Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:16:35.918Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Further studies of the rate of passage of food through the alimentary tract of pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Elizabeth J. Castle
Affiliation:
Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool
M. E. Castle
Affiliation:
Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Liverpool

Extract

1. Four replicated experiments were made to determine the rate of passage of meal through the alimentary tract of pigs on different feeding treatments. In each experiment stained meal was used and the results were expressed by means of excretion curves. From these, mean retention times (R values) were calculated. All the curves were of a similar sigmoid shape.

2. A significant inverse relationship was found between the mean retention time and the total weight (meal plus water) of the ration. This relationship was found when (a) the weight of meal was constant and the weight of water was varied, (b) the weight of water was constant and the weight of meal was varied, and (c) the total combined weight of meal and water (at the same ratio) was varied.

3. The digestibility of the dry matter and crudec protein in Exps. 1–3 was not altered greatly as a result of the different feeding treatments.

4. In Exp. 4, similar rates of passage were found in pigs fed on the two rations of widely different digestibilities.

5. The dry-matter content of the faeces of the pigs was remarkably constant over a wide range of water and food intakes when using the same meal.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1957

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

Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. McC. & Wainman, F. W. (1955). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 14, iv.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. McC. & Wainman, F. W. (1956). Brit. J. Nutr. 10, 69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braude, R. & Mitchell, K. G. (1951). Agriculture, 57, 501.Google Scholar
Castle, Eliazbeth J. & Castle, M. E. (1956). J. Agric. Sci. 47, 196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenkeit, W. (1932). Berl. tierärztl. Wschr. 48, 17.Google Scholar
Minson, D. J. (1955). Private communication.Google Scholar