Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T09:21:41.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do breeds of pig differ in the efficiency with which they use a limiting protein supply?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

I. Kyriazakis  and
G. C. Emmans
I. Kyriazakis
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, SAC, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
G. C. Emmans
Affiliation:
Genetics and Behavioural Sciences Department, SAC, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

An experiment was designed to test the prediction that two genetically-very-different kinds of pigs would retain the same amounts of protein in their bodies when given the same allowances of the same feed for the same period of time, when these allowances were limiting for both. An allowance of 33·957 kg of a feed with 12·76 MJ metabolizable energy (ME) and 189 g crude protein (N × 6·25)/kg feed was given to Large White × Landrace (LW ×) and Chinese Meishan (CM) female pigs over three different periods of time: (1) ad lib. (AL) with the time taken by individual pigs to consume the allowance being a variable, (2) over a period of 7 weeks (H) and (3) over a period of 9 weeks (L). In addition, in a fourth treatment, pigs of both breeds received the same allowance but supplemented with starch also over a period of 7 weeks (HS). The performance of the pigs on treatment AL was affected by pig breed, with CM pigs gaining protein at a slower, and lipid at a faster, rate than LW × pigs. On treatments L, H and HS the average amounts of protein retained were 2·693 and 2·655 kg for the LW × (n 15) and CM (n 15) pigs respectively (SED 0·106 kg). There was a statistical indication that the LW × pigs may have been more efficient on L, and less efficient on HS, than the CM pigs but we have been unable to propose any biological reason for such an effect, if it was in fact a real one. Thus, the efficiency with which ideal protein was utilized was close to being constant, and apparently at its maximum, for the two breeds. However, although CM pigs had the same protein gain, and the same live weights, on the same feed allowances as the LW × pigs, they gained significantly more lipid. This was attributed in part to their digesting their feed better and in part to their having a lower energy requirement for maintenance through a lower level of physical activity. Given that these two very different kinds of pigs use limiting protein with the same efficiency, it is suggested that it is safe to make the assumption in models of pig growth that the material efficiency of using limiting protein is constant across genotypes of pig.

Keywords

Growth modelMeishan pigsPig breedsProtein utilization
Type
Protein metabolism in pigs
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 74 , Issue 2 , August 1995 , pp. 183 - 195
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1995

References

REFERENCES

Agricultural Research Council (1981). The Nutrient Requirements of Pigs. Slough: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux.Google Scholar
Batterham, E. S. (1990). Prediction of the dietary energy value of diets and raw materials for pigs. In Feedstuff Evaluation, pp. 267–281 [Wiseman, J. and D., J. A. Cole, editors]. London: Butterworths.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, R. G. & Taverner, M. R. (1988). Genotype and sex effects on the relationship between energy intake and protein deposition in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 66, 676–686.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emmans, G. C. (1988). Genetic components of potential and actual growth. In Animal Breeding Opportunities. British Society of Animal Production Occasional Publication no. 12, pp. 153–183. Edinburgh: BSAP.Google Scholar
Emmans, G. C. & Kyriazakis, I. (1995). A general method for predicting the weight of water in the empty bodies of growing pigs. Animal Science (In the press).Google Scholar
Ellis, M, Smith, W. C, Henderson, R., Whittemore, C. T., Laird, R. & Phillips, P. (1983). Comparative performance and body composition of control and selection line Large White pigs. 3. Three low feeding scales for a fixed time. Animal Production 37, 253–258.Google Scholar
Février, C, Bourdon, D. & Aumaitre, A. (1992). Effects of level of dietary fiber from wheat bran on digestibility of nutrients, digestive enzymes and performance in the European Large White and Chinese Meishan pigs. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 68, 60–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, M. F. & Garthwaite, P. (1993). The form of response of body protein accretion to dietary amino acid supply. Journal of Nutrition 123, 957–963.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuller, M. F., Gordon, J. C. & Aitken, R. (1982). Energy and protein utilisation of pigs of different sex and genotype. In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals. European Association of Animal Production Publication no. 29, pp. 169–174. Switzerland: Vitzean.Google Scholar
Haley, C. S., d'Agaro, E. & Ellis, M. (1992). Genetic components of growth and ultrasonic fat depth traits in Meishan and Large White pigs and their reciprocal crosses. Animal Production 54, 105–115.Google Scholar
Kanis, E., van der Steen, H. A., M., de, Groot, P. N. & Brascamp, E. W. (1992). Growth, feed intake and body composition of Meishan pigs compared to Western genetic types. In Symposium sur le Pore Chinois, pp. 215–225 [Molenat, M. and Legault, C., editors]. Jouy–en–Josas, France: Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I., Dotas, D. & Emmans, G. C. (1994). The effect of breed on the relationship between feed composition and the efficiency of protein utilization in pigs. British Journal of Nutrition 71, 849–859.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kyriazakis, I. & Emmans, G. C. (1992 a). The effects of varying protein and energy intakes on the growth and body composition of pigs. 1. The effects of energy intake at constant, high protein intake. British Journal of Nutrition 68, 603–613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kyriazakis, I. & Emmans, G. C. (1992 b). The effects of varying protein and energy intakes on the growth and body composition of pigs. 2. The effects of varying both energy and protein intake. British Journal of Nutrition 68, 615–625.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kyriazakis, I., Leus, K., Emmans, G. C, Haley, C. S. & Oldham, J. D. (1993). The effect of breed (Large White × Landrace vs purebred Meishan) on the diets selected by pigs given a choice between two foods that differ in their crude protein contents. Animal Production 56, 121–128.Google Scholar
Minitab (1989). Release 7.1. Minitab, Inc.: Pennsylvania State College.Google Scholar
Morméde, P. & Dantzer, R. (1990). Adaptive abilities of Chinese pig breeds. In Symposium sur le Pore Chinois, pp. 156–165 [Molenat, M. and Legault, C., editors]. Jouy-en-Josas, France: Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. (1983). Development of recommended energy and protein allowances for growing pigs. Agricultural Systems 11, 159–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. & Fawcett, R. H. (1974). Model responses of the growing pigs to dietary intake of energy and protein. Animal Production 19, 221–231.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. & Fawcett, R. H. (1976). Theoretical aspects of a flexible model to simulate protein and lipid growth in pigs. Animal Production 27, 87–96.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T., Tullis, J. B. & Emmans, G. C. (1988). Protein growth in pigs. Animal Production 46, 437–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. (1994). Growth and the simulation of amimal responses. In Principles of Pig Science, pp. 55–73 [Cole, D.J. A., Wiseman, J. and Varley, M. A., editors]. Nottingham: Nottingham University Press.Google Scholar