Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T22:52:28.637Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Partitioning of limiting protein and energy in the growing pig: description of the problem, possible rules and their qualitative evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2007

Fredrik B. Sandberg ,
Gerry C. Emmans  and
Ilias Kyriazakis
Fredrik B. Sandberg*
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition and Health Department, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
Gerry C. Emmans
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition and Health Department, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
Ilias Kyriazakis
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition and Health Department, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Mr Fredrik B. Sandberg, Animal Nutrition and Health Department, Scottish Agricultural College, Bush Estate, Penicuik EH26 0PH, UK, fax +44 (0)131 535 3121, email Fredrik.Sandberg@sac.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

A core part of any animal growth model is how it predicts the partitioning of dietary protein and energy to protein and lipid retention for different genotypes at different degrees of maturity. Rules of partitioning need to be combined with protein and energy systems to make predictions. The animal needs describing in relation to its genotype, live weight and, possibly, body composition. Some existing partitioning rules will apply over rather narrow ranges of food composition, animal and environment. Ideally, a rule would apply over the whole of the possible experimental space (scope). The live weight range over which it will apply should at least extend beyond the ‘slaughter weight range’, and ideally would include the period from the start of feeding through to maturity. Solutions proposed in the literature to the partitioning problem are described in detail and criticised in relation to their scope, generality and economy of parameters. They all raise the issue, at least implicitly, of the factors that affect the net marginal efficiency of using absorbed dietary protein for protein retention. This is identified as the crucial problem to solve. A problem identified as important is whether the effects of animal and food composition variables are independent of each other or not. Of the rules in the literature, several could be rejected on qualitative grounds. Those rules that survived were taken forward for further critical and quantitative analysis in the companion paper. (Sandberg et al. 2005)

Keywords

SwineGrowthPartitioningProteinEnergy
Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 93 , Issue 2 , February 2005 , pp. 205 - 212
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2005

References

ARC (1981) The nutrient requirements of pigs Slough, Berkshire Agricultural Research Council, Commonwealth Agricultural BureauxGoogle Scholar
Bikker, P (1994) Protein and lipid accretion in body components of growing pigs: effects of body weight and nutrient intake. PhD Thesis, Wageningen Agricultural UniversityGoogle Scholar
Birkett, S, de Lange, K (2001a) Limitations of conventional models and a conceptual framework for a nutrient flow representation of energy utilisation by animals. Br J Nutr 86, 647–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkett, S, de Lange, K (2001b) A computational framework for a nutrient flow representation of energy utilisation by growing monogastric animals. Br J Nutr 86, 661–674.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birkett, S & de Lange, K (2001c) Calibration of a nutrient flow model of energy utilisation by growing pigs. Br J Nutr 86, 675–689.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Black, JL (1974) Manipulation of body composition through nutrition. Proc Austr Soc Anim Prod 10, 211–218.Google Scholar
Black, JL, Davies, GT, Bray, HJ, Giles, LR & Chapple, RP (1986) Simulation of energy and amino acid utilisation in the pig. Res Dev Agric 3, 121–145.Google Scholar
Black, JL, Davies, GT, Bray, HJ, Giles, LR & Chapple, RP (1995) Modelling the effects of genotype, environment and health on nutrient utilisation. In Proceedings of IVth International Workshop on Modelling Nutrient Utilisation of Farm Animals, pp. 85–105 [Danfaer, A and Lescoat, P, editors]. Tjele Denmark: National Institute of Animal Science.Google Scholar
Black, JL & de Lange, CFM (1995) Introduction to the principles of nutrient partitioning for growth. In Modelling Growth in the Pig, EAAP Publication no. 78 pp. 33–45 [Moughan, PJ, Verstegen, MWA and Visser-Reyneveld, MI, editors]. Wageningen: Wageningen PressGoogle Scholar
Campbell, RG & Taverner, MR (1988) Relationships between energy intake and protein and energy metabolism, growth and body composition of pigs kept at 14 or 32 degree C from 9 to 20 kg. Livestock Prod Sci 18, 289–303.Google Scholar
Campbell, RG, Taverner, MR & Curic, DM (1985) The influence of feeding level on the protein requirement of pigs between 20 and 45 kg live weight. Anim Prod 40, 489–496.Google Scholar
Collin, AJ, van Milgen, J, Dubois, S & Noblet, J (2001) Effect of high temperature on feeding behaviour and heat production in group-housed young pigs. Br J Nutr 86, 63–70.Google Scholar
Coop, RL & Kyriazakis, I (2001) Influence of host nutrition on the development and consequences of nematode parasitism in ruminants. Trends Parasitol 17, 325–330.Google Scholar
de Greef, KH & Verstegen, MWA (1995) Evaluation of a concept on energy partitioning in growing pigs. In Modelling Growth in the Pig, EAAP Publication no. 78 137–149 [Moughan, PJ and Verstegen, MWA and Visser-Reyneveld, MI, editors]. Wageningen: Wageningen PressGoogle Scholar
de Lange, CFM (1995) Framework for a simplified model to demonstrate principles of nutrient partitioning for growth in the pig. In Modelling Growth in the Pig, EAAP Publication no. 78 71–85 [Moughan, PJ, Verstegen, MWA and Visser-Reyneveld, MI, editors]. Wageningen: Wageningen PressGoogle Scholar
Dividich, JI, Vermorel, M, Noblet, J, Bovier, JC & Aumaitre, A (1980) Effects of environmental temperature on heat production, energy retention, protein and fat gain in early weaned piglets. Br J Nutr 44, 313–323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emmans, GC (1988) Genetic components of potential and actual growth. In Animal Breeding Opportunities. British Society of Animal Production Occasional Publication no. 12 153–181 [Land, RB, Bulfield, G and Hill, WG,editors]. Edinburgh: British Society of Animal ProductionGoogle Scholar
Emmans, GC (1994) Effective energy – a concept of energy utilisation applied across species. Br J Nutr 71, 801–821.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emmans, GC & Fisher, C (1986) Problems of nutritional theory. In Nutritional Requirements and Nutritional Theory, pp. 9–57 [Fisher, C and Boorman, KN, editors] London: ButterworthsGoogle Scholar
Emmans, GC & Kyriazakis, I (1997) Models of pigs growth: problems and proposed solutions. Livestock Prod Sci 51, 119–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, NS, Gous, RM & Emmans, GC (1994) Preferred components for the construction of a new simulation model of growth, feed intake and nutrient requirements of growing pigs. S Afr J Anim Sci 24, 10–17.Google Scholar
Ferguson, NS, Gous, RM & Emmans, GC (1997) Predicting the effects of animal variation on growth and food intake in growing pigs using simulation modelling. Anim Sci 64, 513–522.Google Scholar
Forster, MR (2000) Key concepts in model selection: performance and generalizability. J Math Psychol 44, 205–231.Google Scholar
Fuller, MF & Crofts, RMJ (1977) The protein-sparing effect of carbohydrate. 1. Nitrogen retention of growing pigs in relation to diet. Br J Nutr 38, 479–488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuller, MF, Franklin, MF, McWilliam, R & Pennie, K (1995) The responses of growing pigs, of different sex and genotype, to dietary energy and protein. Anim Sci 60, 291–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, MF, McWilliam, R, Wang, TC & Giles, LR (1989) The optimum dietary amino acid pattern for growing pigs. 2. Requirements for maintenance and for tissue accretion. Br J Nutr 62, 255–267.Google Scholar
Green, DM & Whittemore, CT (2003) Architecture of a harmonized model of the growing pig for the determination of dietary net energy and protein requirements and of excretions into the environment (IMS Pig). Anim Sci 77, 113–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houdijk, JGM, Jessop, NS & Kyriazakis, I (2001) Nutrient partitioning between reproductive and immune functions in animals. Proc Nutr Soc 60, 515–525.Google Scholar
Knap, PW (2000) Stochastic simulation of growth in pigs: relations between body composition and maintenance requirements as mediated through protein turn-over and thermoregulation. Anim Sci 71, 11–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knap, P, Roehe, R, Kolstad, K, Pomar, C & Luiting, P (2002) Characterisation of pig genotypes J Anim Sci 80E, Suppl. 2, E187–E195.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I & Emmans, GC (1992a) The effects of varying protein and energy intakes on the growth and body-composition of pigs. 1. The effects of energy-intake at constant, high protein-intake. Br J Nutr 68, 603–613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kyriazakis, I & Emmans, GC (1992b) The effects of varying protein and energy intakes on the growth and body-composition of pigs. 2. The effects of varying both energy and protein-intake. Br J Nutr 68, 615–625.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I & Emmans, GC (1995) The voluntary feed-intake of pigs given feeds based on wheat bran, dried citrus pulp and grass meal, in relation to measurements of feed bulk. Br J Nutr 73, 191–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lochmiller, RL & Deerenberg, C (2000) Trade-offs in evolutionary immunology: just what is the cost of immunity?. Oikos 88, 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovatto, PA & Sauvant, D (2003) Modeling homeorhetic and homeostatic controls of pig growth. J Anim Sci 81, 683–696.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, DS & Payne, PR (1961) Problems in the prediction of protein values of diets. Br J Nutr 15, 11–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moughan, PJ (2003a) Simulating the partitioning of dietary amino acids: new directions. J Anim Sci 81, E60–E67.Google Scholar
Moughan, PJ (2003b) Amino acid availability: aspects of chemical analysis and bioessay methodology. Nutr Res Rev 16, 127–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moughan, PJ, Smith, WC & Pearson, G (1987) Description and validation of a model simulating growth in the pig (20–90 kg liveweight). N Z J Agric Res 30, 481–489.Google Scholar
Noblet, J, Fortune, H, Shi, XS & Dubois, S (1994) Prediction of net energy value of feeds for growing pigs. J Anim Sci 72, 344–354.Google Scholar
NRC (1998) Nutrient Requirements of Swine 10th ed Washington, DC National Academy PressGoogle Scholar
Powanda, MC & Beisel, WR (2003) Metabolic effects of infection on protein and energy status. J Nutr 133, 322S–327SGoogle Scholar
Sandberg, FB, Emmans, GC & Kyriazakis, I (2005) Partitioning of limiting protein and energy in the growing pig: testing quantitative rules against experimental data. Br J Nutr 93, 213–224.Google Scholar
Schinckel, AP, de Lange, CFM (1996) Characterisation of growth parameters needed as inputs for pig growth models. J Anim Sci 74, 2021–2036.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schinckel, AP, Li, N, Richert, BT, Preckel, PV & Einstein, ME (2003) Development of a model to describe the compositional growth and dietary lysine requirements of pigs fed ractopamine. J Anim Sci 81, 1106–1119.Google Scholar
Stamataris, C, Kyriazakis, I & Emmans, GC (1991) The performance and body-composition of young pigs following a period of growth retardation by food restriction. Anim Prod 53, 373–381.Google Scholar
Susenbeth, A (1995) Factors affecting lysine utilisation in growing pigs: an analysis of literature data. Livestock Prod Sci 43, 193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Milgen, J & Noblet, J (1999) Energy partitioning in growing pigs: the use of a multivariate model as an alternative for the factorial analysis. J Anim Sci 77, 2154–2162.Google Scholar
van Milgen, J & Noblet, J (2003) Partitioning of energy intake to heat, protein, and fat in growing pigs. J Anim Sci 81, E86–E93.Google Scholar
van Milgen, J, Quiniou, N & Noblet, J (2000) Modelling the relation between energy intake and protein and lipid deposition in growing pigs. Anim Sci 71, 119–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, TC & Fuller, MF (1989) The optimum dietary amino acid pattern for growing pigs. 1. Experiments by amino acid deletion. Br J Nutr 62, 77–89.Google Scholar
Wellock, IJ, Emmans, GC & Kyriazakis, I (2003) Modelling the effects of thermal environment and dietary composition on pig performance: model logic and concepts. Anim Sci 77, 255–266.Google Scholar
Wellock, IJ, Emmans, GC & Kyriazakis, I (2004) Describing and predicting potential growth in the pig. Anim Sci 78, 379–388.Google Scholar
Whittemore, CT (1983) Development of recommended energy and protein allowances for growing pigs. Agric Syst 11, 159–186.Google Scholar
Whittemore, CT (1995) Modelling the requirement of the young growing pig for dietary protein. Agric Syst 47, 415–425.Google Scholar
Whittemore, CT & Fawcett, RH (1974) Model responses of the growing pig to the dietary intake of energy and protein. Anim Prod 19, 221–231.Google Scholar
Whittemore, CT & Fawcett, RH (1976) Theoretical aspects of a flexible model to simulate protein and lipid growth in pigs. Anim Prod 22, 87–96.Google Scholar
Whittemore, CT & Green, DM (2002) The description of the rate of protein and lipid growth in pigs in relation to live weight. J Agric Sci 138, 415–423.Google Scholar
Whittemore, CT, Green, DM & Knap, PW (2001) Technical review of the energy and protein requirements of growing pigs: protein. Anim Sci 73, 363–373.Google Scholar