| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
* Research Institute for Animal Husbandry, P.O. Box 2176, 8203 AD Lelystad, The Netherlands,
and
Wageningen University, Department of Animal Science P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands,
and
Nutreco Agriculture Research and DevelopmentP.O. Box 220, 5830 AE Boxmeer, The Netherlands
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionImplicationsLiterature cited |
|---|
Key Words: Fiber • Gestation • Lactation • Polysaccharides • Reproduction • Sows
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionImplicationsLiterature cited |
|---|
). High levels of fermentable nonstarch polysaccharides (NSP) in diets for gestating sows reduce stereotypic behavior due to reduced hunger (Vestergaard, 1997). Reproductive performance seems unaffected when gestating sows are fed a diet with a high level of fermentable NSP (Vestergaard and Danielsen, 1998). However, there are some indications from two Danish field studies (Sørensen, 1992, 1994) that reproductive performance (in terms of subsequent litter size) may be improved when sows are fed diets with a high level of fermentable NSP during both gestation and lactation. Information on the long-term effects and carry-over effects of feeding high levels of dietary fermentable NSP during gestation, during lactation or during both gestation and lactation on reproductive performance and body composition of the sows is lacking. Group housing of gestating sows in countries within the European Community will be compulsory in the future. The type of group-housing system may influence reproductive performance and body composition of sows (Backus et al., 1997). Therefore, this experiment was conducted to determine the effects on reproductive performance, body weight and backfat thickness in sows that are fed a starch diet or a diet high in fermentable NSP during gestation, lactation or both gestation and lactation during the first three parities. The experiment was conducted in two group-housing systems for gestating sows: free access stalls or electronic feeding.
|
Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionImplicationsLiterature cited |
|---|
Diets
The pelleted diets for the gestating sows (Table 1) differed mainly in starch and fermentable NSP content. To feed the gestating sows isoenergetic, a digestibility trial was conducted with both gestation diets (Van der Peet-Schwering et al., 2002). The level of fecal digestible CP, fecal digestible crude fat, nonfermentable NSP and NE in the starch and NSP gestation diets were 93 and 90 g/kg, 42 and 40 g/kg, 191 and 172 g/kg, and 8.52 and 8.59 MJ/kg, respectively. Net energy of the diets was calculated according to CVB (2000). However, based on the results of Rijnen et al. (2001) the estimated net energy value of fermentable NSP was assumed to be similar to that of digested starch (13.5 MJ/kg). Starch in the starch diet was primarily derived from wheat, peas and tapioca, whereas NSP in the NSP diet was derived from dried sugar beet pulp and soybean hulls, both of which are highly fermentable NSP sources. To comply with the Dutch law (National Reference Center, 1998) that says that gestating sows should receive 14% crude fiber in their diet, 14.1% and 11.1% straw was added to the starch diet and the NSP diet, respectively. Straw has a high level of crude fiber but a low level of fermentable NSP. The pelleted diets for the lactating sows (Table 1) also differed mainly in starch and fermentable NSP content. The level of fecal digestible CP (120 g/kg), fecal digestible crude fat (48 g/kg), nonfermentable NSP (120 g/kg) and NE (9.42 MJ/kg) were formulated to be the same in both diets (CVB, 2000). The net energy value of fermentable NSP was assumed to be similar to that of digested starch. Starch in the starch diet was primarily derived from tapioca, whereas NSP in the NSP diet was derived from dried sugar beet pulp.
|
Approximately 10 d before the expected time of parturition, irrespective of housing system during gestation, sows were moved to farrowing rooms each having six pens of 2.20 x 1.80 m. The concrete solid floor (1.00 x 1.80 m) was equipped with floor heating. Cross fostering of piglets took place within 3 days after parturition and occurred only among sows of the same experimental treatment. Piglets were weaned at an average age of 27.8 d (SD = 4.0). On the day of weaning, sows were moved to sow gestation rooms. All rooms were equipped with computer-controlled heating and mechanical ventilation systems.
Feeding
Gestating sows housed in free access stalls were fed the gestation diets twice a day (0800 and 1500). In the electronic feeding system, the feeding cycle started at 2300. Sows were free to consume their daily ration all at once or to divide it in more portions. Daily amount of both diets increased during gestation (d 0 to 60: 2.5 kg/d; d 60 to 85: 2.9 kg/d; d 85 to day of transfer to farrowing room: 3.4 kg/d). Gestating sows of parity 1, 2, and 3 were all fed the same daily amount of feed. Feeding levels were not adjusted for body condition of sows at weaning. In the farrowing room, sows were fed the lactation diets at 3.4 kg/d prior to parturition. During lactation, sows were fed on an ascending scale from parturition until d 6 after parturition and were given free access to the lactation diets from d 6 after parturition onwards. On the day of weaning, sows were fed 0.75 kg of the lactation diet in the farrowing room at 0800 and 1.25 kg of the gestation diet in the room for gestating sows at 1500. During the weaning-to-estrus interval (WEI) sows were fed the gestation diets at a level of 2.5 kg/d. All feeds were given as dry feed. All sows were given free access to drinking water. Piglets were given free access to a commercial creep feed from d 11 after birth until weaning.
Measurements
Feed.
During the two-year experiment, experimental diets were sampled weekly. The weekly samples were pooled per 2 mo. Feed was analyzed every 2 mo for DM, ash, CP, crude fat, starch and sugars. All samples were analyzed in duplicate. DM, ash, CP and crude fat content were analyzed according to standard methods ISO 6496 (ISO, 1999b), ISO 5984 (ISO, 1978), ISO 5983 (ISO, 1979) and ISO 6492 procedure B (ISO, 1999a), respectively. The starch content was analyzed enzymatically as described by Brunt (2000). The sugar content was analyzed by the method of Luff Schoorl (EG, 1971). Dietary NSP was calculated as dietary DM minus dietary ash, CP, crude fat, starch and sugars.
Culling.
During the experiment, culling of sows was recorded. Sows were culled for the following reasons: severe lameness, endometritis, illness and reproductive failure like return to estrus for the third time in one parity, not showing estrus after two treatments with PG600, and loosing piglets in the last month of gestation.
Body weight and backfat thickness.
Individual BW and backfat thickness of the sows was measured at the start of the trial, at the day of transfer to the farrowing room, at d 112 of gestation and at weaning in all three parities. Backfat thickness was measured ultrasonically at three points 5 cm left of the median as described in Vesseur et al. (1997).
Reproductive performance.
Number of total piglets born (live-born piglets + stillborn piglets + mummies) was recorded within 16 h after parturition. Number of weaned piglets was recorded at weaning. Individual weights of live piglets were obtained at parturition, after cross fostering and at weaning. Weaning-to-estrus interval, number of sows that returned to estrus after first insemination and farrowing rate after 1st and 2nd insemination were recorded for sows in all three parities.
Feed intake.
Feed intake of the sows was recorded during the following periods: from weaning until mating, from mating until the day of transfer to the farrowing stall, the days before parturition in the farrowing stall, and during wk 1, 2, 3, and 4 of the lactation period, respectively.
Statistical analysis
All response variables were analyzed for the fixed effects of diet composition during gestation, diet composition during lactation, group-housing system during gestation, genotype and batch. Nonsignificant interactions were omitted from the model. Body weight and backfat thickness of the sows, changes in BW and backfat thickness, number of total piglets born, piglets birth weight, piglets weaning weight, piglets daily gain, WEI, feed intake during gestation and feed intake during lactation were analyzed by means of F-tests using generalized linear models. Weaning-to-estrus interval was log transformed prior to analysis to stabilize the variance. Live-born piglets, stillborn piglets and weaned piglets were analyzed by means of F-tests using logistic regression (McCullagh and Nelder, 1989). Live-born and stillborn piglets were expressed as a fraction of total piglets born. Weaned piglets were expressed as a fraction of live-born piglets after fostering. The percentage of sows that returned to estrus after first insemination, and farrowing rate after first and second insemination were analyzed by means of chi-square tests using logistic regression for binomial distributed data. Response variables with repeated measurements, such as weekly feed intake during lactation, were analyzed by using a split-plot model. Sow was the main plot, and sow within week was the residual error. The random effect of sow and the fixed effect of week were added to the model. The random sow effect was considered to be normally distributed with mean 0 and variance equal to 
2sow. Estimates of fixed effects in the model and components of variance were obtained using the Residual Maximum Likelihood procedure. Fixed effects were assessed using chi-squares for the Wald statistics. Pairwise differences between treatment means were tested using a t-test. All analyses were performed using the statistical program GenStat (2000). Some response variables were affected (P < 0.05) by batch and genotype. There was no interaction of batch and genotype with treatments therefore, the effects of batch and genotype are not presented.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionImplicationsLiterature cited |
|---|
). Eleven parity 1 sows were culled at weaning, 16 sows did not come in estrus after weaning, and 17 sows were culled before second parturition. Eleven parity 2 sows were culled at weaning, eight sows did not become in estrus, and nine sows were culled before third parturition. Another 123 sows could not have a third litter for practical reasons and were therefore removed from the experiment. During gestation, sows were culled because of lameness or reproductive failure. At weaning, sows were culled because of lameness or endometritis. Dietary treatments during both gestation and lactation and housing system during gestation did not influence the number of culled sows at any moment.
|
). Besides, it was lower in sows housed in the electronic feeding system than in those housed in free access stalls (P < 0.001 and P < 0.01 in parities 1 and 2, respectively). Sows that were fed the G-starch diet and then the L-NSP diet ate less before parturition than sows that were fed the G-starch diet and then the L-starch diet (2.69 vs 2.90 kg and 3.08 vs 3.37 kg in parities 1 and 2, respectively). Daily feed intake before parturition was not affected by housing system during gestation. Due to feed refusals, especially in parity 1 sows, the actual feed intakes before parturition were lower than the planned feed intakes.
|
). Body weight gain was not affected by housing system during gestation. In parity 1, sows that were housed in free access stalls gained more backfat than those housed in the electronic feeding system (P < 0.001) whereas in parity 2, sows that were housed in free access stalls gained less backfat (P < 0.05).
Litter performance at birth and reproductive performance
The number of total piglets born was higher in sows fed the G-NSP diet than in those fed the G-starch diet (P = 0.07 and P = 0.05 in parities 1 and 2, respectively; Table 4). Lactation diet and housing system during gestation did not affect the number of total piglets born. In sows that were fed the G-NSP diet and then the L-NSP diet, the number of total piglets born was lower than in sows that were fed the G-NSP diet and then the L-starch diet (12.5 vs 13.8 in parity 3). Live-born piglets and stillborn piglets (expressed as % of total piglets born) were not affected by gestation diet (Table 4) but live-born piglets were higher and stillborn piglets were lower in sows fed the L-starch diet (P = 0.09 and P < 0.05, respectively, in parity 1) and in sows housed in the electronic feeding system (P < 0.01 in parity 2). Piglet birth weight was lower in sows fed the G-NSP diet (P = 0.07 and P < 0.05 in parities 1 and 2, respectively; Table 4) and higher in sows housed in the electronic feeding system (P < 0.05). Lactation diet did not affect piglet birth weight. Gestation diet and lactation diet did not affect total litter weight at birth whereas in parity 1, it was higher in sows housed in the electronic feeding system during gestation.
|
). Housing system during gestation affected the percentages of sows that returned to estrus (P < 0.001 and P < 0.05 in parities 1 and 2, respectively) and farrowing rate (P < 0.05 in parity 3).
|
) but lower in sows fed the L-NSP diet (P < 0.001). These effects were consistent during the whole lactation period. Body weight and backfat losses during lactation were less in sows that were fed the G-NSP diet than in those that were fed the G-starch diet (Table 6). Body weight loss during lactation was not affected by lactation diet or by housing system during gestation. In parities 1 and 2, sows fed the L-NSP diet lost more backfat than those fed the L-starch diet (P < 0.01 and P < 0.05, respectively). Backfat loss was not affected by housing system during gestation.
|
) and higher in sows housed in the electronic feeding system (P < 0.05 in parity 1). Lactation diet did not affect the % of weaned piglets. Gestation diet and housing system during gestation did not affect piglets weaning weight and daily gain (Table 6). In all three parities, piglets weaning weight and daily gain were higher in sows fed the L-starch diet than in those fed the L-NSP diet.
Interaction between gestation diet and housing system during gestation
In both housing systems, BW and backfat gains during gestation were lower in sows that were fed the G-NSP diet than in those that were fed the G-starch diet but the effects were more pronounced in the electronic feeding system (Table 7). In parity 1 sows housed in free access stalls during gestation, BW and backfat losses during lactation were not affected by gestation diet. In the electronic feeding system, BW loss and backfat loss were less in sows that were fed the G-NSP diet (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001 for BW loss and backfat loss, respectively). In the free access stalls, WEI and the percentage of sows that returned to estrus were higher in sows fed the G-NSP diet than in those fed the G-starch diet (P < 0.05 in parity 1 and P < 0.05 in parity 3, respectively; Table 7) whereas it was similar on both diets in sows housed in the electronic feeding system. In both housing systems, sows that were fed the G-NSP diet ate more during lactation than those that were fed the G-starch diet but the effects were more pronounced in the electronic feeding system (Table 7).
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionImplicationsLiterature cited |
|---|
), in all three parities, BW gain from weaning until d 112 of gestation was lower in sows fed the G-NSP diet than in those fed the G-starch diet. Because sows were weighed on the day of transfer to the farrowing room and at d 112 of gestation, it could be calculated that the extra gut fill caused by the G-NSP diet compared with the G-starch diet was on average about 6 kg. Moreover, backfat gain from weaning until d 112 of gestation was lower in sows fed the G-NSP diet. Differences in BW and backfat gains during gestation were not expected because sows on both diets were fed isoenergetic and isonitrogenous (in terms of fecal digestible protein). The net energy value of the gestation diets was calculated using the apparent fecal digestibilities as measured previously (Van der Peet-Schwering et al., 2002) and using the net energy values of the digestible nutrients (CVB, 2000). The efficiency of utilization of energy from fermentable NSP is considered to be 30% lower than that from digestible starch (Noblet et al., 1994). Rijnen et al. (2001), however, showed that group-housed sows are capable of using energy from fermentable NSP (i.e., NSP from sugar beet pulp) as efficiently as energy form digested starch due to reduced physical activity. Therefore, we assumed the estimated net energy value of fermentable NSP to be similar to that of digested starch (13.5 MJ/kg). Considering the lower BW and backfat gains during gestation in sows fed the G-NSP diet, the energy value of fermentable NSP may have been overestimated. It might be that the results of Rijnen et al. (2001) are not applicable to all types of NSP or that the results depend on the level of fermentable NSP in the diet. It may also be that the activity of the sows in the present experiment is lower than in the sows used by Rijnen et al. (2001). In the study of Ramonet et al. (2000), the high fiber diet consisting of a mixture of fiber-rich feedstuffs of different origin (like sugar beet pulp, soybean hulls, sunflower meal and wheat bran) did not reduce heat production related to physical activity in gestating sows compared to the low fiber diet. Consequently, total heat production was higher and energy retention was lower compared to sows fed a low fiber diet. In our study sugar beet pulp and soybean hulls were used as major fibrous ingredients whereas in the study of Rijnen et al. (2001) only sugar beet pulp was used. The botanical origin of the dietary fiber seems an important factor influencing the effect of fiber on heat production related to physical activity. Besides the level of fermentable NSP in the G-NSP diet was higher than in the diets of Rijnen et al. (2001). It might be that sows have a minimum level of physical activity and that a further increase in dietary fermentable NSP only will reduce energy retention and not heat production related to physical activity. If we had used the net energy value of fermentable NSP according to Noblet et al. (1994), the net energy value of the G-NSP diet would have been 8% lower than that of the G-starch diet resulting in a 198 MJ lower NE intake from d 1 to d 112 of gestation. Over all parities, the differences in BW gain (including extra gut fill of 6 kg) and backfat gain between sows that were fed the G-starch diet or the G-NSP diet were about 16 kg and 2 mm, respectively. Energy costs for the deposition of 2 mm backfat (i.e. 3.8 kg of lipid) would be 128 MJ NE (Everts et al., 1994). A 70 MJ (198 MJ - 128 MJ) NE lower intake would result in a 2.5 kg lower protein deposition during gestation. Based on Everts et al. (1994), a 198 MJ lower NE intake during gestation would result in a 15 kg lower BW gain (3.8 kg lipid + 2.5 kg protein + 3.4 x 2.5 kg water). It seems that in our trial the net energy value of fermentable NSP according to Noblet et al. (1994) gives a better estimation of the NE of the diet than the net energy value according to Rijnen et al. (2001). This calls for further investigation of the energetic efficiency of fermentable NSP from various ingredients.
Body weight and backfat losses during lactation were less in sows fed the G-NSP diet than in those fed the G-starch diet. This can be explained by higher feed intake levels during lactation of the sows fed the G-NSP diet (+ 8.6, + 9.3 and + 8.4% in parities 1, 2 and 3, respectively). These results are in agreement with the results of Dourmad (1991), Revell et al. (1998) and Prunier et al. (2001). They demonstrated that backfat thickness at farrowing is negatively correlated with voluntary feed intake during lactation. Lean sows at parturition eat more, lose less BW and lose less backfat during lactation than fat sows. The higher feed intake during lactation, however, might also be due to an extended gastrointestinal tract and a longer colon in pigs fed high fiber diets (Jørgensen et al., 1996) which might stimulate feed intake. The higher feed intake during lactation did not compensate the lower energy intake during gestation because sows fed the G-NSP diet were about 4.5% lighter at weaning and had about 12.0% less backfat at weaning from parity 1 and 2 than sows that were fed the G-starch diet (Table 3).
Effects of diet composition during lactation on body weight and backfat thickness
Nutrient requirements of lactating sows are high and therefore they are fed highly digestible diets. The use of high fiber diets for lactating sows has hardly been studied. In our experiment, parity 1 and 2 sows fed the L-NSP diet lost more backfat during lactation than sows fed the L-starch diet. Lower feed intake levels during lactation explain this. These results are in contrast with the results of Zoiopoulos et al. (1982) who showed that the inclusion of either 400-g oat husks or 300-g straw in diets for lactating sows increased mean daily intakes of dry matter during lactation compared to a low fiber control diet. The inclusion of fibrous ingredients, however, reduced the daily energy intake. The origin of the dietary fiber probably explains these different results. Brouns et al. (1995) gave gestating sows free access to six diets each containing a high level of a fibrous ingredient. Voluntary feed intake of the sugar beet pulp diet was significantly lower than that of the other five high fiber diets (2.3 kg/d vs. 7.1 kg/d). Sugar beet pulp gives a higher degree of satiety in the gastrointestinal tract than other fibrous ingredients (Vestergaard, 1997) and therefore voluntary feed intake is reduced. It is not clear whether this is the result from physical or from metabolic effects during gestation. Sugar beet pulp has a high water-holding capacity (Bertin et al., 1988) which results in an increased gut fill and it changes the postprandial glucose response inducing long lasting effects on satiety (Vestergaard, 1997). The L-NSP diet contained 20% sugar beet pulp and this probably explains the reduction in feed intake and energy intake compared to the L-starch diet. As the NE of the L-NSP diet may have been overestimated, the reduction in energy intake even might be greater than the reduction in feed intake. The reduced feed intake might also be a way to reduce heat production of the sows fed the L-NSP diet as high fiber diets may increase heat production in adult sows (Ramonet et al., 2000) and most lactating sows are suffering from heat stress (Quiniou and Noblet, 1999).
Effects of group-housing system during gestation on body weight and backfat thickness
Body weight and backfat gain from onset until d 112 of gestation was lower in gilts housed in the electronic feeding system than in those housed in free access stalls, especially in gilts fed the G-NSP diet. This was due to a lower feed intake. In the free access stalls sows were fed twice a day. Feed refusals were hardly noticed. In the electronic feeding system sows were free to consume their daily ration all at once or to divide it in more portions. Especially in gilts fed the G-NSP diet, the daily amount of feed was too high to be consumed in one meal. However, gilts did not return to the feeding station for a second time to eat the rest of their daily ration. These results are in agreement with the results of Backus et al. (1997). A lower social rank of gilts compared to older sows might explain why gilts did not return to the feeding system for a second time. Another explanation might be that gilts that are fed once daily are less active and have a lower feeding motivation than gilts that are fed twice daily (Robert et al., 2002). This probably also applies to gilts that eat most of their diet in one large meal. A third explanation might be that in gilts fed the G-NSP diet the real feed intake is somewhat lower than the feed intake registered by the feeding computer. Video recordings showed that especially gilts that were fed the G-NSP diet did not always eat all the feed that was dispensed in the feeding trough probably because their feed intake rate was limiting. The feed in the feeding trough however is registered as eaten by the sow it was dispensed to. We used a feed intake rate of 90 g/min and this was probably too high for gilts fed a high NSP diet (Brouns et al., 1997).
In parity 2, backfat gain from onset till d 112 of gestation was higher in sows housed in the electronic feeding system than in those housed in free access stalls. This is in agreement with the results of Backus et al. (1997) and suggests that sows housed in an electronic feeding system use their feed more efficiently than sows housed in free access stalls. This can presumably be explained by a reduced physical activity. Sows housed in an electronic feeding system are less active and the level of stereotypic behavior is lower than in sows housed in free access stalls (Backus et al., 1997). Besides, sows that are fed once daily are less active (Robert et al., 2002).
Reproductive performance
The numbers of total piglets born and live-born piglets were 0.5 piglet higher in sows fed the G-NSP diet. This is in agreement with a review of Reese (1997) who reported that the number of live-born piglets is increased with 0.3 piglet when sows are fed high fiber diets. Vestergaard and Danielsen (1998) did not find an effect on the number of live-born piglets in sows that were fed the high NSP diet. In their study, however, sows were fed a lactation diet from weaning until mating whereas in our study sows were fed the G-NSP diet already before mating. Ashworth and Antipatis (1999) concluded that the level of feed intake before mating had a greater influence on embryo survival than the level of feed intake after mating. Another explanation for the higher number of total piglets born might be the less negative energy balance during lactation of the sows fed the G-NSP diet. Sows fed the G-NSP diet during gestation ate 0.4 kg/d more during lactation and lost less weight (about 5.3 kg) and backfat (about 1.1 mm) than sows fed the G-starch diet. A less negative energy balance during lactation is associated with an increased subsequent embryo survival (Baidoo et al., 1992). However, this does not explain the higher number of total piglets born in parity 1 sows. The less negative energy balance in sows fed the G-NSP diet did not result in a shorter weaning-to-estrus interval, which is in contrast with results of Baidoo et al. (1992) and Zak et al. (1997). The treatment-induced difference in feed intake during lactation in our research was presumably too small to induce an effect on weaning-to-estrus interval.
Piglet birth weight was lower in sows that were fed the G-NSP diet than in those that were fed the G-starch diet. This is in agreement with the results of Reese (1997) and Vestergaard and Danielsen (1998). The higher number of live-born piglets or the lower energy intake during gestation might explain the lower piglet birth weight. Total litter weight at birth was not affected by gestation diet. The percentage of weaned piglets after fostering was lower in sows that were fed the G-NSP diet. In parity 1 sows, this was mainly caused by a higher number of piglets that died because of biting by the sow. We do not have an explanation for these findings. Presumably, it is not due to the composition of the gestation diet because behavioral measurements showed no differences in standing and lying activity and in aggressive behavior in lactation between sows that were fed a starch or a NSP diet during gestation (Van der Peet-Schwering et al., 2003). In parity 2 sows fed the G-NSP diet, the higher number of culled piglets can mainly be explained by a lower birth weight of the piglets. Lactation diet did not affect any of the reproductive traits. Only piglet daily gain was 14 g/d lower in sows that were fed the L-NSP diet. The lower piglet daily gain can possibly be explained by the 0.4 kg/d lower feed intake during lactation of the sows fed the L-NSP diet. The reduction in feed intake was apparently too small to negatively affect other reproductive traits, like weaning-to-estrus interval and live-born piglets.
The number of sows that returned to estrus after first insemination was higher in sows housed in the electronic feeding system than in sows housed in the free access stalls. This might be explained by a higher level of aggression in sows housed in the electronic feeding system than in sows housed in free access stalls (Backus et al., 1997). In the electronic feeding system there are less possibilities for sows to avoid other sows. Especially sows with a lower social rank may have suffered from this.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the results of this study show that, although high NSP diets negatively influence BW and backfat thickness of the sows, reproductive performance is not negatively influenced. The number of live-born piglets is 0.5 piglet higher when sows are fed a high NSP diet during gestation. Feeding a high NSP diet during both gestation and lactation does not further improve the number of live-born piglets. Sows that are fed a high NSP diet during gestation and a high starch diet during lactation eat most during lactation. Overall, it is possible to feed sows a high NSP diet during gestation and lactation without negative effects on reproductive performance. However, the energetic efficiency of fermentable NSP from various ingredients in sows needs further investigation.
|
Implications |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionImplicationsLiterature cited |
|---|
|
Footnotes |
|---|
2 The technical assistance of H. Diepstraten is gratefully acknowledged. We would also like to thank P.F.G. Vereijken for his assistance with statistical analysis.
3 Correspondence: P.O. Box 2176 (phone: 0031 320293211; fax: 0031 320241584; E-mail: carola.vanderpeet{at}wur.nl).
Received for publication July 22, 2002. Accepted for publication March 13, 2003.
|
Literature cited |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionImplicationsLiterature cited |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  C. M. C. van der Peet-Schwering, B. Kemp, G. P. Binnendijk, L. A. den Hartog, P. F. G. Vereijken, and M. W. A. Verstegen Effects of additional starch or fat in late-gestating high nonstarch polysaccharide diets on litter performance and glucose tolerance in sows J Anim Sci, October 1, 2004; 82(10): 2964 - 2971. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. M. C. van der Peet-Schwering, B. Kemp, J. G. Plagge, P. F. G. Vereijken, L. A. den Hartog, H. A. M. Spoolder, and M. W. A. Verstegen Performance and individual feed intake characteristics of group-housed sows fed a nonstarch polysaccharides diet ad libitum during gestation over three parities J Anim Sci, April 1, 2004; 82(4): 1246 - 1257. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
