Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:01:31.786Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The performance and body composition of young pigs following a period of growth retardation by food restriction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. Stamatarist ,
I. Kyriazakis  and
G. C. Emmans
C. Stamatarist
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, Scottish Agricultural College Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
I. Kyriazakis
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, Scottish Agricultural College Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
G. C. Emmans
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, Scottish Agricultural College Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
Get access

Abstract

Pigs were fed either ad libitum or given 300 g/day of the same food (digestible energy 15·4M)/kg; crude protein 208 g/kg fresh food) from 6 to 12 kg live weight (LW). Four pigs were killed at 6 kg LWand eight (equal numbers from the two sexes) from each treatment at 12 kg LW. Eight pigs (three males and five females; AL) were continued on ad libitum feeding to 24 kg LW when they were killed. Ten (four males and six females; R) of the pigs which had been restricted to 12 kg LW, were fed ad libitum to 24 kg LW, when they were killed. The entire empty bodies of the pigs killed were chemically analysed and the weights of organs determined. The empty body was considered as three fractions: the entire skin, including the subcutaneous fat (SK); the internal organs and the empty gastrointestinal tract (INT) and the remainder (CARC). The distributions of the chemical components between these three fractions were determined.

The R pigs took 19 days longer and 2·6 kg more food to go from 6 to 12 kg LW. At 12 kg LWthey had less gut fill, lighter organs concerned with food processing and less lipid, more protein and heavier CARC weights than the AL pigs. The R pigs took 5·5 days less and 2·4 kg less food to go from 12 to 24 kg than the AL pigs. At 24 kg LW they had more gut fill, similar weights of the organs concerned with food processing, and slightly less lipid and protein. Over the 12 to 24 kg weight interval the R pigs gained lipid and protein at faster rates than the AL pigs. None of the increase in protein growth rate was in the CARC fraction.

It is concluded that pigs given a low intake of food adjust their organ weights to be sufficient to process the allowance. On being given ad libitum food they rapidly increase the weights of their organs to process the increased rate of intake, and increase their gut fill. These effects are seen as a short lived, greatly increased rate of LW gain. During rehabilitation lipid stores return to their normal level but carcass protein does not show an increased rate of growth.

Keywords

body compositionfood restrictiongrowthpigs
Type
Papers
Information
Animal Production , Volume 53 , Issue 3 , December 1991 , pp. 373 - 381
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1991

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

Agricultural Research Council. 1981. The nutrient requirements of pigs. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Burton, J. H., Anderson, M. and Reid, J. T. 1974. Some biological aspects of partial starvation. The effect of weight loss and regrowth on body composition in sheep. British Journal of Nutrition 32: 515–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, R. G. and Biden, R. S. 1978. The effect of protein nutrition between 5-5 and 20 kg live weight on the subsequent performance and carcass quality of pigs. Animal Production 27: 223–228.Google Scholar
Cole, D. J. A., Duckworth, J. E., Holmes, W. and Cuthbertson, A. 1968. Factors affecting voluntary feed intake in pigs. III. The effect of a period of feed restriction, nutrient density of the diet and sex on intake, performance and carcass characteristics. Animal Production 10: 345–357.Google Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H., McDonald, I. and Fowler, V. R. 1964. The effect of plane of nutrition on the carcasses of pigs and lambs when variations in fat content are excluded. Animal Production 6:141–154.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I. and Emmans, G. C. 1991. Diet selection in pigs: dietary choices made by growing pigs following a period of underfeeding with protein. Animal Production 52: 337–346.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I., Stamataris, C., Emmans, G. C. and Whittemore, C. T. 1991. The effects of food protein content on the performance of pigs previously given foods with low or moderate protein contents. Animal Production 52:165–173.Google Scholar
Owen, J. B., Ridgman, W. J. and Wyllie, D. 1971. The effect of food restriction on subsequent voluntary intake of pigs. Animal Production 13: 537–546.Google Scholar
Palsson, H. and Verges, J. B. 1952a. Effects of the plane of nutrition on growth and the development of carcass quality in lambs. Part I. The effects of high and low planes of nutrition at different ages, journal of Agricultural Science 42: 1–92.Google Scholar
Palsson, H. and Verges, J. B. 1952b. Effects of the plane of nutrition on growth and the development of carcass quality in lambs. Part II. Effects on lambs of 30 lb carcass weight. Journal of Agricultural Science 42: 93–149.Google Scholar
Ratcliffe, B. and Fowler, V. R. 1980. The effect of low birth weight and early undernutrition on subsequent development in pigs. Animal Production 30: 470 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Thornton, R. F., Hood, R. L., Jones, P. N. and Re, V. E. 1979. Compensatory growth in sheep. Australian journal of Agricultural Research 30:135–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tullis, J. B. and Whittemore, C. T. 1986. Body composition and feed intake of young pigs postweaning. journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 37:1178–1184.Google Scholar