Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T05:44:25.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of different piglet diets in organic agriculture using milk powder, enriched lysine, conventional potato protein or high soybean cake content

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2020

Nele Quander-Stoll Open the ORCID record for Nele Quander-Stoll [Opens in a new window] ,
Mirjam Holinger Open the ORCID record for Mirjam Holinger [Opens in a new window] ,
Barbara Früh ,
Werner Zollitsch  and
Florian Leiber Open the ORCID record for Florian Leiber [Opens in a new window]
Nele Quander-Stoll*
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), 5070Frick, Switzerland
Mirjam Holinger
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), 5070Frick, Switzerland
Barbara Früh
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), 5070Frick, Switzerland
Werner Zollitsch
Affiliation:
Institute of Livestock Sciences, BOKU–University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, 1180Vienna, Austria
Florian Leiber
Affiliation:
Department of Livestock Sciences, Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), 5070Frick, Switzerland
*
Author for correspondence: Nele Quander-Stoll, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Feeding monogastric livestock in organic agriculture is challenging due to several tradeoffs between animal welfare aspects, resource efficiency, as well as ecological and social sustainability. Organic standards may even increase such conflicts, as is currently the case with upcoming new regulations regarding restrictions of feed sources for organic pigs in Europe. In order to contribute data for balancing reasons to minimize tradeoffs, we compared four different piglet diets, each targeted to reach a high protein quality by either a high proportion of soybean cake (SOY), inclusion of milk powder (MILK), fermentatively produced lysine (LYS) or conventional potato protein (POT). All diets were designed to meet the nutritional requirements of piglets in the best possible way, however they all represented different conflicts with either organic regulations or sustainability goals. In each of five consecutive runs, respectively three litters were assigned to every dietary treatment, resulting in 15 litters per treatment in total. In each litter, seven focus animals were defined. The piglets were studied from birth until 58 days of age. They were weaned at day 46 and sold from the farm at day 58. Piglets were individually weighed at an average age of 3, 21, 43, 50 and 58 days with simultaneous assessment of body condition score (BCS) and prevalence of diarrhea. Feed intake (FI) was recorded litter wise weekly, starting from week three. Feed conversion ratio (FCR) was calculated for the period after weaning. Statistical analysis was executed using linear mixed effect models. Regarding FI, FCR and daily weight gains, no treatment effect was found. Only at day 21, BCS was lower for piglets receiving POT. Prevalence of diarrhea increased after weaning for all treatments. All four tested diets led to similar weight gains and feed conversion in the piglets. Animals fed diet POT recovered better from diarrhea compared to the other treatments. A high soybean cake content or lysine supplementation in the diet was disadvantageous with regard to the occurrence of diarrhea. LYS diet led to signs of threonine deficit, indicating that lysine addition alone may not solve the issue. The addition of milk powder provided no extra benefit. In recognition of the health benefits, the use of 5% potato protein, even if it is sourced from conventional production, must still be considered as a sustainable option for feeding organic piglets. The sustainability implications are discussed in the paper.

Keywords

Amino acid supplyanimal healthdiet compositiongrowth rateorganic pig nutrition
Type
Research Paper
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , June 2021 , pp. 245 - 254
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Almeida, E, Martins, SMMK, Abrahão, AFA, Andrade, AFC, Moreno, AM, Parazzi, LJ, Del Santo, TA and Moretti, ASA (2012) Effect of probiotic on the development of piglets challenged with Escherichia coli. Brazilian Journal of Veterinary Research and Animal Science 49, 57–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Araújo, WAG, Ferreira, AS, Renaudeau, D, Brustolini, PC and Silva, BAN (2010) Effects of diet protein source on the behavior of piglets after weaning. Livestock Science 132, 35–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldinger, L, Hagmüller, W, Minihuber, U, Matzner, M and Zollitsch, W (2014) Sainfoin seeds in organic diets for weaned piglets – utilizing the protein-rich grains of a long-known forage legume. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 31, 12–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldinger, L, Hagmüller, W, Minihuber, U, Schipflinger, M and Zollitsch, W (2015) Organic grass pea (Lathyrus sativus L.) seeds as a protein source for weaned piglets: effects of seed treatment and different inclusion rates on animal performance. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 31, 269–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baldinger, L, Bussemas, R, Höinghaus, K, Renger, A and Weißmann, F (2017) Effect of six 100% organic feeding strategies differing in external input demand on animal performance and production costs of piglets before and after weaning. Organic Agriculture 7, 267–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, D, Mächler, M, Bolker, B and Walker, S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bio Suisse (2020) Schweizer Richtlinien für die Erzeugung, Verarbeitung und den Handel von Knospe-Bio-Produkten [Swiss Guidelines for the Production, Processing and Trade of Organic Products].Google Scholar
Bouzerzour, K, Morgan, F, Cuinet, I, Bonhomme, C, Jardin, J, Le Huërou-Luron, I and Dupont, D (2012) In vivo digestion of infant formula in piglets: protein digestion kinetics and release of bioactive peptides. British Journal of Nutrition 108, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bussemas, R and Weißmann, F (2008) Prolonged suckling period in organic piglet production – effects on some performance and health aspects. In Neuhoff, D, Halberg, N, Thomas, A et al. (eds), 16th IFOAM Organic World Congress Modena, pp. 106–109.Google Scholar
Chen, Y, Li, D, Dai, Z, Piao, X, Wu, Z, Wang, B, Zhu, Y and Zeng, Z (2014) L-Methionine supplementation maintains the integrity and barrier function of the small-intestinal mucosa in post-weaning piglets. Amino Acids 46, 1131–1142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dourmad, JY and Jondreville, C (2007) Impact of nutrition on nitrogen, phosphorus, Cu and Zn in pig manure, and on emissions of ammonia and odours. Livestock Science 112, 192–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doyle, RE, Groat, J, Wynn, PC and Holyoake, PK (2015) Physiological and nonphysiological indicators of body condition score in weaner pigs. Journal of Animal Science 93, 1887–1895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ertl, P, Knaus, W and Zollitsch, W (2016) An approach to including protein quality when assessing the net contribution of livestock to human food supply. Animal: An International Journal of Animal Bioscience 11, 1883–1889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faccin, JE, Allerson, MW, Woodworth, JC, DeRouchey, JM, Tokach, MD, Dritz, SS and Goodband, RD (2019) Effects of Weaning Age and Antibiotic Use on Pig Performance in a Commercial System. Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports: Vol. 5: Iss. 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fang, ZF, Yao, K, Zhang, XL, Zhao, S, Sun, Z, Tian, G, Yu, B, Lin, Y, Zhu, B, Jia, G, Zhang, K, Chen, D and Wu, D (2010) Nutrition and health relevant regulation of intestinal sulfur amino acid metabolism. Amino Acids 39, 633–640.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernández, JA and Strathe, A (2009) Dietary tryptophan and threonine supply to 28 days old weaned piglets. Animal Feed Science and Technology 154, 265–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forstmeier, W and Schielzeth, H (2011) Cryptic multiple hypotheses testing in linear models: overestimated effect sizes and the winner's curse. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 65, 47–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Früh, B, Schlatter, B, Isensee, A, Maurer, V and Willer, H (2015) Report on organic protein availability and demand in Europe = Deliverable 1.2 of the CORE Organic project (ICOPP). Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Garcia-Launay, F, Van Der Werf, HMG, Nguyen, TTH, Le Tutour, L and Dourmad, JY (2014) Evaluation of the environmental implications of the incorporation of feed-use amino acids in pig production using life cycle assessment. Livestock Science 161, 158–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorissen, SHM, Crombag, JJR, Senden, JMG, Huub Waterval, WA, Bierau, J, Verdijk, LB and van Loon, LJC (2018) Protein content and amino acid composition of commercially available plant-based protein isolates. Amino Acids 50, 1685–1695.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halekoh, U and Højsgaard, S (2014) A Kenward–Roger approximation and parametric bootstrap methods for tests in linear mixed models – the R package pbkrtest. Journal of Statistical Software 59, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamard, A, Sève, B and Le Floc'h, N (2007) Intestinal development and growth performance of early-weaned piglets fed a low-threonine diet. Animal: An International Journal of Animal Bioscience 1, 1134–1142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holinger, M, Früh, B, Stoll, P, Graage, R, Wirth, S, Bruckmaier, R, Prunier, A, Kreuzer, M and Hillmann, E (2018) Chronic intermittent stress exposure and access to grass silage interact differently in their effect on behaviour, gastric health and stress physiology of entire or castrated male growing-finishing pigs. Physiology & Behavior 195, 58–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
IFOAM (2014) The IFOAM Norms for Organic Production and Processing. International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM), Bonn, Germany.Google Scholar
Jayaraman, B, Htoo, J and Nyachoti, CM (2015) Effects of dietary threonine:lysine ratios and sanitary conditions on performance, plasma urea nitrogen, plasma-free threonine and lysine of weaned pigs. Animal Nutrition 1, 283–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, D and Gomes, J (2005) Methionine production by fermentation. Biotechnology Advances 23, 41–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lange de, CFM, Pluske, J, Gong, J and Nyachoti, CM (2010) Strategic use of feed ingredients and feed additives to stimulate gut health and development in young pigs. Livestock Science 134, 124–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, GK, Bertolo, RF, Adjiri-Awere, A, Pencharz, PB and Ball, RO (2007) Adequate oral threonine is critical for mucin production and gut function in neonatal piglets. American Journal of Physiology – Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology 292, G1293–G1301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le Huërou-Luron, I, Bouzerzour, K, Ferret-Bernard, S, Ménard, O, Le Normand, L, Perrier, C, Le Bourgot, C, Jardin, J, Bourlieu, C, Carton, T, Le Ruyet, P, Cuinet, I, Bonhomme, C and Dupont, D (2018) A mixture of milk and vegetable lipids in infant formula changes gut digestion, mucosal immunity and microbiota composition in neonatal piglets. European Journal of Nutrition 57, 463–476.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leiber, F and Früh, B (2014) Aspekte zur Zulassung von Aminosäurepräparaten aus fermentativer Produktion in der Tierernährung im Biologischen Landbau [Aspects for the Approval of Amino Acids from Fermentative Production for Animal Nutrition in Organic Farming]. Framework Paper of the Research Institute of Organic Farming (FiBL, Switzerland).Google Scholar
Lenth, R, Singmann, H, Love, J, Buerkner, P and Herve, M (2020) Emmeans: estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. The American Statistician 34, 216–221.Google Scholar
Lindermayer, H, Probstmeier, G and Preißinger, W (2010) Ferkelfütterung mit Heimischen Sojaprodukten – 20/15% Sojakuchen – extrudiert, 27/20% Vollfettsojabohnen- geröstet [Piglet Feeding with Local Soy Products – 20/15% Soy Cake – Extruded, 27/20% Full Fat Soybeans – Roasted]. Test report S18. State Institute for Agriculture (LfL).Google Scholar
Liu, S, Ni, JQ, Radcliffe, JS and Vonderohe, CE (2017) Mitigation of ammonia emissions from pig production using reduced dietary crude protein with amino acid supplementation. Bioresource Technology 233, 200–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Main, RG, Dritz, SS, Tokach, MD, Goodband, RD and Nelssen, JL (2004) Increasing weaning age improves pig performance in a multisite production system. Journal of Animal Science 82, 1499–1507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meul, M, Ginneberge, C, Van Middelaar, CE, De Boer, IJM, Fremaut, D and Haesaert, G (2012) Carbon footprint of five pig diets using three land use change accounting methods. Livestock Science 149, 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NRC, National Research Council (2012) Nutrient Requirements of Swine, 11th revised Edition. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Nyachoti, CM, Omogbenigun, FO, Rademacher, M and Blank, G (2006) Performance responses and indicators of gastrointestinal health in early-weaned pigs fed low-protein amino acid-supplemented diets. Journal of Animal Science 84, 125–134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Philippe, FX, Cabaraux, JF and Nicks, B (2011) Ammonia emissions from pig houses: influencing factors and mitigation techniques. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 141, 245–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pluske, JR, Turpin, DL and Kim, JC (2018) Gastrointestinal tract (gut) health in the young pig. Animal Nutrition 4, 187–196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poulsen, ASR, Jonge de, N, Sugiharto, S, Nielsen, JL, Lauridsen, C and Canibe, N (2017) The microbial community of the gut differs between piglets fed sow milk, milk replacer or bovine colostrum. British Journal of Nutrition 117, 964–978.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team (2017) R: A language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available at https://www.R-project.org.Google Scholar
Reckmann, K, Blank, R, Traulsen, I and Krieter, J (2016) Comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) of pork using different protein sources in pig feed. Archives Animal Breeding 59, 27–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saxe, H, Hamelin, L, Hinrichsen, T and Wenzel, H (2018) Production of pig feed under future atmospheric CO2 concentrations: changes in crop content and chemical composition, land use, environmental impact, and socio-economic consequences. Sustainability (Switzerland) 10, 3184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaart, MW, Schierbeek, H, Sophie, RDV and Stoll, B (2005) Threonine utilization is high in the intestine of piglets. The Journal of Nutrition 135, 765.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schader, C, Muller, A, El-Hage Scialabba, N, Hecht, J, Isensee, A, Erb, K-H, Smith, P, Makkar, HPS, Klocke, P, Leiber, F, Schwegler, P, Stolze, M and Niggli, U (2015) Impacts of feeding less food-competing feedstuffs to livestock on global food system sustainability. Journal of the Royal Society Interface 12, 20150891.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schumacher, U, Fidelak, C, Koopmann, R, Weißmann, F, Snigula, J, Brüggemann, R, Naatjes, M, Simoneit, C and Bender, S (2011) Wissenstandsanalyse zur Tiergesundheit aller Nutztierarten im Ökologischen Landbau und 100% Biofütterung [Analysis of Knowledge Status on Animal Health of All Types of Livestock in Organic Farming and 100% Organic Feeding]. BÖLN – Federal organic farming program and other forms of sustainable agriculture.Google Scholar
Schwediauer, P, Hagmüller, W and Zollitsch, W (2018) Germination of faba beans (Vicia faba L.) for organic weaning piglets. Organic Agriculture 8, 249–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J, Gerrard, CL and Hermansen, JE (2014) Improved Contribution of Local Feed to Support 100% Organic Feed Supply to Pigs and Poultry. ICOPP Synthesis Report.Google Scholar
Stalljohann, G. 2006. Untersuchungen zu Fütterungsstrategien für eine erfolgreiche Aufzucht ökologisch gehaltener Ferkel [Investigation on Feeding Strategies for Successful Rearing of Organic Piglets] Dissertation. Munich, LMU.Google Scholar
Stoll, P (2004) Einsatzgrenzen von Einzelfuttermitteln für Schweine. Merkblatt für die Praxis [Limits of Use of Feed Materials for Pigs. Leaflet for Practice]. ALP aktuell 2004, Nr. 15.Google Scholar
Sundrum, A (2001) Organic livestock farming: a critical review. Livestock Production Science 67, 207–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundrum, A, Schneider, K and Richter, U (2006) Possibilities and Limitations of Protein Supply in Organic Poultry and Pig Production. Final Project Report EEC 2092/91 (Organic) Revision, Nr. D 4.1 (Part 1). University of Kassel, Witzenhausen, Department of Animal Nutrition and Animal Health.Google Scholar
The Council of the European Union (2007) Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products. Official Journal of the European Union 189, 1–23.Google Scholar
The Council of the European Union (2018) Council Regulation (EC) No 2018/848 of June 2018 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007. Official Journal of the European Union 150, 1–92.Google Scholar
VDLUFA [Association of German Agricultural Analytic and Research Institutes] (ed.) (2007) Handbuch der Landwirtschaftlichen Versuchs- und Untersuchungsmethodik (VDLUFA-Methodenbuch), Band III: Die chemische Untersuchung von Futtermitteln [Handbook of Agricultural Experimental and Analytical Methods, Volume III: The Chemical Analysis of Feedstuffs]. 3rd ed. VDLUFA-Verlag, Darmstadt, Germany.Google Scholar
Vente-Spreeuwenberg, MAM, Verdonk, JMAJ, Bakker, GCM, Beynen, AC and Verstegen, MWA (2004) Effect of dietary protein source on feed intake and small intestinal morphology in newly weaned pigs. Livestock Production Science 86, 169–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waglay, A, Karboune, S and Alli, I (2013) Potato protein isolates: recovery and characterization of their properties. Food Chemistry 142, 373–382.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, W, Zeng, X, Mao, X, Wu, G and Qiao, S (2010) Optimal dietary true ileal digestible threonine for supporting the mucosal barrier in small intestine of weanling pigs. The Journal of Nutrition 140, 981.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Witten, S, Paulsen, HM, Weißmann, F and Bussemas, R (2014) Praxisbefragung zur Aminosäurelücke und praktische Möglichkeiten zur Verbesserung der Eiweißversorgung der Monogastrier in der Fütterung im Ökologischen Landbau [Practice Survey on the Amino Acid Gap and Practical Possibilities for Improving the Protein Supply of Monogastric Animals in Feeding in Organic Farming]. Thünen Working Paper.Google Scholar
Wlcek, S, Hagmüller, W, Leeb, C, Stark, H, Ölzant, F and Böhm, M (2015) Leitfaden tierwohl schwein [Guide animal welfare pig]. Bio Austria 1, 1–20.Google Scholar
Wu, JJ, Zhang, Y, Dong, JH, Cao, CM, Li, B, Feng, SB, Ding, HY, Ma, LY, Wang, XC and Li, Y (2016) Allergens and intestinal damage induced by soybean antigen proteins in weaned piglets. Italian Journal of Animal Science 15, 437–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, GJ, Xie, CY, Thacker, PA, Htoo, JK and Qiao, SY (2013) Estimation of the ideal ratio of standardized ileal digestible threonine to lysine for growing pigs (22–50 kg) fed low crude protein diets supplemented with crystalline amino acids. Animal Feed Science and Technology 180, 83–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, S, Qin, G, Chen, J and Zhang, F (2018) Acidic polypeptides A1a, A3 and A4 of Gly m 6 (glycinin) are allergenic for piglets. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology 202, 147–152.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zollitsch, W (2007) Challenges in the nutrition of organic pigs. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 87, 2747–2750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar