Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T01:23:39.671Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nutritional evaluation of wheat 1. Effects of preparation on digestibility of dry matter, energy and nitrogen in pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

M. Ivan ,
L. R. Giles ,
A. R. Alimon  and
D. J. Farrell
M. Ivan
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry and Nutrition, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia
L. R. Giles
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry and Nutrition, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia
A. R. Alimon
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry and Nutrition, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia
D. J. Farrell
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry and Nutrition, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia
Get access

Summary

1. A split-plot design was used to study apparent digestibility of dry matter, gross energy and nitrogen of a whole grain wheat diet and processed (hammermilled, rolled or hammermilled and then steam-pelleted) wheat diets by eight small (33·9 ± 0·1 kg) and eight large (70±1·7 kg) pigs. Metabolizable energy and nitrogen retention were also studied with the small pigs.

2. The processed wheat diets were superior to the whole grain wheat diet in all the parameters measured.

3. There were no significant differences between the performance of pigs given the differently processed wheat diets.

4. Apparent digestibility of dietary components particularly in the whole wheat diet was significantly higher when diets were given to small pigs than when given to large pigs.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 19 , Issue 3 , December 1974 , pp. 359 - 365
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1974

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

Association of Official Agricultural Chemists. 1960. Official Methods of Analysis. 9th ed.Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
Braude, R., Townsend, J., Harrington, G. and Rowell, J. G. 1961. A comparison of wheat and fine offal in the rations of fattening pigs. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 57: 257–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braude, R., Townsend, J., Harrington, G. and Rowell, J. G. 1963. A comparison of feeding growing pigs once or twice daily. J agric. Sci., Camb. 60: 389–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, E. J. and Castle, M. E. 1956. The rate of passage of food through the alimentary tract of pigs. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 47: 196–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castle, E. J. and Castle, M. E. 1957. Further studies of the rate of passage of food through the alimentary tract of pigs. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 49: 106–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunha, T. J. 1957. Swine Feeding and Nutrition. Ch. VII. Interscience Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
Duncan, D. B. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics, 11: 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frape, D. L., Wilkinson, J. and Chubb, L. G. 1968. Effect of processing barley and of delayed concentrate feeding on growth and nutrient balance in growing pigs and the effect of processing barley on apparent digestibility of pregnant sows. J Anim. Sci. 27: 1313–1318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frape, D. L., Wolf, K. L., Wilkinson, J. and Chubb, L. G. 1968. Modification to Shinfield metabolism crate. J Inst. Anim. Techns. 19: 61–64.Google Scholar
Gill, D. R. 1964. Ore. agric. Exp. Stn, 6th Ann. Swine Day spec. Rep., No. 179.Google Scholar
Ivan, M., Clack, D. J. and White, G. J. 1974. Improved nitrogen distillation apparatus. Lab. Pract. 23: 184–185.Google Scholar
Krider, J. L. and Carroll, W. E. 1971. Swine Production. 4th ed.McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Larsen, L. M. and Oldfield, J. E. 1960. Improvement of barley rations for swine. II. Effects of pelleting and supplementation with barley malt. J Anim. Sci. 19: 601–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, T. L. J. 1967. High level cereal diets for the growing/finishing pig. I. The effect of cereal preparation and water level on the performance of pigs fed diets containing high levels of wheat. J agric. Sci., Camb. 68: 269–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, T. L. J. 1970. Some effects of including differently processed barley in the diet of the growing pig. 1. Growth rate, food conversion efficiency, digestibility and rate of passage through the gut. Anim. Prod. 12: 139–150.Google Scholar
Lawrence, T. L. J. 1972a. A review of some effects on health and performance of variations in the physical form of the diet of the growing pig. I. Cereal processing. Vet. Rec. 91: 67–70.Google ScholarPubMed
Lawrence, T. L. J. 1972b. A review of some effects on health and performance of variations in the physical form of the diet of the growing pig. II. Fibrous constituents and water level. Vet. Rec. 91: 84–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lawrence, T. L. J. 1972C. A review of some effects on health and performance of variations in the physical form of the diet of the growing pig. III. Heat treatment and cubing. Vet. Rec. 91: 108–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, F. 1957. Feeds and Feeding. 22nd ed.The Morrison Publishing Company, Ithaca, New York.Google Scholar
Vanschoubroek, F., Coucke, L. and Van Spaendonck, R. 1971. The quantitative effect of pelleting feed on the performance of piglets and fattening pigs. Nutr. Abstr. Rev. 41:1–9.Google ScholarPubMed