Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:11:15.879Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differential effects of feeding fermentable carbohydrate to growing pigs on performance, gut size and slaughter characteristics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. R. Pluske ,
D. W. Pethick  and
B. P. Mullan
J. R. Pluske
Affiliation:
Division of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia
D. W. Pethick
Affiliation:
Division of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA 6150, Australia
B. P. Mullan
Affiliation:
Animal Research and Development Services, Agriculture Western Australia, Locked Bag No. 4, Bentley Delivery Centre, WA 6983, Australia
Get access

Abstract

Thirty-five gilts grown between 18 and 55 kg live weight were used to examine the effects of feeding fermentable carbohydrate on voluntary food intake, performance, carcass characteristics, and large intestinal growth. Five diets were used. The first diet contained steam-flaked sorghum and a supplement based on animal protein sources and 40 g/kg soya-bean meal (diet SAP). Using this diet as a base, three other diets contained either (i) guar gum, a source of soluble non-starch polysaccharide (NSP) (diet SAP + S-NSP), (ii) Novelose™, a source of resistant starch (RS) (diet SAP + RS), and (Hi) a combination of both S-NSP and RS (diet SAP + S-NSP + RS). The final diet (diet WBL) was based on wheat, barley and Australian sweet lupins. Diets (i), (ii) and (Hi) were formulated such that the concentrations of soluble NSP, oligosaccharide and RS were similar to those contained in diet WBL. There was no relationship (F > 0·05) between voluntary food intake and indices of hind-gut fermentation, although pigs given diets SAP + S-NSP and SAP + S-NSP + RS took longer to reach the slaughter weight of 55 kg (F < 0·001) and converted food less efficiently than pigs given other diets (F < 0·001). An increased intake of S-NSP (R2 = 0·842, P < 0·05) and S-NSP + RS (R2 = 0·805, F < 0·05) was positively correlated to an increased (empty) weight of the large intestine. A significant negative relationship (R2 = 0·78, F < 0·05) existed between the daily intake of S-NSP + RS and dressing proportion, such that each gram increase caused a 0·25 g/kg decrease in the dressing proportion of pigs. No such relationships existed between the daily intake of soluble NSP, insoluble NSP, or RS (P > 0·05) with dressing proportion. These data suggest that the sources of fermentable carbohydrate used in this study, i.e. soluble NSP and RS, may not significantly depress voluntary food intake but can affect performance and have a significant effect on large intestinal growth and dressing proportion.

Keywords

carbohydratescarcass compositionfood intakelarge intestinepigs
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 67 , Issue 1 , August 1998 , pp. 147 - 156
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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

Annison, G. 1993. The chemistry of dietary fibre. In Dietary fibre and beyond: Australian perspectives (ed. Samman, S. and Annison, G.), Nutrition Society of Australia occasional publications, volume 1, pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
Annison, G. and Choct, M. 1994. Plant polysaccharides — their physiochemical properties and nutritional roles in monogastric animals. In Biotechnology in the feed industry (ed. Lyons, T. P. and Jacques, K. A.), proceedings of Alltech's 10th annual symposium, pp. 51–66. Nottingham University Press, Loughborough.Google Scholar
Annison, G., Hughes, R. J. and Choct, M. 1996. Effects of enzyme supplementation on the nutritive value of dehulled lupins. British Poultry Science 37:157–172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Annison, G. and Topping, D. L. 1994. Resistant starch: chemical structure vs physiological function. Annual Review of Nutrition 14: 297–320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1988. Official methods of analysis, 14th edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Bakker, G. C. M., Jongbloed, R., Verstegen, M. W. A., Jongbloed, A. W. and Bosch, M. W. 1995. Nutrient apparent digestibility and the performance of growing fattening pigs as affected by incremental additions of fat to starch or non-starch polysaccharides. Animal Science 60: 325–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, I. L. 1993. The structure of Australian maize starch. M.Sc. thesis, University of New England, Armidale, Australia.Google Scholar
Brown, W. 1979. Interactions of small molecules with hydrated polymer networks. In Dietary fibers, chemistry and nutrition (ed. Inglett, G. E. and Falkehag, S. I.), pp. 1–15. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Brunsgaard, G., Bach Knudsen, K. E. and Eggum, B. O. 1995. The influence of the period of adaptation on the digestibility of diets containing different types of indigestible polysaccharides in rats. British journal of Nutrition 74:833–848.Google ScholarPubMed
Chabeauti, E. and Noblet, J. 1990. Digestion par le pore de quatre sources de parois végétales utilisées seules ou en association. Journées de la Recherche Porcine en France 22: 167–174.Google Scholar
Cummings, J. H., Beatty, E. R., Kingman, S. M., Bingham, S. A. and Englyst, H. N. 1996. Digestion and physiological properties of resistant starch in the human large bowel. British Journal of Nutrition 75: 733–747.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, I. R., Brown, J. C. and Livesey, G. 1991. Energy values and energy balance in rats fed on supplements of guar gum or cellulose. British Journal of Nutrition 65:415–433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Englyst, H. N. and Kingman, S. M. 1990. Dietary fibre and resistant starch. A nutritional classification of plant polysaccharides. In Dietary fibre: chemistry, physiology and health effects (ed. Kritchevsky, D., Bonfield, C. and Anderson, J. A.), pp. 49–65. Plenum Press, NY.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Englyst, H. N., Kingman, S. M., Hudson, G. J. and Cummings, J. H. 1996. Measurement of resistant starch in vitro and in vivo. British Journal of Nutrition 75: 749–755.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evans, A. J., Cheung, P. C.-K. and Cheetham, N. W. H. 1993. The carbohydrate composition of cotyledons and hulls of cultivars of Lupinus angustifolius from Western Australia. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 61: 189–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gdala, J., Jansman, A. J. M., Buraczewska, L., Huisman, J. and Leeuwin, P. van. 1997. The influence of α-galactosidase supplementation on the ileal digestibility of lupin seed carbohydrates and dietary protein in young pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 67:115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodlad, J. S. and Mathers, J. C. 1990. Large bowel fermentation in rats given diets containing raw peas (Pisum sativum). British Journal of Nutrition 64:569–587.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Govers, M. J. A. P., Gannon, N. J., Dunshea, F. R., Fielding, M., Kilias, D., Gibson, P. R. and Muir, J. G. 1997. Altering the site of fermentation in the pig: implications for colon cancer risk in humans. In Manipulating pig production VI (ed. Cranwell, P. D.), p. 181. Australasian Pig Science Association, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.Google Scholar
Graham, H., Hesselman, K. and Åman, P. 1986. The influence of wheat bran and sugar-beet pulp on the digestibility of dietary components in a cereal-based pig diet. Journal of Nutrition 116:242–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, I., Larsen, T., Bach-Knudsen, K. E. and Eggum, B. O. 1991. Nutrient digestibilities in ingredients fed alone or in combinations. British Journal of Nutrition 66: 27–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jin, L., Reynolds, L. P., Redmer, D. A., Caton, J. S. and Crenshaw, J. D. 1994. Effects of dietary fiber on intestinal growth, cell proliferation and morphology in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 72:2270–2278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
King, R. H. 1990. Lupins. In Nontraditional feed sources for use in swine production (ed. Thacker, P.A. and Kirkwood, R.N.), pp. 237–246. Butterworths, Stoneham, UK.Google Scholar
Laplace, J. P., Darcy-Vrillon, B., Perez, J. M., Henry, Y., Giger, S. and Sauvant, D. 1989. Associative effects between two fibre sources on ileal and overall digestibilities of amino acids, energy and cell-wall components in growing pigs. British Journal of Nutrition 61: 75–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsen, F. M., Wilson, M. N. and Moughan, P. J. 1994. Dietary fiber viscosity and amino acid digestibility, proteolytic digestive enzyme activity and digestive organ weights in growing rats. Journal of Nutrition 124:833–841.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LeClere, C., Champ, M., Cherbut, C. and Delort-Laval, J. 1993. Starch digestion and amylase activity in the small intestine in the presence of guar gums. Sciences des Aliments 13:325–332.Google Scholar
Maindonald, J. H. 1992. Statistical design, analysis, and presentation issues. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 35:121–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muir, J. G., Young, G. P., O'Dea, K., Cameron-Smith, D., Brown, I. L. and Collier, G. R. 1993. Resistant starch — the neglected ‘dietary fiber’? Implications for health. In Dietary fiber bibliography and reviews (ed. Leeds, A. R.), volume 1, pp. 33–47. Smith Gordon, London.Google Scholar
Müller, H. L., Kirchgessner, M. and Roth, F. X. 1989. Energy utilisation of intracaecally infused carbohydrates and casein in sows. In Energy metabolism offarm animals (ed. Honing, Y. van der and Close, W. H.), pp. 123–126. Wageningen Pers, Pudoc.Google Scholar
Noblet, J. and Henry, Y. 1991. Energy evaluation systems for pig diets. In Manipulating pig production III (ed. Batterham, E. S.), pp. 87–110. Australasian Pig Science Association, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.Google Scholar
Phillips, J., Muir, J. G., Birkett, A., Lu, Z. X., Jones, G. P., O'Dea, K. O. and Young, G. P. 1995. Effect of resistant starch on fecal bulk and fermentation-dependent events in humans. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 62:121–130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pluske, J. R., Pethick, D. W., Durmic, Z., Mullan, B. P. and Hampson, D. J. 1996a. Non-starch polysaccharides in diets for pigs and their role in the expression of swine dysentery. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society of Australia 20:91.Google Scholar
Pluske, J. R., Siba, P. M., Pethick, D. W., Durmic, Z., Mullan, B. P. and Hampson, D. J. 1996b. The incidence of swine dysentery in pigs can be reduced by feeding diets that limit the amount of fermentable substrate entering the large intestine. Journal of Nutrition 126: 2920–2933.Google ScholarPubMed
Pond, W. G. and Varel, V. H. 1989. Comparative response of swine and rats to high fiber or protein diets. Journal of Animal Science 67:617–631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Potkins, Z. V., Lawrence, T. L. J. and Thomlinson, J. R. 1991. Effects of structural and non-structural polysaccharides in the diet of the growing pig on gastric emptying rate and rate of passage of digesta to the terminal ileum and through the total gastrointestinal tract. British Journal of Nutrition 65:391–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PRDC Lupin Working Group. 1994. Understanding the nutritional value of lupins (ed. Barneveld, R. J. Van), proceedings of the Pig Research and Development Corporation Lupin Working Group. PRDC workshop series — 1/1994.Google Scholar
Rainbird, A. L., Low, A. G. and Zebrowska, T. 1984. Effect of guar gum on glucose and water absorption from isolated loops of jejunum in conscious growing pigs. British Journal of Nutrition 52:489–498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scheppach, E., Fabian, C., Ahrens, F., Spengler, M. and Kaspar, H. 1988. Effect of starch malabsorption on colonic function and metabolism in humans. Gastroenterology 95: 1549–1555.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Siba, P. M., Pethick, D. W. and Hampson, D. J. 1996. Pigs experimentally infected with Serpulina hyodysenteriae can be protected from developing swine dysentery by feeding them a highly digestible diet. Epidemiology and Infection 116: 207–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanogias, G. and Pearce, G. R. 1985. The digestion of fibre by pigs. I. The effects of the amount and type of fibre on apparent digestibility, nitrogen balance and rate of passage. British Journal of Nutrition 53:513–530.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taverner, M. J. and Curie, D. M. 1983. The influence of hind-gut digestion on measures of nutrient availability in pig feeds. In Feed information and animal production (ed. Robards, G. E. and Packham, R. G.), pp. 295–298. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Theander, O. and Westerlund, E. 1992. Determination of individual components of dietary fibre. In Dietary fiber in human nutrition, second edition (ed. Spiller, G.A.), pp. 77–90. CRC Press, NY, USA.Google Scholar
Topping, D. L., Gooden, J. M., Brown, I. L., Biebrick, D. A., McGrath, L., Trimble, R. P., Choct, M. and Illman, R. J. 1997. A high amylose (amylomaize) starch raises proximal large bowel starch and increases colon length in pigs. Journal of Nutrition 127: 615–622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Barneveld, R. J., Baker, J., Szarvas, S. R. and Choct, M. 1995a. Effect of lupin non-starch polysaccharides (NSP) on nutrient digestion and microbial activity in growing pigs. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society of Australia 19:43.Google Scholar
Van Barneveld, R. J., King, R. H., Mullan, B. P. and Dunshea, F. R. 1995b. Maximising the efficiency of lupin use in pig diets. In Recent advances in animal nutrition in Australia (ed. Rowe, J. B. and Nolan, J. V.), pp. 37–42. Department of Animal Science, University of New England, Armidale, Australia.Google Scholar
Van Barneveld, R. J., Olsen, L. E. and Choct, M. 1996. Effect of lupin oligosaccharides on energy digestion in growing pigs. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society of Australia 20:114.Google Scholar
Van Barneveld, R. J., Olsen, L. E. and Choct, M. 1997. Lupin oligosaccharides depress the apparent ileal digestion of amino acids by growing pigs. In Manipulating pig production VI (ed. Cranwell, P. D.), p. 230. Australasian Pig Science Association, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.Google Scholar
Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B. and Lewis, B. A. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. Journal of Dairy Science 74:3583–3597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiggins, H. S. 1984. Nutritional value of sugars and related compounds undigested in the small gut. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 43:69–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wyatt, G. M., Horn, N., Gee, J. M. and Johnson, I. T. 1988. Intestinal microflora and gastrointestinal adaptation in the rat in response to non-digestible dietary polysaccharides. British Journal of Nutrition 60:197–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed