Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T11:23:29.891Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Modelling phosphorus intake, digestion, retention and excretion in growing and finishing pigs: model description

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2014

V. Symeou*
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Claremont Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK
I. Leinonen
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Claremont Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK
I. Kyriazakis
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Claremont Road, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK
*
Get access

Abstract

Low phosphorus (P) digestibility combined with intensive pig production can increase P diffuse pollution and environmental load. The aim of this paper was to develop a deterministic, dynamic model able to represent P digestion, retention and ultimately excretion in growing and finishing pigs of different genotypes, offered access to diets of different composition. The model represented the limited ability of pig endogenous phytase activity to dephosphorylate phytate as a linear function of dietary calcium (Ca). Phytate dephosphorylation in the stomach by exogenous microbial phytase enzymes was expressed by a first order kinetics relationship. The absorption of non-phytate P from the lumen of the small intestine into the blood stream was set at 0.8 and the dephosphorylated phytate from the large intestine was assumed to be indigestible. The net efficiency of using digested P was set at 0.94 and assumed to be independent of BW, and constant across genotype and sex. P requirements for both maintenance and growth were made simple functions of body protein mass, and hence functions of animal genotype. Undigested P was assumed to be excreted in the feaces in both soluble and insoluble forms. If digestible P exceeded the requirements for P then the excess digestible P was excreted through the urinary flow; thus the model represented both forms of P excretion (soluble and insoluble) into the environment. Using a UK industry standard diet, model behaviour was investigated for its predictions of P digestibility, retention and excretion under different levels of inclusion of microbial phytase and dietary Ca, and different non-phytate P : phytate ratios in the diet, thus covering a broad space of potential diet compositions. Model predictions were consistent with our understanding of P digestion, metabolism and excretion. Uncertainties associated with the underlying assumptions of the model were identified. Their consequences on model predictions, as well as the model evaluation are assessed in a companion paper.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

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

Adeola, O, Olukosi, OA, Jendza, JA, Dilger, RN and Bedford, MR 2006. Response of growing pigs to Peniophora lycii- and Escherichia coli- derived phytases or varying ratios of calcium to total phosphorus. Animal Science 82, 637644.Google Scholar
Blaabjerg, K, Strathe, AB and Poulsen, HD 2012. Modelling phytate degredation kinetics in soaked wheat and barley. Animal Feed Science and Technology 175, 4856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, JL 2009. Models to predict feed intake. In Voluntary feed intake in pigs (ed. D Torrallardona and E Roura), pp. 323351. Wageningen Academic Publishers, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Breves, G and Schröder, B 1991. Comparative aspects of gastrointestinal phosphorus metabolism. Nutrition Research Reviews 4, 125140.Google Scholar
BSAS 2003. Nutrient requirement standards for pigs. British Society of Animal Science, Penicuik, UK.Google Scholar
Columbus, D, Niven, SJ, Zhu, CL and de Lange, CFM 2010. Phosphorus utilization in starter pigs fed high-moisture corn-based liquid diets steeped with phytase. Journal of Animal Science 88, 39643976.Google Scholar
Dias, RS, Lopez, S, Moreira, JA, Schulin-Zeuthen, M, Vitti, DMSS, Kebreab, E and France, J 2010. Application of a kinetic model to describe phosphorus metabolism in pigs fed a diet with microbial phytase. Journal of Agricultural Science 148, 277286.Google Scholar
Ekpe, ED, Zijlstra, RT and Patience, JF 2002. Digestible phosphorus requirement of grower pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 82, 541549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmans, GC 1986. A model of the food-intake, growth and body-composition of pigs fed ad-libitum. Animal Production 42, 471471.Google Scholar
Emmans, G and Kyriazakis, I 2001. Consequences of genetic change in farm animals on food intake and feeding behaviour. The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 60, 115125.Google Scholar
Fernández, JA 1995. Calcium and phosphorus metabolism in growing pigs. III. A model resolution. Livestock Production Science 41, 255261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
France, J, Dias, RS, Kebreab, E, Vitti, DMSS, Crompton, LA and Lopez, S 2010. Kinetic models for the study of phosphorus metabolism in ruminants and monogastrics. In Phosphorus and calcium utilization and requirements in farm animals (ed. DMSS Vitti and E Kebreab), pp. 1845. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Hendriks, WH and Moughan, PJ 1993. Whole-body mineral composition of entire male and female pigs depositing protein at maximal rates. Livestock Production Science 33, 161170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jongbloed, AW 1987. Phosphorus in the feeding of pigs. Effect of diet on the absorption of phosphorus by growing pigs. PhD thesis, University of Wageningen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
Jongbloed, AW and Kemme, PA 1990. Effect of pelleting mixed feeds on phytase activity and the apparent absorbability of phosphorus and calcium in pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 28, 233242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemme, PA, Jongbloed, AW, Mroz, Z and Beynen, AC 1997. The efficacy of Aspergillus niger phytase in rendering phytate phosphorus available for absorption in pigs is influenced by pig physiological status. Journal of Animal Science 75, 21292138.Google Scholar
Kidder, DE and Manner, MJ 1978. Digestion in the pig. Kingston Press Publishers, Bath, UK.Google Scholar
Kirchmann, H and Pettersson, S 1995. Human urine-chemical composition and fertilizer use efficiency. Fertilizer Research 40, 149154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knap, PW 2000. Time trends of Gompertz growth parameters in ‘meat-type’ pigs. Animal Science 70, 3949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyriazakis, I 2011. Opportunities to improve nutrient efficiency in pigs and poultry through breeding. Animal 5, 821832.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I and Emmans, GC 1991. Diet selection in pigs: dietary choices made by growing pigs following a period of underfeeding with protein. Animal Production 52, 337346.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I and Emmans, GC 1995. The voluntary feed-intake of pigs given feeds based on wheat bran, dried citrus pulp and grass meal, in relation to measurements of feed bulk. British Journal of Nutrition 73, 191207.Google Scholar
Larsen, T, Fernández, JA and Engberg, RM 2000. Bone turnover in growing pigs fed three levels of dietary calcium. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 80, 547557.Google Scholar
Létourneau-Montminy, MP and Narcy, A 2010. Meta-analysis of phosphorus digestive and metabolic utilization by growing pigs: effect of dietary phosphorus, calcium and exogenous phytase. In Abstracts: Proceedings of the 2010 Meeting of the Animal Science Modelling Group. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 90, 595605.Google Scholar
Létourneau-Montminy, MP, Jondreville, C, Sauvant, D and Narcy, A 2012. Meta-analysis of phosphorus utilization by growing pigs: effect of dietary phosphorus, calcium and exogenous phytase. Animal 6, 15901600.Google Scholar
Létourneau-Montminy, MP, Narcy, A, Lescoat, P, Magnin, M, Bernier, JF, Sauvant, D, Jondreville, C and Pomar, C 2011. Modeling the fate of dietary phosphorus in the digestive tract of growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 89, 35963611.Google Scholar
Lopes, JB, Moreira, JA, Kebreab, E, Vitti, DMSS, Abdalla, AL, Crompton, LA and France, J 2009. A model on biological flow of phosphorus in growing pigs. Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia 61, 691697.Google Scholar
Luttrell, BM 1993. The biological relevance of the binding of calcium ions by inositol phosphates. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 268, 15211524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maguire, RO, Dou, Z, Sims, JT, Brake, J and Joern, BC 2005. Dietary strategies for reduced phosphorus excretion and improved water quality. Journal of Environmental Quality 34, 20932103.Google Scholar
Mahan, DC 1982. Dietary calcium and phosphorus levels for weanling swine. Journal of Animal Science 54, 559564.Google Scholar
Mahan, DC and Shields, RG 1998. Macro- and micro-mineral composition of pigs from birth to 145 kilograms of body weight. Journal of Animal Science 76, 506512.Google Scholar
Martínez-Ramírez, HR, Jeaurond, EA and de Lange, CFM 2008. Dynamics of body protein deposition and changes in body composition after sudden changes in amino acid intake: I. Barrows. Journal of Animal Science 86, 21562167.Google Scholar
Mukhametzyanova, AD, Akhmetova, AI and Sharipova, MR 2012. Microorganisms as phytase producers. Microbiology 81, 267275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nair, VC, Laflamme, J and Duvnjak, Z 1991. Production of phytase by Aspergillus ficuum and reduction of phytic acid content in canola meal. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 54, 355365.Google Scholar
NRC 2012. Nutrient requirements of swine. The National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Petersen, GI and Stein, HH 2006. Novel procedure for estimating endogenous losses and measurement of apparent and true digestibility of phosphorus by growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 84, 21262132.Google Scholar
Pettey, LA, Cromwell, GL and Lindemann, MD 2006. Estimation of endogenous phosphorus loss in growing and finishing pigs fed semi-purified diets. Journal of Animal Science 84, 618626.Google Scholar
Plumstead, PW, Leytem, AB, Maguire, RO, Spears, JW, Kwanyuen, P and Brake, J 2008. Interaction of calcium and phytate in broiler diets. 1. Effects on apparent prececal digestibility and retention of phosphorus. Poultry Science 87, 449458.Google Scholar
Pomar, C, Jondreville, C, Dourmad, JY and Bernier, JF 2006. Effect of dietary phosphorus concentration on pigs’ performance and the body retention of calcium, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, magnesium, iron and zinc of 20 to 100 kg of live weight pigs. Journées de la Recherche Porcine en France 38, 209216.Google Scholar
Poulsen, HD, Carlson, D, Nørgaard, JV and Blaabjerg, K 2010. Phosphorus digestibility is highly influenced by phytase but slightly by calcium in growing pigs. Livestock Science 134, 100102.Google Scholar
Rodehutscord, M, Haverkamp, R and Pfeffer, E 1998. Inevitable losses of phosphorus in pigs, estimated from balance data using diets deficient in phosphorus. Archiv für Tierernährung 51, 2738.Google Scholar
Rodehutscord, M, Faust, M and Pfeffer, E 1999. The course of phosphorus excretion in growing pigs fed continuously increasing phosphorus concentrations after phosphorus depletion. Archiv für Tierernährung 52, 323334.Google Scholar
Rymarz, A, Fandrejewski, H and Kielanowski, J 1982. Content and retention of calcium, phosphorus, potassium and sodium in the bodies of growing gilts. Livestock Production Science 9, 399407.Google Scholar
Sandberg, AS, Larsen, T and Sandström, B 1993. High dietary calcium level decreases colonic phytate degradation in pigs fed a rapeseed diet. Journal of Nutrition 123, 559566.Google Scholar
Sandberg, FB, Emmans, GC and Kyriazakis, I 2005. Partitioning of limiting protein and energy in the growing pig: description of the problem, possible rules and their qualitative evaluation. British Journal of Nutrition 93, 205212.Google Scholar
Sandberg, FB, Emmans, GC and Kyriazakis, I 2007. The effects of pathogen challenges on the performance of naïve and immune animals: the problem of prediction. Animal 1, 6786.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sauvant, D, Perez, JM and Tran, G 2004. Tables of composition and nutritional value of feed materials: pigs, poultry, cattle, sheep, goats, rabbits, horses and fish. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Schulin-Zeuthen, M, Kebreab, E, Gerrits, WJJ, Lopez, S, Fan, MZ, Dias, RS and France, J 2007. Meta-analysis of phosphorus balance data from growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 85, 19531961.Google Scholar
Selle, PH and Ravindran, V 2008. Phytate-degrading enzymes in pig nutrition. Livestock Science 113, 99122.Google Scholar
Selle, PH, Ravindran, V, Cowieson, AJ and Bedford, MR 2011. Phytate and phytase. In Enzymes in farm animal nutrition (ed. MR Bedford and GG Partidge), pp. 160205. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Symeou, V, Leinonen, I and Kyriazakis, I 2014. Modelling phosphorus intake, digestion, retention and excretion in growing and finishing pigs: Model evaluation. Animal, published online, doi: 10.1017/S1751731114001414.Google Scholar
Vipperman, PE Jr, Peo, ER Jr and Cunningham, PJ 1974. Effect of dietary calcium and phosphorus level upon calcium, phosphorus and nitrogen balance in swine. Journal of Animal Science 38, 758765.Google Scholar
Wellock, IJ, Emmans, GC and Kyriazakis, I 2003. Modelling the effect of thermal environment and dietary composition on pig performance: model logic and concepts. Animal Science 77, 255266.Google Scholar
Wellock, IJ, Emmans, GC and Kyriazakis, I 2004. Modeling the effects of stressors on the performance of populations of pigs. Journal of Animal Science 82, 24422450.Google Scholar
Whittemore, CT, Tullis, JB and Emmans, GC 1988. Protein-growth in pigs. Animal Production 46, 437445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, Q, Liu, H, Zhang, Y and Zhang, Y 2010. Engineering of protease-resistant phytase from Penicillium sp.: high thermal stability, low optimal temperature and pH. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering 110, 638645.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Symeou Supplementary Material

Figure S1

Download Symeou Supplementary Material(File)
File 35.2 KB
Supplementary material: File

Symeou Supplementary Material

Figure S2

Download Symeou Supplementary Material(File)
File 40.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Symeou Supplementary Material

Figure S3

Download Symeou Supplementary Material(File)
File 30.2 KB
Supplementary material: File

Symeou Supplementary Material

Figure S4

Download Symeou Supplementary Material(File)
File 35.8 KB
Supplementary material: File

Symeou Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material

Download Symeou Supplementary Material(File)
File 27.4 KB