Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T02:42:51.466Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Studies on cannulation method and alternative indigestible markers and the effects of food enzyme supplementation in barley-based diets on ileal and overall apparent digestibility in growing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

Y.-L. Yin
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Environmental Science, The Queen’s University of Belfast, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT9 5PX
J. D. G. McEvoy
Affiliation:
Veterinary Sciences Division, Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland, Stoney Road, Belfast BT4 3SD
H. Schulze
Affiliation:
Finnfeeds International Ltd, Marlborough, Wiltshire SN8 1AA
K. J. McCracken
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Environmental Science, The Queen’s University of Belfast, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT9 5PX Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT9 5PX
Get access

Abstract

Two different cannulation procedures (simple ileal ‘T’ cannula v. The post valve ‘T’ caecal cannula (PVTC)) and two indigestible markers (TiO2 v. Cr2O3) were studied with six male littermate pigs fitted with PVTC or simple ileal ‘T’ cannulae. Six diets were used, of which two were based on wheat and wheat bran and the other four were based on two barleys of different bushel weight without and with exogenous enzymes (ß-glucanase/xylanase). Proportional TiO2 and Cr2O3 recoveries in faeces were less than 1·00, the mean values for the six diets being 0·858 for TiO2 and 0·811 for Cr2O3. With both markers, recovery in faeces was lowest for the most digestible wheat-based diet (A). The ileal apparent digestibility (IAD) coefficients of dry matter (DM), crude protein (CP), energy and amino acids measured with Cr2O3 were significantly (P < 0·001) lower than those measured with TiO2. There was no difference in overall apparent digestibility of DM, CP and energy measured with simple ileal ‘T’ cannula and PVTC techniques. However, IAD of DM, energy and CP measured with the PVTC method were significantly higher than those measured with the simple ileal ‘T’ cannula method. The data also showed that the standard errors with the simple ileal ‘T’ cannula method were greater than when using the PVTC method. Diet significantly affected ileal and overall digestibility of nutrients (P < 0·001) with values being highest for diet A and least for the wheat bran-based diet (B). Overall digestibility (OD) of DM and energy were higher for the higher bushel weight barley-based diet (C) than for the normal bushel weight barley-based diet (E). Enzyme inclusion improved OD for both barley diets and ileal digestibility of energy (0·060) and CP (0·057) for the normal bushel weight barley.

Type
Non-ruminant nutrition, behaviour and production
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2000

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

Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1984. Official methods of analysis, 14th edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Baidoo, S. K., Liu, Y. G. and Grandhi, R. R. 1997. Exogenous microbial enzymes and hulless barley utilization by pigs. Proceedings of the Manitoba swine seminar, Manitoba University, Winnipeg, vol. 11, pp. 135140.Google Scholar
Barnicoat, C. R. 1945. Nutrient digestion in animals. New Zealand Journal of Science and Technology 27: 202205.Google Scholar
Bedford, M. R. and Classen, H. L. 1992. Reduction of intestinal viscosity through manipulation of dietary rye and pentosanase concentration is affected through changes in carbohydrate composition of the intestinal aqueous phase and results in improved growth rate and feed conversion efficiency of broiler chicks. Journal of Nutrition 122: 560569.Google Scholar
Campbell, G. L. and Bedford, M. R. 1992. Enzyme applications for monogastric feeds: a review. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 72: 449466.Google Scholar
Cromwell, G. L., Cantor, A. H., Stáhly, T. S. and Randolph, J. H. 1988. Efficacy of beta-glucanase addition to barley-based diets on performance of weanling and growing-finishing pigs and broiler chicks. Journal of Animal Science 66: 46(abstr.).Google Scholar
Englyst, H. N. and Cummings, J. A. 1984. Simplified method for the measurement of total NSP by gas liquid chromatography of constituent sugars as alditol acetates. Analyst 109: 937942.Google Scholar
Fuller, M. F. 1991. Methodologies for the measurement of digestion. Proceedings of the fifth international symposium on digestive physiology in pigs, Pudoc, Wageningen (ed. Verstegen, M. W. A. Huisman, J. and L. A. den, Hartog), pp. 273288.Google Scholar
GENSTAT 5 Committee. 1993. GENSTAT 5 release 3 reference manual. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Graham, H., Fadel, J. G., Newman, C. W. and Newman, R. K. 1989. Effect of pelleting and ß-glucanase supplementation on the ileal and faecal digestibility of a barley-based diet in the pig. Journal of Animal Science 67: 12931298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, H., Hesselman, K., Jonsson, E. and Aman, P. 1986a. Influence of ß-glucanase supplementation on digestion of a barley-based diet in the pig gastrointestinal tract. Nutrition Reports International 34: 10891096.Google Scholar
Graham, H., Hesselman, K., Jonsson, E. and Aman, R 1986b. The influence of wheat bran and sugar-beet pulp on the digestibility of dietary components in a cereal-based pig diet. Journal of Nutrition 116: 242251.Google Scholar
Graham, H., Lowgren, W., Petterson, D. and Aman, R 1988. Effect of supplementation on digestion of a barley/ pollard-based pig diet. Nutrition Reports International 38: 10731079.Google Scholar
Gréer, H. E. 1992. Relative nutritive value of soya, peas and field beans in diets for growing pigs. M.Sc. thesis, The Queens University of Belfast.Google Scholar
Hesselman, K. and Åman, P. B. 1986. The effect of ß-glucanase on the utilization of starch and nitrogen by broiler chickens fed on barley of low- or high-viscosity. Animal Feed Science and Technology 14: 283291.Google Scholar
Inborr, J. and Ogle, R. B. 1988. Effect of enzyme treatment of piglet feeds on performance and post-weaning diarrhoea. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 18: 129133.Google Scholar
Jagger, S., Wiseman, J., Cole, D. J. A. and Craigon, J. 1992. Evaluation of inert markers for the determination of ileal and faecal digestibility values in the pig. British Journal of Nutrition 68: 729739.Google Scholar
Köhler, T., Huisman, J., Hartog, L. A.den and Mosenthin, R. 1990. Comparison of different digesta collection methods to determine the apparent digestibilities of nutrients at the terminal ileum in pigs. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 53: 465475.Google Scholar
Kotb, A. R. and Luckey, T. D. 1972. Markers in nutrition. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews 42: 2829.Google Scholar
Leeuwen, P. van, Kleef, D. J. van, Kempen, G. J. M. van, Huisman, J. and Verstegen, M. W. A. 1991. The post valve T-caecum cannulation technique in pigs applicated to determine the digestibility of amino acids in maize, groudnut and sunflower meal. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 65: 183193.Google Scholar
Leeuwen, P. van, Veldan, A., Boisen, S., Deuring, K., Derksen, G.B., Verstegen, M. W. A. and Schaafsma, G. 1996. Apparent ileal dry matter and crude protein digestibility of rations fed to pigs and determined with the use of chromic oxide (Cr2O3) and acid-insoluble ash as digestive markers. British Journal of Nutrition 76: 551562.Google Scholar
Leone, J. L. 1973. Collaborative study of the quantitative determinations of titanium dioxide in cheese. Journal of Association of Analytical Chemistry 56: 535537.Google Scholar
Lide, D. R. and Frederikse, H. P. R. 1995. CRC handbook of chemistry and physics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.Google Scholar
McClean, D. 1993. Effects of processing of raw materials on digestibility of diets for weaned pigs. Ph.D. thesis, The Queen’s University of Belfast. Google Scholar
Mink, C. J. K., Neer, R. H. G. C. and Habets, L. 1969. Estimation of chromic oxide in faeces by dry ashing. Clinica Chemica Acta 24: 183185.Google Scholar
Moore, J. H. 1957. Diurnal variations in the composition of the faeces of pigs on diets containing chromium oxide. British Journal of Nutrition 11: 273288.Google Scholar
Moore, J. H. 1959. The use of indicators in digestibility studies. Agricultural Progress 34: 4863.Google Scholar
Newman, W.C, Eslick, R. E, Peppar, J. W. and Elnegoumy, A. M. 1980. Performance of pigs fed hulless and covered barleys supplemented with or without a bacterial diastase. Nutrition Reports International 22: 833835.Google Scholar
Njaa, L. R. 1961. Determination of protein digestibility with titanium dioxide as indicator substance. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 11: 227241.Google Scholar
Peddie, J., Dewar, W. A., Gilbert, A. B. and Waddington, D. 1982. The use of titanium dioxide for determining apparent digestibility in mature domestic fowls. Journal of Agricultural Science 99: 233236.Google Scholar
Saha, D. C. and Gilbreath, R. L. 1991. Analytical recovery of chromium from diet and faeces determined by colorimetry and atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 55: 433446.Google Scholar
Sauer, W. C. and Ozimek, L. 1986. Digestibility of amino acids in swine: results and their practical application: a review. Livestock Production Science 15: 367369.Google Scholar
Sauer, W.C, Dugan, M., Lange, K.de, Imbeah, M. and Mosenthin, R. 1989. Considerations in methodology for the determination of amino acid digestibilities in feedstuffs for pigs. In Absorption and utilization of amino acids, volume III (ed. Friedman, M.), pp. 217230. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.Google Scholar
Sauer, W. C. and Lange, C. F. M.de. 1992. Protein and amino acid digestibility in pigs. In Modem methods in protein nutrition and metabolism (ed. Nissen, S.), pp. 87120. Academic Press, Inc., NY.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schroder, H., Schulz, E. and Oslage, H. J. 1989. Influence of different cannula techniques- simple T cannula vs. Re-entrant cannula- on the precaecal measured digestibility of N-compounds. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 61: 169178.Google Scholar
Taverner, M. R. and Campbell, R. G. 1988. The effects of protected dietary enzymes on nutrient absorption in pigs. Proceedings of the fourth international symposium on digestive physiology in pigs, Jabłonna, Poland (ed. Buraczewska, L. Buraczewskii, S., Pastuszewska, B. Zebrowska, T.), pp. 357359.Google Scholar
Wenk, C., Weiss, E., Bee, G. and Messikommer, R. 1993. Interactions between a phytase and a carbohydrase in a pig diet. In Enzymes in animal nutrition (ed. Wenk, C. and Boessinger, M.), pp. 160164. ETH, Zürich, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Williams, C. H., David, D. J. and Iismaa, O. 1962. The determination of chromic oxide in faeces samples by atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 59: 381385.Google Scholar
Yin, Y-L. 1997. Factors affecting ileal digestibility and endogenous nitrogen losses in growing pig. Ph.D. thesis, The Queen’s University of Belfast. Google Scholar
Yin, Y-L. and McCracken, K. J. 1996. Methodological aspects of in vivo measurement of ileal amino acid digestibility in pigs — a review. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Science 9: 495502.Google Scholar