Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T15:41:23.140Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

A. G. Sinclair ,
M. C. Cia ,
S. A. Edwards  and
S. Hoste
A. G. Sinclair
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA
M. C. Cia
Affiliation:
Pig Improvement Company, Fyfield Wick, Abington, Oxfordshire OX13 5NA
S. A. Edwards
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, Craibstone Estate, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB21 9YA
S. Hoste
Affiliation:
Pig Improvement Company, Fyfield Wick, Abington, Oxfordshire OX13 5NA
Get access

Abstract

A 3 × 2 factorial experiment was used to investigate the influence of the breed type of gilts (Meishan synthetic 50% (M), purebred Large White (LW) and purebred Landrace (LR)) on response to insoenergetic 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 pregnancy by supplementing a set quantity of basal diet (131 g CP per kg, 12·7 MJ digestible energy (DE) per kg) with an energy source (maize starch + soya oil), to attain a backfat at P2 (6·5 mm off midline at last rib) of 25 mm at farrowing for all breeds. There were no significant diet effects or breed ×diet interactions on lactational performance. On day 1 of lactation, backfat was: M = 25·9, LW = 24·9, LR = 23·9 mm (P < 0·005). M gilts were lighter at farrowing (M = 173, LW = 192, LR = 182 kg; P < 0·001) and had more piglets than LW and LR. LR gilts had heavier piglets at birth (M = 1·13, LW = 1·18, LR = 1·38 kg, P < 0·001) than M and LW gilts. M gilts had a higher food intake (M = 6·4, LW = 5·2, LR = 5·1 kg/day; P < 0·001) but higher fat (M = 4·1, LW = 2·2, LR = 2·9 mm; P < 0·05) and weight (M = 15·9, LW = 1·0, LR = 4·7 kg; P < 0·001) loss over lactation than LW and LR gilts. LW gilts had a lower lactation output as reflected by lower litter weights at weaning than M and LR gilts (M = 73·7, LW = 59·3, LR = 75·2 kg; P < 0·002). It is concluded that lactation of gilts is not improved by provision of a very high protein diet (240 g CP per kg) and that performance still differs between breeds when backfat levels are standardized.

Keywords

backfatgiltslactationpregnancyprotein intake
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 67 , Issue 2 , October 1998 , pp. 349 - 354
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

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. Ivan, E.), 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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koketsu, Y., Dial, G. D., Pettigrew, J. E., Marsh, W. E. and King, V. L. 1996. Characterization of feed intake patterns during lactation in commercial swine herds. Journal of Animal Science 74: 1202–1210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1991. The feedingstuffs regulations 1991. Statutory instrument no. 2840, p. 76. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Mullan, B. P. and Williams, I. H. 1989. The effect of body reserves at farrowing on the reproductive performance of first litter sows. Animal Production 48: 449–457.Google Scholar
Richert, B. T., Goodband, R. D., Tokach, M. D. and Nelssen, J. L. 1994. New developments in amino acid requirements for lactating sows. Proceedings of 25th annual meeting of the American Association of Swine Practitioners, Chicago, pp. 330–337.Google Scholar
Showina, A. C., English, P. R., Llopart, D., MacPherson, O., Roden, J. A. and Edwards, S. A. 1994. Effect of different lysine to energy ratios in the lactation diet on sow performance. Animal Production 58: 466 (abstr.).Google Scholar
Sinclair, A. G., Edwards, S. A., Hoste, S. and McCartney, A. 1998. Evaluation of the influence of maternal and piglet breed differences on behaviour and production of Meishan synthetic and European White breeds during lactation. Animal Science 66: 423–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, A. G., Edwards, S. A., Hoste, S., McCartney, A. and Fowler, V. R. 1996. Partitioning of dietary protein in the Meishan synthetic and European White breeds of pig during lactation. Animal Science 62: 355–362.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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weldon, W. C., Lewis, A. J., Louis, G. F., Kovar, J. L., Giesemann, M. A. and Millar, P. S. 1994. Postpartum hypophagia in primiparous sows. 1. Effects of gestation feeding level on feed intake, feeding behavior and plasma metabolite concentrations during lactation. Journal of Animal Science 72: 387–394.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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. Haresign, W. and Cole, D. J. A.), pp. 133–147. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar