Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:20:16.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Circadian variation in the apparent digetibility of diets measured at the terminal ileum in pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. M. Livingstone
Affiliation:
The Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
Barbara A. Baird
Affiliation:
The Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
T. Atkinson
Affiliation:
The Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB
R. M. J. Crofts
Affiliation:
The Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB

Summary

Circadian variation in the apparent digestibility of diets having different physical characteristics was measured in samples taken from the terminal ileum using simple cannulae and marker ratios. Six pigs were used in three latin squares involving three iso-nitrogenous diets (30 g N/kg D.M.). Diet A was based on barley, weatings, soyabean meal and fish meal, diet B included barley, weatings and oats and diet C was purified. The allocation of diet provided 100 g D.M./kg Weg0·75/24 h and in each latin square a different pattern of feed intake was used; diets were given at intervals of either 1 or 12 h, or ad libitum.

Differences in the digestibility of the diets were consistently distinguished by the technique. The circadian variation in digestibility was related to the type of diet and could be modified by changing the number and distribution of feeds per day. The results show that an understanding of the variation associated with different diets and feeding methods is necessary for optimizing the strategy for sampling from the terminal ileum.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

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

Association op Official Agricultural Chemists (1965). Official Methods of Analysis. Washington, D.C.: A.O.A.C.Google Scholar
Braude, R. (1972). Feeding Methods. In University of Nottingham Eighteenth Easter School in Agricultural Science, 1971. Pig Production(ed. Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 279291. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Davidson, J., Mathieson, J. & Boyne, A. W. (1970). The use of automation in determining nitrogen by the Kjeldahl method, with final calculations by computer. Analyst, London 95, 181193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horszczaruk, F. (1971). Digestion in the pig. II. Studies on digestion and absorption with the use of the slaughter method. Biuletyn Instytut Genetyki i Hodowli Zwierzat Polskicj Akademii Nauk 21, 117136.Google Scholar
Knapka, J. J., Barth, K. M., Brown, D. G. & Cragie, R. G. (1967). Evaluation of polyethylene, chromic oxide and cerium-144 as digestibility indicators in burros. Journal of Nutrition 92, 7985.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laplace, J. P. (1972). Le transit digestif chez les monogastriques. I. Les techniques de'étude. Annales de zootechnie 21, 83105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livingstone, R. M., Fowler, V. R., White, F. & Wenham, G. (1977). Annealed glass cannulae for use in digestion studies with pigs. Veterinary Record 101, 168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Low, A. G. (1976). Digestion and absorption of nutrients in growing pigs. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 35, 5762.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mathieson, J. (1970). The automated estimation of chromic oxide. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 29, 30A.Google Scholar
Moore, J. H. (1957). Diurnal variations in the composition of the faeces of pigs on diets containing chromium oxide. British Journal of Nutrition 11, 273288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nordfeldt, S. (1954). Digestibility experiments with pigs. Kungliga Lantbrukshögskolans annaler 21, 129.Google Scholar
Stevenson, A. E. & Clare, N. T. (1963). Measurement of feed intake by grazing cattle and sheep. IX. Determination of chromic oxide in faeces using an Auto Analyzer. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 6, 121126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar