Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T04:03:20.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response to dietary protein during lactation of Meishan synthetic and European White sows fed to attain two levels of backfat at farrowing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

A. G. Sinclair ,
M. C. Cia ,
S. Hoste  and
S. A. Edwards
A. G. Sinclair
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen, AB21 9YA
M. C. Cia
Affiliation:
Pig Improvement Company, Fyfield Wick, Abington, Oxfordshire, 0X13 5NA
S. Hoste
Affiliation:
Pig Improvement Company, Fyfield Wick, Abington, Oxfordshire, 0X13 5NA
S. A. Edwards
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen, AB21 9YA
Get access

Abstract

This experiment measured the consequences of manipulating body fat reserves at farrowing by nutritional means in three sow breed types. A 3 ×2× 2 factorial experiment involving 83 second parity sows (previously given food to achieve a standard backfat measurement of 25 mm at first farrowing) was used to investigate the influence of breed type (Meishan synthetic 50% (M) or purebred European Landrace (LR) and Large White (LW) on response to isoenergetic diets of differing protein levels (180 g crude protein (CP) per kg, 9 g lysine per kg; or 240 g CP per kg, 12 g lysine per kg) offered to appetite over a 28-day lactation. Body fat reserves were adjusted during the preceding pregnancy by supplementing a set quantity of basal diet (131 g CP per kg, 12·7 MJ digestible energy per kg) with an energy source (maize starch + soya oil), to attain a backfat at P2 of either 23 mm (T) or 28 mm (F) at farrowing. No lactation diet effects on performance were observed. There were no significant breed or diet differences in backfat at farrowing. M sows were lighter at farrowing than LW and LR (M = 19·4, LW = 22·3, LR = 21·4 kg, P < 0·001). M consumed more food throughout lactation than LR and LW (M = 7·02, LW = 5·02, LR = 5·86 kg/day, P < 0·01) but weight loss was higher for M than for LW and LR sows (M = 11·7, LW = 5·4, LR = 6·1 kg, P < 0·05). Fat loss also showed a breed effect (M = 3·6, LW = 2·1, LR = 2·7 mm P2, P < 0·05), as did litter growth rates (M = 2·33, LW = 1·74, LR = 2·07 kg/day, P < 0·01). However, the breed effect disappeared when litter size was added as a covariate. The proportion of sows that was served within 5 days of weaning was higher for M than for the White breed types (W) (M = 0·74 , W = 0·51 , P < 0·05). The Meishan synthetics still mobilized more body tissue and produced greater milk yields than the W sows when backfat levels were standardized between breeds. The use of a very high protein food did not offer any advantage for the sow in terms of milk production or conservation of maternal body reserves.

Keywords

body fatbreed differencesdietary proteinsows
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 69 , Issue 3 , December 1999 , pp. 583 - 590
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1999

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

Baidoo, S. K., Lythgoe, E. S., Kirkwood, R. N., Aherne, F.X. and Foxcroft, G. R. 1992. Effect of lactational feed intake on the endocrine status and metabolite levels in the sow. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 72: 799–807.Google Scholar
Cole, D. J. A. 1990. Nutritional strategies to optimise reproduction in pigs. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, Supplement 40: 67–82.Google Scholar
Edwards, S. A. 1998. Nutrition of the rearing gilt and sow. In Progress in Pig Science (ed. Wiseman, J., Varley, M. A. and Chadwick, J. P.), pp. 361–382. Nottingham University Press. Google Scholar
Everts, H. 1994. Nitrogen and energy metabolism of sows during several reproductive cycles in relation to nitrogen intake. Ph.D. thesis, Institute for Animal Science and Health, Leylstad, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Foxcroft, G. R., Aherne, F. X., Clowes, E. C., Miller, H. and Zak, L. 1995. Sow fertility: the role of suckling inhibition and metabolic status. In Animal science research and development: moving towards a new century (ed. E., Ivan), pp. 337–393.Google Scholar
Johnston, L. J., Pettigrew, J. E. and Rust, J. W. 1993. Response of maternal-line sows to dietary protein concentration during lactation. Journal of Animal Science 71: 2151-2156.Google Scholar
Kemm, E. H. 1974. A study of the protein and energy requirement of the pregnant gilt (Sus scrofa domesticus) . Ph.D. thesis, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa.Google Scholar
Lee, P. A. and Mitchell, K. G. 1989. Feeding sows for specific weight gains in pregnancy and its effect on reproductive performance. Animal Production 48: 407–417.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1991. The feedingstuffs regulations 1991, p. 76. Statutory instrument no. 2840. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Mullan, B. P. and Williams, L. H. 1989. The effect of body reserves at farrowing on the reproductive performance of first-litter sows. Animal Production 48: 449–457.Google Scholar
O’Dowd, S., Hoste, S., Mercer, J. T., Fowler, V. R. and Edwards, S. A. 1993. Nutritional modification of body composition and the consequences for longevity of gentically lean sows. Proceedings of the European Associatoli for Animal Production meeting, Aarhus.Google Scholar
Reveil, D. K., Williams, L. H., Ranford, J. L., Mullan, B. P. and Smits, R. J. 1995a. Body fatness reduces voluntary food intake and alters plasma metabolites during lactation. In Manipulating pig production V (ed. Hennessy, D. P. and Cranwell, P. D.), p. 128.Google Scholar
Reveil, D. K., Williams, L.H., Ranford, J. L., Mullan, B. P. and Smits, R. J. 1995b. A high protein diet maximises milk output and minimises weight loss in lactation. In Manipulating pig production V (ed. Hennessy, D. P. and Cranwell, P. D.), p. 136.Google Scholar
Reveil, D. K., Williams, L. H., Ranford, J. L., Mullan, B. P. and Smits, R. J. 1998a. Body composition at farrowing and nutrition during lactation affect the performance of primiparous sows. 1. Voluntary food intake, weight loss and plasma metabolites. Journal of Animal Science 76: 1729–1737.Google Scholar
Reveil, D. K., Williams, L. H., Ranford, J. L., Mullan, B. P. and Smits, R. J. 1998b. Body composition at farrowing and nutrition during lactation affect the performance of primiparous sows. 2. Milk composition, milk yield and pig growth. Journal of Animal Science 76: 1738–1743.Google Scholar
Richart, B. T., Goodband, R. D., Tokach, M. D. and Nelssen, J. L. 1994. New developments in animo acid requirements for lactating sows. Proceedings of the 25th annual meeting of the American Association of Swine Practitioners, Chicago, p. 330–337.Google Scholar
Sinclair, A. G., Cia, M. C., Edwards, S. A. and Hoste, S. 1998a. Response to dietary protein during lactation of Meishan synthetic, Large White and Landrace gilts given food to achieve the same target backfat level at farrowing. Animal Science 67: 349–354.Google Scholar
Sinclair, A. G., Edwards, S. A., Hoste, S., McCartney, A. and Fowler, V. R. 1996. Partitioning of dietary protein during lactation in the Meishan synthetic and European White breeds of pig. Animal Science 62: 355–362.Google Scholar
Sinclair, A. G., Edwards, S. A., Hoste, S. and McCartney, A. 1998b. Evaluation of the influence of maternal and piglet breed differences on behaviour and production of Meishan synthetic and European White breeds of pig during lactation. Animal Science 66: 423–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tritton, S. M., King, R. H., Campbell, R. G., Edwards, A. C. and Hughes, P. E. 1996. The effects of dietary protein and energy levels of diets offered during lactation on the lactational and subsequent reproductive performance of first-litter sows. Animal Science 62: 573–579.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. and Yang, H. 1989. Physical and chemical composition of the body of breeding sows with differing body subcutaneous fat depth at parturition, differing nutrition during lactation and differing litter size. Animal Production 48: 203–212.Google Scholar
Williams, I. H., Close, W. H. and Cole, D. J. A. 1985. Strategies for sow nutrition: predicting the response of pregnant animals to protein and energy intake. In Recent advances in animal nutrition (ed. W., Haresign and Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 133–147. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, J. D., Whelehan, O. P., Ellis, M., Smith, W. C. and Laird, R. 1983. Effects of selection for low backfat thickness in pigs on the sites of tissue deposition in the body. Animal Production 36: 389–397.Google Scholar
Yang, H., Eastham, P. R., Phillips, P. and Whittemore, C. T. 1989. Reproductive performance, body weight and body condition of breeding sows with differing body fatness at parturition, differing nutrition during lactation, and differing litter size. Animal Production 48: 181–201.Google Scholar