Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:48:52.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Daily gain, food intake and food efficiency in pigs during the growing period

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

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

Abstract

The non-linear model y = ae(−hW−c/W) was fitted to weekly calculated daily gain (DG), daily food intake (FI) and food efficiency (FE) of 653 barrows and gilts fed ad libitum or restrictedly during a growing period from 27 to 108 kg live weight. Where y was DG, FI or FE, W was live weight and a, b and c were parameters. The model fitted well to the expected course of the traits, with an accuracy similar to that of quadratic polynomials. Parameters for one trait could simply be derived from the parameters for the other two traits. For each trait, four basic patterns were distinguished, depending on the signs of b and c. Curves with a maximum (b > 0 and c > 0) occurred most frequently. In cases of curves with a maximum, the model could be reparameterized to a model with parameters having a simple biological meaning.

Coefficients of determination in barrows averaged 0·29 for DG, 0·88 for FI and 0·45 for FE, whereas these values were somewhat lower in gilts. With ad libitum feeding, a DG curve with a maximum was fitted in proportionately 0·83 of the barrows and 0·61 of the gilts. The maximum DG was on average at live weights of 64 kg for barrows and 77 kg for gilts. A maximum in the FI curve was predicted in proportionately 0·60 of the barrows and 0·39 of the gilts. Curves for DG and FI in gilts were less curvilinear than in barrows. FE curves, with ad libitum feeding, had a maximum in proportionately 0·59 of the barrows and 0·52 of the gilts. This predicted maximum FE was, on average, before the start of the growing period. Gilts had a higher FE than barrows from 35 kg body weight onwards, and the difference increased with increasing live weight. Differences in FE between ad libitum and restricted feeding were small, with a tendency for animals fed at a restricted feeding level to be more efficient at the end of the growing period.

Average FE curves and individual FI or DG curves were used for indirect prediction of individual DG or FI curves, respectively. The correlation between directly and indirectly predicted values of DG and FI at live weights of 30, 65 or 100 kg was about 0·7 in ad libitum fed barrows and gilts, and greater than 0·8 in pigs fed at a restricted level. This indicates that the model is suitable to predict and control the course of individual daily gain by influencing the course of food intake.

Keywords

food conversionfood intakegrowthmathematical modelspigs
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , April 1990 , pp. 353 - 364
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

Agricultural Research Council. 1981. The Nutrient Requirements of Pigs. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Cöp, W. A. G. 1971. [Growth in pigs.] Communications, Agricultural University Wageningen, 71–4.Google Scholar
Cöp, W. A. G. and Buiting, G. A. J. 1977. Feed intake in six lines of pigs and its influence on growth and carcass traits. 1. Feeding twice daily for 20 min per session. Animal Production 25: 291–304.Google Scholar
Cöp, W. A. G., Stelwagen, J. and Koops, W. J. 1970. [An analysis of growth in boars during performance testing.] Communications, Agricultural University Wageningen, 70–22.Google Scholar
DIXON, W. J. ed. 1973. Biomedical Computer Programs (BMD). 3rd ed. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Flak, P., Hetényi, L. and Gráčik, P. 1987. Live weight growth in different pig genotypes. Pig News and Information 8: 145–150.Google Scholar
Fowler, V. R. 1980. Growth in mammals for meat production. In Growth in Animals (ed. Lawrence, T. L. J.), pp. 249–263. Butterworths, London.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. 1983. Weekly individual voluntary feed intake of growing and finishing pigs. 54th Annual Meeting, European Association of Animal Production, Madrid.Google Scholar
Kanis, E. 1988. Effects of average daily food intake on production performance in growing pigs. Animal Production 46: 111–122.Google Scholar
Kielanowski, J. 1972. Energy requirements of the growing pig. In Pig Production (ed. Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 183–202. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
Krieter, J. 1986. [Development of selection methods for live weight gain and food intake capacity in pigs.] Ph.D. Thesis, Christian-Albrechts University, Kiel.Google Scholar
McCance, R. A. and Widdowson, E. M. 1974. The determinants of growth and form. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B 185: 1–17.Google ScholarPubMed
McCarthy, J. C. and Barker, H. 1979. The effects of selection for different combinations of weights at two ages on the growth curve of mice. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 55: 57–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moughan, P. J. and Verstegen, M. W. A. 1988. The modelling of growth in the pig. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science 36: 145–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parks, J. R. 1982. A Theory of Feeding and Growth of Animals. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. 1985. Use of genetic size-scaling in evaluation of animal growth. Journal of Animal Science 61: Suppl. 2, pp. 118–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timon, V. M. and Eisen, E. J. 1970. Comparison of ad libitum and restricted feeding of mice selected and unselected for postweaning gain. I. Growth, feed consumption and feed efficiency. Genetics 64: 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vangen, O. 1977. Studies on a two trait selection experiment in pigs. I. Growth, feed consumption and feed conversion ratio after 10 years of selection for growth rate and backfat thickness. Acla Agricullurae Scandinavicu 27: 331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenk, C., Piirter, H. P. and Bickel, H. 1980. Energetic aspects of feed conversion in growing pigs. Livestock Production Science 7: 483–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. 1983. Development of recommended energy and protein allowances for growing pigs. Agricultural Systems 11: 159–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar