Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T22:41:45.505Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of food intake capacity on genotype by feeding regimen interactions in growing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

E. Kanis
E. Kanis
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding, Wageningen Agricultural University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
Get access

Abstract

From each of 159 litters, between one and three pigs were fed ad libitum and between one and four pigs were fed at several restricted feeding levels from about 27 to 107 kg live weight. Effects of litter by feeding regimen (ad libitumv. restricted feeding) interactions (L × F) and sex by feeding regimen interactions (S × F) on production traits were investigated. In experimental groups where restrictedly fed animals received an amount of food based on their estimated voluntary food intake capacity (FIC), interactions were non-significant. In groups where restricted feeding was independent of FIC, significant L × F or S × F interactions were found for daily food intake (FI), daily gain, lean tissue growth rate and fatty tissue growth rate, but not for body composition and food conversion traits.

Because of between-animal variation in FIC, restricted feeding according to a fixed scale restricted intake of some animals to a higher degree than others and degree of food intake restriction (DFR) was calculated from actual FI and FIC for animals fed at a restricted level. After correction of FI and production traits of restrictedly fed animals for differences in DFR, L × F and S × F interactions were not significant.

It was concluded that the poor relationships often found between test-station results of boars and results of their progeny in practical environments may be caused, to an important extent, by differences in DFR in each environment. To overcome these genotype by environment interactions it is recommended that animals be fed ad libitum in both test and commercial environments.

Keywords

food intakegenotypesgrowthpigs
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , April 1990 , pp. 343 - 351
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1990

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

Bergström, P. L. and Kroeske, D. 1968. Methods of carcass assessment in research on carcass quality in the Netherlands. I. Description of methods. Rapport Instituut voor Veeteeltkundig Onderzoek, C-123. Zeist, The Netherlands and Annual Meeting, European Association of Animal Production, Dublin.Google Scholar
Brascamp, E. W., Merks, J. W. M. and Wilmink, J. B. M. 1985. Genotype environment interaction in pig breeding programmes: methods of estimation and relevance of the estimates. Livestock Production Science 13: 135–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busse, W. and Groeneveld, E. 1986. [Estimation of population parameters in German Landrace pigs with data organised in the Mariensee-Herdbook Information-System. 2. Estimation of population parameters for criteria of performance testing in field and genetic correlations between performance test in field and sib test in stations with consideration of genotype-environment interactions.] Züchtungskunde 58: 184–195.Google Scholar
Campbell, R. G. and King, R. H. 1982. The influence of dietary protein and level of feeding on the growth performance and carcass characteristics of entire and castrated male pigs. Animal Production 35: 177–184.Google Scholar
Claus, H., Claus, J. and Kalm, E. 1984. Comparison between estimated breeding values of young boars and progeny results in commercial herds. 35th Annual Meeting, European Association of Animal Production, The Hague.Google Scholar
Donker, R. A., Hartog, L. A. den, Brascamp, E. W., Merks, J. W. M., Noordewier, G. A. and Buiting, G. A. J. 1986. Restriction of feed intake to optimize the overall performance and composition of pigs. Livestock Production Science 15: 353–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, Y. 1983. Feed intake regulation in growing pigs. 34th Annual Meeting, European Association of Animal Production, Madrid. Vol. 2, abstract P2.5.Google Scholar
Kanis, E. 1988. Effect of average daily food intake on production performance in growing pigs. Animal Production 46: 111–122.Google Scholar
Kanis, E. 1990. Effect of food intake capacity on production traits in growing pigs with restricted feeding. Animal Production 50: 333–341.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J. 1974. Genotype × environment interactions in pigs. Proceedings of the 1st World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Madrid, Vol. 1, pp. 873–884.Google Scholar
Ketelaars, E. H. 1979. [Inheritance of traits recorded in commercial herds of pigs.] Agricultural Research Report 883. Pudoc, Wageningen.Google Scholar
King, J. W. B. 1972. The interaction ot genotype and environment in pig production. In Pig Production (ed. Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 21–36. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
Merks, J. W. M. 1988. Genotype × environment interactions in pig breeding programmes. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen, Agricultural University, Wageningen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ollivier, L., Gueblez, R., Laloe, D., Runavot, J. P. and Sellier, P. 1984. Estimation of genotype × environment interactions in the national pig breeding programme in France. 35th Annual Meeting, European Association of Animal Production, The Hague.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1985. User's Guide: Statistics, Version 5. SAS. Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Standal, N. 1977. Studies on breeding and selection schemes in pigs. VI. Correlation between breeding values estimated from station test and on-farm-test data. Ada Agriculturae Scandinavica 27: 138–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steane, D. E., Evans, D. G. and Kempster, A. J. 1984. A practical estimation of G × E in the United Kingdom. 35th Annual Meeting, European Association of Animal Production, The Hague.Google Scholar
Verdooren, L. R. 1982. How large is the probability for the estimate of a variance component to be negative? Biometncal Journal 24: 339–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walstra, P., Buiting, G. A. J. and Mateman, G. 1977. [Fattening of boars. 1. The influence of castration and feeding method on gain, food conversion and slaughter quality.] Rapport Instituut voor Veeteeltkundig Onderzoek, B-128. Ziest, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Webb, A. J. and Curran, M. K. 1986. Selection regime by production system interaction in pig improvement: a review of possible causes and solutions. Livestock Production Science 14: 41–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyllie, D., Morton, J. R. and Owen, J. B. 1979. Genetic aspects of voluntary food intake in the pig and their association with gain and food conversion efficiency. Animal Production 28: 381–390.Google Scholar