J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J. Anim Sci. 1969. 29:591-597.
© 1969 American Society of Animal Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pocock, E. F.
Right arrow Articles by Slinger, S. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pocock, E. F.
Right arrow Articles by Slinger, S. J.

Dietary Factors Affecting the Development of Esophagogastric Ulcers in Swine1,2,

Elizabeth F. Pocock3, H. S. Bayley4, C. K. Roe3 and S. J. Slinger4

University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario

Abstract

The influence of some dietary factors on the development of gastric ulcers in swine was studied. Pelleting a corn-soybean meal diet significantly increased the number of gastric lesions observed. Restriction of feed intake for three separate 7-day periods during the growing period had no significant effect although there were more normal stomachs than when the feed was not restricted. A diet containing corn, soybean meal, fish meal, meat meal and fish oil was found to be ulcerogenic. The addition to this diet of 10% alfalfa meal did not reduce the number of gastric lesions but 5% oat hulls did have a protective effect; however, this effect could not be repeated in a second experiment. Adding 5% wood shavings to the ulcerogenic diet significantly reduced the number of abnormal stomachs. When the pigs in the same experiment had access to the same wood shavings as bedding, there were more normal stomachs and the lesions were less severe than when no bedding was provided but the difference was not significant.

Footnotes

1 This research was supported in part by the Ontario Department of Agriculture and Food.

2 The authors are indebted to Dr. G. C. Ashton for assistance in performing the statistical analyses.

3 Department of Clinical Studies, Ontario Veterinary College.

4 Department of Nutrition, Ontario Agricultural College.






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1969 by the American Society of Animal Science.