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


     


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 Wolter, B. F.
Right arrow Articles by Webel, D. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wolter, B. F.
Right arrow Articles by Webel, D. M.

Journal of Animal Science, Vol 78, Issue 11 2784-2789, Copyright © 2000 by American Society of Animal Science


JOURNAL ARTICLE

Feeder location did not affect performance of weanling pigs in large groups

B. F. Wolter, M. Ellis, S. E. Curtis, E. N. Parr and D. M. Webel
Department of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana 61801, USA.

Crossbred pigs weaned at 17 d of age (n = 1,760; mean initial BW = 5.6 +/- 0.7 kg) were used in two 4-wk trials (four replicates per trial) to evaluate the effects of three pen designs on pig performance. The designs were 1) large group size (100 pigs/pen) with five two-sided feeders in a single, central location in the pen; 2) large group size (100 pigs/pen) with five two-sided feeders in multiple (five) locations in the pen; and 3) small group size (20 pigs/pen) with a single two-sided feeder in a central location in the pen. Each feeder provided two 20.3-cm-wide feeding places on each side. Pigs had free access to feed and water. Feeder-trough space (4 cm/pig) and floor-area allowance (0.17 m2/pig) were the same for all treatments. Pigs in the large-group treatments were lighter (15.6 and 15.6 vs 16.0 kg; P < 0.01) at the end of wk 4 and had lower ADG (358 and 357 vs 373 g; P < 0.01) and ADFI (510 and 521 vs 544 g; P < 0.01) during wk 2 through 4 than pigs in small groups. Gain:feed ratio was similar (P > 0.05) for all treatment groups throughout the study. For large groups, feed disappearance from each of the five feeders was similar (P > 0.05) for both multiple- and single-location treatments. In summary, large group size reduced pig growth performance, but the approach to providing multiple feeding locations that was employed in this experiment did not increase feed intake or growth performance of pigs in the large groups.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2000 by the American Society of Animal Science.