Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:10:06.162Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gastric secretion in suckling pigs and early-weaned pigs given a dry cow's-milk formula ad lib.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

J. A. Decuypere ,
R. Bossuyt  and
H. K. Henderickx
J. A. Decuypere
Affiliation:
Laboratorium voor Voeding en Hygiëne, Faculteit van de Landbouwwetenschappen, Rijksuniversiteit Gent, Bosstraat 1, 9230 Melle, Belgium
R. Bossuyt
Affiliation:
Laboratorium voor Voeding en Hygiëne, Faculteit van de Landbouwwetenschappen, Rijksuniversiteit Gent, Bosstraat 1, 9230 Melle, Belgium
H. K. Henderickx
Affiliation:
Laboratorium voor Voeding en Hygiëne, Faculteit van de Landbouwwetenschappen, Rijksuniversiteit Gent, Bosstraat 1, 9230 Melle, Belgium
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.

1. Twelve gastric-cannulated litter-mate pigs were used to study secretion and proteolytic activity in the stomach of suckling and early-weaned pigs in relation to age and food intake.

2. Results demonstrate that from the first observation at day 8, piglets were able to secrete acid. pH and acid concentration did not change during the first 4 weeks of life.

3. Proteolytic activity was low during the first 2–3 weeks of life and rapidly increased thereafter.

4. Two phenomena differentiated suckling pigs from pigs given dry cow's milk: (1) a low buffering capacity the gastric contents, beginning 1 h after feeding the dry cow's-milk formula, results in a low total acid concentration in the weaned pigs and (2) the increase in proteolytic activity in relation to the age is much more pronounced in the artificially-reared pigs.

5. These two phenomena are discussed and related to the formation of a hard casein clot in the stomach of the cow's-milk-fed pigs, which has a long retention time and stimulates gastrin release.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , July 1978 , pp. 91 - 102
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1978

References

Anson, M. L. (1939). J. gen. Physiol. 22, 79.Google Scholar
Braude, R. (1972). 2nd Wld Congr. Anim. Fdg, Madrid. Gen. Rep. 1, 641.Google Scholar
Braude, R., Mitchell, K. G., Newport, M. J. & Porter, J. W. G. (1970). Br. J. Nutr. 24, 501.Google Scholar
Braude, R., Newport, M. J. & Porter, J. W. G. (1970). Br. J. Nutr. 24, 827.Google Scholar
Conway, E. J. (1957). Microdiffusion and Volumetric Error. London: Crosby Lockwood.Google Scholar
Cranwell, P. D., Noakes, D. E. & Hill, K. J. (1968). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 27, 26 A.Google Scholar
Cranwell, P. D., Noakes, D. E. & Hill, K. J. (1976). Br. J. Nutr. 36, 71.Google Scholar
Cranwell, P. D. & Titchen, D. A. (1974). Res. vet. Sci. 16, 105.Google Scholar
Cranwell, P. D. & Titchen, D. A. (1975). 46th Mtg Aust. N.Z. Ass. Anim. Sci, Canberra.Google Scholar
Crean, G. P., Marshall, M. W. & Rumsey, R. D. E. (1969). Gastroenterology 57, 147.Google Scholar
Cunningham, H. M. & Brisson, G. J. (1957). J. Anim. Sci. 16, 568.Google Scholar
Decuypere, J. A. & Van der Heyde, H. (1972). Zbl. Bakt. Parasitenk 221A, 492.Google Scholar
Decuypere, J. A., Vervaeke, I. J., Henderickx, H. K. & Dierick, N. A. (1977). J. Anim. Sci. 46, 463.Google Scholar
Dragstedt, L. R. & Lawson, L. J. (1964). Archs Surg. 88, 151.Google Scholar
Forte, G. M., Forte, J. G. & Machen, T. E. (1972). J. Physiol., Lond. 226, 31.Google Scholar
Friend, D. W., Cunningham, H. M. & Nicholson, J. W. G. (1963). Can. J. Anim. Sci. 43, 156.Google Scholar
Hartman, P. A., Hays, V. W., Baker, R. O., Neagle, L. H. & Catron, D. V. (1961). J. Anim. Sci. 20, 114.Google Scholar
Höller, H. (1970 a). Zbl. Veterinarmed. 17A, 665.Google Scholar
Höller, H. (1970 b). Zbl. Veterinarmed. 17A, 857.Google Scholar
Kidder, D. E. & Manners, M. J. (1974). Tirth int. Pig Vet. Soc. Congr., Lyon.Google Scholar
Kutas, F. & Szabo, J. (1974). Acta vet. Acad. Sci. hung. 24, 133.Google Scholar
Kwasnizkij, A. W. & Bakejewa, E. M. (1940). Trudy Inst. Swinowodstwa Kijew 15, 3.Google Scholar
Lewis, C. J., Catron, D. V., Liv, C. H., Speer, V. C. & Ashton, G. C. (1955). J. agric. Fd Chem. 3, 1047.Google Scholar
Lubran, M. (1966). Lancet ii, 1070.Google Scholar
Maner, J. H., Pond, W. G., Loosli, J. K. & Lowrey, R. S. (1962). J. Anim. Sci. 21, 49.Google Scholar
Manners, M. J. (1970). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 21, 333.Google Scholar
Manners, M. J. (1976). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 35, 49.Google Scholar
Noakes, D. E., Cranwell, P. D. & Hill, K. J. (1968). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 27, 21.Google Scholar
Roy, J. H. B. & Ternouth, J. H. (1972). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 31, 53.Google Scholar
Saint Hilaire, S., Lavers, M. K., Kennedy, J. & Code, C. F. (1960). Gastroenterology 39, 1.Google Scholar
Schulman, A. (1973). Nord. VetMed. 25, 220.Google Scholar
Second report of, the Federation, Internationale de Pharmacie Commission (1966). J. mond. Pharm. 4, 343.Google Scholar
Van der Heyde, H. (1969). Rev. Agric. 22, 1411.Google Scholar
Walker, D. M. (1959). J. agric. Sci., Camb. 52, 352.Google Scholar
White, F., Wenham, G., Sharman, G. A. M., Jones, A. S., Pattray, E. A. S. & McDonald, I. (1969). Br. J. Nutr. 23, 847.Google Scholar
Willems, G., Vansteenkiste, Y. & Limbosch, J. M. (1972). Gastroenterology, 62, 583.Google Scholar
Zelenkova, J. & Gregor, O. (1971). Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 6, 653.Google Scholar
Zontine, W. J. (1973). J. Am. vet. med. Ass. 162, 878.Google Scholar