Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T05:10:55.085Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of diet composition, feed enzymes and method of cannulation on faecal and ileal digestibility measurements in growing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2021

K J McCracken ,
Y-L Yin ,
J McEvoy  and
H Schulze
K J McCracken
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Environmental Science, The Queen's University of Belfast Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT9 5PX, Northern Ireland
Y-L Yin
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Environmental Science, The Queen's University of Belfast
J McEvoy
Affiliation:
Veterinary Science Division, Department of Agriculture, Stoney Road, Belfast, BT4 3SD
H Schulze
Affiliation:
Finn Feeds International Ltd., Market House, Ailesbury Court, High Street, Marlborough, SN8 1AA
Get access

Extract

Whereas feed enzymes containing (β-glucanase give good responses in broilers and young pigs those in older pigs have been variable (Campbell and Belford, 1992). In commercial practice, bushel weight is frequently used as an indicator of quality. There are a range of methods for determining ileal digestibility of diets each of which has limitations (Fuller, 1991). Previously in our laboratory the 'T' cannula (T) method has been used, but the post-valve 'T' caecal (PVTC) cannulation method (van Leeuwen et al, 1991) appears to have a number of advantages. The twin objectives of this study were to study the effects of a feed enzyme preparation in two sources of barley of different bushel weight and to compare the T and PVTC methods with diets of differing fibre content.

Type
Pig Nutrition
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science , Volume 1996 , March 1996 , pp. 151
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 1996

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

Campbell, G.L. and Bedford, M.R. (1992). Enzyme applications for monogastric feeds: A review. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 72: 449–466.10.4141/cjas92-058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, M.F. (1991). Methodologies for the measurement of digestion. In: Verstegen, M.W.A., Huisman, J. and den Hartog, L.A. (eds), Digestive Physiology in Pigs. Pudoc, Wageningen, 173–228.Google Scholar
Köhler, T., Huisman, J., den Hartog, L.A. and Mosenthin, R. (1990). Comparison of different digesta collection methods to determine the apparent digestibilities of the nutrients at the terminal ileum in pigs. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 53: 465–475.10.1002/jsfa.2740530405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Leeuwen, P., Van Kleef, D.J., Van Kempen, G.J.M., Huisman, J. and Verstegen, M.W.A. (1991). The post valve T-caecum cannulation technique in pigs applicated to determine the digestibility of amino acid in maize, groundnut and sunflower meal. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 65: 183–193.10.1111/j.1439-0396.1991.tb00256.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar