Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:33:09.934Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Growth and food intake curves for group-housed gilts and castrated male pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

S. Andersen
Affiliation:
National Committee for Pig Breeding, Health and Production, Copenhagen, Denmark
B. Pedersen
Affiliation:
National Committee for Pig Breeding, Health and Production, Copenhagen, Denmark
Get access

Abstract

Polynomial models with random regression coefficients were used to describe cumulated food intake and gain as a function of number of days on test for gilts and castrated male pigs which were on test from 30 to 115 kg live weight. Growth rate and daily food intake were expressed as the derivative of the curves. The applied models allowed a separation of between and within animal variation. Confidence limits for average curves and prediction limits for individual curves were also obtained. A similar model was used to describe gain as a function of cumulated food intake. From this function food efficiency was obtained. The application of the results in stochastic simulation models is discussed.

Growth rate and daily food intake had a more curvilinear progress for castrated males than for gilts. It was estimated that 98% of the castrated males and 96% of the gilts had a lower growth rate at day 80 than at day 50; 74% of the castrated males and 48% of the gilts had a lower daily food intake at day 100 than at day 80. On average food efficiency of gilts was higher than food efficiency of castrated males and the difference increased through the test period.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1996

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

Carroll, R. J. and Ruppert, D. 1988. Transformation and weighting in regression. Chapman and Hall, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowder, M. J. and Hand, D. J. 1991. Analysis of repeated measures. Chapman and Hall, New York.Google Scholar
Diggle, P. J., Liang, K.-Y. and Zeger, S. L. 1994. Analysis of longitudinal data. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Efron, B. 1987. Bootstrap confidence interval s and bootstrap approximations (with discussion). Journal of the American Statistical Association. 82: 171200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmans, G. C. 1995. Way s of describing pig growth and food intake using equations. Pig News and Information 16: 113N116N.Google Scholar
Fowler, V. R. 1980. Growth in mammals for meat production. In Growth in animals (ed. Lawrence, T. L. J.), pp. 249263. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelfand, A. E., Hills, S. E., Racine-Poon, A. and Smith, A. F. M. 1990. Illustration of Bayesian inference in norma l data models using Gibbs sampling. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 85: 977985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanis, E. and Koops, W. J. 1990. Daily gain, food intake and food efficiency in pigs during the growing period. Animal Production 50: 353364.Google Scholar
Knap, P. W. 1995. Use of automatic systems for feed consumption control in national programmes for genetic improvements in pigs. XIV Symposium del Asociacion de Porcinocultura Cientifica (ANAPORC), Barcelona, 8–9 November 1995.Google Scholar
Mrode, R. A. and Kennedy, B. W. 1993. Geneti c variation i n measures of food efficiency in pigs and their genetic relationships with growth rate and backfat. Animal Production. 56: 225232.Google Scholar
Parks, J. R. 1982. A theory of feeding and growth of animals. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaeffer, L. R. and Dekkers, J. C. M. 1994. Random regressions in animal model s for test-day production in dairy cattle. Proceedings of the fifth world congress on genetics applied to livestock production, Guelph, vol. 18, pp. 443446.Google Scholar
Taylor, St C. S. 1985. Use of genetic size-scaling in evaluation of animals growth. Journal of Animal Science 61: (suppl. 2) 118143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar