, S, et al. (2017) nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/nlme/index.html (accessed March 2018).
46. R Core Team (2016) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Core Team.
47. Nakagawa, S & Schielzeth, H (2013) A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed‐effects models. Methods Ecol Evol 4, 133142.
48. Bartoń, K (2016) MuMIn: multi-model inference. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/MuMIn/index.html (accessed March 2018).
49. Cameron, AC & Miller, DL (2015) A practitioner’s guide to cluster-robust inference. J Hum Res 50, 317372.
50. Jongbloed, AW, Everts, H, Kemme, PA, et al. (1999) Quantification of absorbability and requirements of macroelements. In A Quantitative Biology of the Pig, pp. 275299 [I Kyriazakis, editor]. Wallingford, Oxon: CABI Publishing.
51. González-Vega, JC & Stein, HH (2016) Digestibility of calcium in feed ingredients and requirements of digestible calcium for growing pigs. Anim Prod Sci 56, 13391344.
52. Schulin-Zeuthen, M, Kebreab, E, Gerrits, WJJ, et al. (2007) Meta-analysis of phosphorus balance data from growing pigs. J Anim Sci 85, 19531961.
53. Létourneau-Montminy, MP, Jondreville, C, Sauvant, D, et al. (2012) Meta-analysis of phosphorus utilization by growing pigs: effect of dietary phosphorus, calcium and exogenous phytase. Animal 6, 15901600.
54. Borenstein, M, Hedges, LV, Higgins, J, et al. (2009) When does it make sense to perform a meta‐analysis? In Introduction to Meta-Analysis, 1st ed., pp. 357–364. Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
55. Simons, PCM, Versteegh, HAJ, Jongbloed, AW, et al. (1990) Improvement of phosphorus availability by microbial phytase in broilers and pigs. Br J Nutr 64, 525540.
56. Selle, PH & Ravindran, V (2008) Phytate-degrading enzymes in pig nutrition. Livest Sci 113, 99122.
57. Kühn, I & Männer, K (2012) Performance and apparent total tract phosphorus and calcium digestibility in grower–finisher pigs fed diets with and without phytase. J Anim Sci 90, 143145.
58. González-Vega, JC & Stein, HH (2014) Invited review – calcium digestibility and metabolism in pigs. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 27, 1.
59. Yi, Z, Kornegay, ET, Ravindran, V, et al. (1996) Effectiveness of Natuphos phytase in improving the bioavailabilities of phosphorus and other nutrients in soybean meal-based semipurified diets for young pigs. J Anim Sci 74, 16011611.
60. Harper, AF, Kornegay, ET & Schell, TC (1997) Phytase supplementation of low-phosphorus growing-finishing pig diets improves performance, phosphorus digestibility, and bone mineralization and reduces phosphorus excretion. J Anim Sci 75, 31743186.
61. Taylor, TC (1965) The availability of the calcium and phosphorus of plant materials for animals. Proc Nutr Soc 24, 105112.
62. Almaguer, BL, Sulabo, RC, Liu, Y, et al. (2014) Standardized total tract digestibility of phosphorus in copra meal, palm kernel expellers, palm kernel meal, and soybean meal fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 92, 24732480.
63. Brady, SM, Callan, JJ, Cowan, D, et al. (2002) Effect of phytase inclusion and calcium/phosphorus ratio on the performance and nutrient retention of grower–finisher pigs fed barley/wheat/soya bean meal‐based diets. J Sci Food Agric 82, 17801790.
64. Lei, XG, Ku, PK, Miller, ER, et al. (1994) Calcium level affects the efficacy of supplemental microbial phytase in corn-soybean meal diets of weanling pigs. J Anim Sci 72, 139143.
65. Qian, H, Kornegay, ET & Conner, DE (1996) Adverse effects of wide calcium: phosphorus ratios on supplemental phytase efficacy for weanling pigs fed two dietary phosphorus levels. J Anim Sci 74, 12881297.
66. Stein, HH, Adeola, O, Cromwell, GL, et al. (2011) Concentration of dietary calcium supplied by calcium carbonate does not affect the apparent total tract digestibility of calcium, but decreases digestibility of phosphorus by growing pigs. J Anim Sci 89, 21392144.
67. Liu, J, Bollinger, DW, Ledoux, DR, et al. (1998) Lowering the dietary calcium to total phosphorus ratio increases phosphorus utilization in low-phosphorus corn-soybean meal diets supplemented with microbial phytase for growing-finishing pigs. J Anim Sci 76, 808813.
68. Reinhart, GA & Mahan, DC (1986) Effect of various calcium: phosphorus ratios at low and high dietary phosphorus for starter, grower and finishing swine. J Anim Sci 63, 457466.
69. Létourneau-Montminy, M-P, Narcy, A, Magnin, M, et al. (2010) Effect of reduced dietary calcium concentration and phytase supplementation on calcium and phosphorus utilization in weanling pigs with modified mineral status. J Anim Sci 88, 17061717.
70. Bai, LL, Wu, F, Liu, H, et al. (2017) Effects of dietary calcium levels on growth performance and bone characteristics in pigs in grower-finisher-transitional phase. Anim Feed Sci Technol 224, 5965.
71. Varley, PF, Callan, JJ & O’Doherty, JV (2011) Effect of dietary phosphorus and calcium level and phytase addition on performance, bone parameters, apparent nutrient digestibility, mineral and nitrogen utilization of weaner pigs and the subsequent effect on finisher pig bone parameters. Anim Feed Sci Technol 165, 201209.
72. Emmans, GC & Fisher, C (1986) Problems in nutritional theory. In Nutrient Requirements of Poultry and Nutritional Research, pp. 939 [GC Emmans and C Fisher, editors]. London: Butterworths.
73. Emmans, G & Kyriazakis, I (2001) Consequences of genetic change in farm animals on food intake and feeding behaviour. Proc Nutr Soc 60, 115125.
74. Fernandez, JA (1995) Calcium and phosphorus-metabolism in growing pigs. 2. Simultaneous radio-calcium and radio-phosphorus kinetics. Livest Prod Sci 41, 243254.
75. Besançon, P, Guéguen, L, Colette, K, et al. (1969) Les principales voies du métabolisme calcique chez le porc en croissance (The main ways of calcium metabolism in growing pigs). Ann Biol Anim Biochim Biophys 9, 537553.
76. Hansard, SL, Lyke, WA & Crowder, HM (1961) Absorption, excretion and utilization of calcium by swine. J Anim Sci 20, 292296.
77. Dilger, RN & Adeola, O (2006) Estimation of true phosphorus digestibility and endogenous phosphorus loss in growing pigs fed conventional and low-phytate soybean meals. J Anim Sci 84, 627634.
78. Revy, PS, Jondreville, C, Dourmad, JY, et al. (2004) Effect of zinc supplemented as either an organic or an inorganic source and of microbial phytase on zinc and other minerals utilisation by weanling pigs. Anim Feed Sci Technol 116, 93112.
79. González-Vega, JC, Walk, CL & Stein, HH (2015) Effects of microbial phytase on apparent and standardized total tract digestibility of calcium in calcium supplements fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 93, 22552264.

Keywords

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Misiura et al. supplementary material
Misiura et al. supplementary material 1

 Word (318 KB)
318 KB

Do not neglect calcium: a systematic review and meta-analysis (meta-regression) of its digestibility and utilisation in growing and finishing pigs

  • Maciej M. Misiura (a1), João A. N. Filipe (a1), Carrie L. Walk (a2) and Ilias Kyriazakis (a1)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed