Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T10:46:27.242Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of expander processing and by-product inclusion levels on performance of grower-finisher pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

J. V. O’Doherty ,
D. Murphy  and
S. G. McGlynn
D. Murphy
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Production, University College Dublin, Lyons Research Farm, Newcastle, Co. Dublin, Ireland
S. G. McGlynn
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and Production, University College Dublin, Lyons Research Farm, Newcastle, Co. Dublin, Ireland
Get access

Abstract

Seventy-two entire male pigs (initially 28 kg body weight) were used to study the effects of by-product (pollard, rapeseed meal, peas and copra meal combined) inclusion level with or without expander processing, on growth performance and nutrient digestibility in a 3 ✕ 2 factorial arrangement of treatments. Productive performance and nutrient digestibility coefficients (no. = 6) were determined in individually fed pigs offered pelleted diets ad libitum containing a low by-product diet (350 g/kg), medium by-product diet (520 g/kg) and high by-product diet (752 g/ kg). The expanded diets were processed at 105ºC for 5 s at 35 bar pressure having been previously conditioned at 85ºC for 5 s. All diets were formulated using standard values for ingredients to have similar concentrations of digestible energy (DE) and ideal protein. Starch contents of 437, 401 and 314 g/kg and crude fibre contents of 48, 58 and 74 g/kg were recorded for the low, medium and high by-product diets respectively. No by-product level ✕ expander processing interactions (P > 0·05) were observed in growth criteria, carcass characteristics or nutrient digestibility. Expander processing decreased (P < 0·05) the apparent organic matter (OM), ash and energy digestibility of the diets, as well as the digestible energy content of the diets. The level of by-product in the diet had no statistically significant effect on the OM, protein and energy digestibility or the DE content of the diets. The increase in by-product inclusion levels decreased (P < 0·05) average daily gain (ADG) (0·899 v. 0·888 v. 0·854 (s.e. 0·014) kg/day) from 28 kg to slaughter and food intake (1·62 v 1·48 v 1·48 (s.e. 0·028) kg/day) in the 28 to 55 kg weight range. Expander processing had no effect on ADG, food intake or food conversion ratio. The increase in byproduct level decreased (P < 0·01) killing-out proportion (723 v 705 v 710 (s.e. 3·94) g/kg) and carcass ADG (0·684 v 0·651 v. 0·635 (s.e. 0·012) kg/day) (P < 0·05). Expander processing decreased (P < 0·05) killing out proportion (707 v. 718 (s.e. 3·22) g/kg). In conclusion, increasing the by-product content of the diet decreased ADG while expander processing had no effect on growth performance.

Keywords

by-productsexpansionpigs.
Type
Non-ruminant, nutrition, behaviour and production
Information
Animal Science , Volume 73 , Issue 3 , December 2001 , pp. 479 - 487
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2001

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

Armstrong, H. 1993. Nutritional implications of expanded feed. Feed Mix 1: 24–27.Google Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 1980. Official methods of analysis, 13th edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Bach-Knudsen, K.E, Jensen, B. B. and Hansen, I. 1993. Digestion of polysaccharides and other major components in the small and large intestine of pigs fed on diets consisting of oat fractions rich in beta D-glucan. British Journal of Nutrition 119: 879–886.Google Scholar
Baker, D. H., Becker, D. E., Jensen, A. H. and Harmon, B. G. 1968. Effect of dietary dilution on performance of finishing swine. Journal of Animal Science 27: 1332–1335.Google Scholar
Camire, M. E., Camire, A. and Krumhar, K. 1990. Chemical and nutritional changes in foods during extrusion. Food Science and Nutrition 29: 35–56.Google Scholar
Casteels, M., Bekaert, H., Eeckhout, W. and Buysse, F. 1970. Het effect van korrel-of meelverstrekking bij ad libitum voeding op de vetmestingsresultaten en de karkaskwaliteit van Pietrain-mestvarkens. Landbouwtijdschrift 11-12: 1589-1606.Google Scholar
Centraal Veevoeder Bureau. 1999. Feedstuff table. CVB, Lelystad, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Close, W. H. 1994. Feeding new genotypes: establishing amino acid/energy requirements. In Principles of pig science (ed. D. J. A. Cole, J. Wiseman and Varley, M. A.), pp. 123–140. Nottingham University Press. Google Scholar
Department of Agriculture and Food. 1994. Pig carcass dressing specification. SI 216. Department of Agriculture and Food, Ireland.Google Scholar
Dore, M. G. 1999. Studies related to in vivo and in vitro digestibilities of pig feed ingredients. M.Agr.Sc. thesis, National University of Ireland.Google Scholar
Erickson, J. P., Miller, E. R., Ku, P. K., Collings, G. F. and Black, J. R. 1985. Wheat middlings as a source of energy, amino acids, phosphorus and pellet binding quality for swine diets. Journal of Animal Science 60: 1012–1020.Google Scholar
Fenwick, G. R., Spinks, E. A., Wilkinson, A. P., Heany, R. K. and Legoy, M. A. 1986. Effect of processing on the antinutrient content of rape seed. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 37: 735–741.Google Scholar
Fernandez, J. A. and Jorgensen, J. N. 1986. Digestibility and absorption of nutrients as defined by fibre content in the diet of the pig. Quantitative aspects. Livestock Production Science 15: 53–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginste, J. vande and Schrijver, R. de. 1998. Performance and nutrient utilization of growing pigs given an expanded and pelleted diet. Animal Science 66: 225–230.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. 1985. Combining peas for animal feed. In The pea crop (ed. Hebblethwaite, P. D. and Dawkins, T. C. K.), pp. 453–462. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. and Gatel, F. 1986. Peas for pigs. Pig News and Information 7: 443–448.Google Scholar
Hendriks, W. H., Moughan, P. J., Boer, H. and Poel, A. F. B. van der. 1994. Effects of extrusion on the dye-binding, fluorodinitrobenzene-reactive and total lysine content of soyabean meal and peas. Animal Feed Science and Technology 48: 99–109.Google Scholar
Holden, P. J. and Zimmerman, D. R. 1991. Utilisation of cereal grain by-products in feeding swine. In Swine nutrition (ed. E. R. Miller, , Ullrey, D. E. and Lewis, A. J.), pp. 585–593. Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston.Google Scholar
Iwaki, K., Nimura, N., Hiraga, Y., Kinoshita, T., Takeda, K. and Ogura, H. 1987. Amino acid analysis by reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatrography. Journal of Chromatography 407: 273–279.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, H., Zhao, X. Q. and Eggum, B. O. 1996. The influence of dietary fibre and enviromental temperature on the development of the gastrointestinal tract, digestibility, degree of fermentation in the hind-gut and energy metabolism in pigs. British Journal of Nutrition 75: 365–378.Google Scholar
Kass, M. L., Van Soest, P. J. and Pond, W. G. 1980 Utilisation of dietary fibre from alfalfa by growing swine. II. Volatile fatty acid concentrations in and disappearance from the gastrointestinal tract. Journal of Animal Science 50: 192–197.Google Scholar
Keady, U. and O’Doherty, J. V. 2000. The effects of extrusion on the nutritive value of rape seed meal for pigs. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 39: 419–431.Google Scholar
Laurinen, P., Valaja, J., Nasi, M. and Smeds, K. 1998. Effects of expander processing conditions on the nutritive value of barley and wheat by-products in pig diets. Livestock Production Science 74: 213–227.Google Scholar
Low, A. G. 1993. Role of dietary fibre in pig diets. In Recent developments in pig nutrition 2 (ed. Cole, D. J. A., Haresign, W. and Garnsworthy, P. C.), pp. 137–161. Nottingham Press, London.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1991. The feedingstuffs regulations 1991. Statutory instrument no. 2840, 9. 76. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Nasi, M. 1992. Effects of grinding, pelleting and expanding on nutritive value of barley in pig diets. Agricultural Science Finland 1: 461–469.Google Scholar
Noblet, J., Fortune, H., Shi, X. S. and Dubois, S. 1994. Prediction of net energy value of feeds for growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 72: 344–354.Google Scholar
Noblet, J. and Perez, J. M. 1993. Prediction of digestibility of nutrients and energy values of pig diets from chemical composition. Journal of Animal Science 71: 3389–3398.Google Scholar
O’Doherty, J. V. and Keady, U. 2000. The nutritive value of extruded and raw peas for growing and finishing pigs. Animal Science 70: 265–274.Google Scholar
O’Doherty, J. V. and Keady, U. 2001. The effect of expander processing and extrusion on the nutritive value of peas for pigs. Animal Science 72: 43–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Doherty, J. V. and McKeon, M. P. 2000. The use of expeller copra meal in grower and finisher pig diets. Livestock Production Science 67: 55–65.Google Scholar
Peisker, M. 1992. High-temperature-short-time conditioning: physical and chemical changes during expander processing. Feed International, February, pp. 5–8.Google Scholar
Peisker, M. 1994. Influence of expander processing on feed components. Feed Mix 2: 26–31.Google Scholar
Poel, A. F. B. van der, Schoterman, A. and Bosch, M. W. 1998. Effect of expander conditioning and/or pelleting of a diet on the ileal digestibility of nutrients and on feed intake after choice feeding of pigs. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 76: 87–90.Google Scholar
Pond, W. G. 1987. Thoughts on fibre utilisation in swine. Journal of Animal Science 65: 497–499 Google Scholar
Sauer, W. C. and Ozimek, L., 1986. Digestibility of amino acids in swine. Results and their practical applications. A review. Livestock Production Science 15: 367–388.Google Scholar
Sauer, W. C. and Thacker, P. A. 1986. Apparent ileal and faecal digestibility of amino acids in barley based diets supplemented with soyabean meal or canola meal for growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 14: 183–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1985. Statistical analysis systems. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Thorne, P. J., Wiseman, J. and Cole, D. J. A. 1990. Copra meal. In Non-traditional feed sources for use in swine production (ed. Thacker, P. A. and Kirkwood, R. N.), pp. 127–134. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
Thorne, P. J., Wiseman, J., Cole, D. J. A. and Machin, D. H. 1992. Effects of level of inclusion of copra meal in balanced diets supplemented with synthetic amino acids on growth and fat deposition and composition in growing pigs fed ad-libitum at a constant temperature. Animal Feed Science and Technology 40: 31–40.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B. and Lewis, B. A. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and non starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74: 3583–3597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Varel, V. H. 1987. Activity of fibre degrading microorganisms in the pig large intestine. Journal of Animal Science 65: 488–496.Google Scholar