Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T02:28:26.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tests of two theories of food intake using growing pigs 1. The effect of ambient temperature on the intake of foods of differing bulk content

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

E. C. Whittemore ,
I. Kyriazakis ,
G.C. Emmans  and
B.J. Tolkamp
E. C. Whittemore
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition and Health Department, Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
I. Kyriazakis
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition and Health Department, Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
G.C. Emmans
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition and Health Department, Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
B.J. Tolkamp
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition and Health Department, Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
Get access

Abstract

An experiment was carried out on pigs to provide a test of two current conceptual frameworks available for the understanding and prediction of food intake. Framework 1 assumes that food intake will be that which allows potential (genetic) performance to be achieved. If this is not achieved then it is because intake is being constrained. Framework 2 sees food intake as being a consequence of a process of optimization such that biological efficiency (the ratio of net energy ingested to oxygen consumed) is maximized. Both frameworks predict that a reduction in temperature will increase the intake of a high quality food. For a food of low quality framework 2 predicts that intake will also be increased when temperature is decreased while framework 1 predicts that it will not. This difference between the predictions of the two frameworks allows them to be tested by means of an experiment in which foods of different quality were given to animals at different environmental temperatures.

Forty pigs were randomly allocated to a control (C) food based on micronized wheat with 13·1 MJ digestible energy (DE) and 232 g crude protein (CP) per kg fresh food, or one of two high bulk foods. The high bulk foods contained either 650 g/kg of unmolassed sugar-beet pulp (SBP) or 650 g/kg of wheat bran (WB). Half the pigs were maintained at a thermoneutral temperature of 22ºC for 14 days followed by a cold temperature of 12ºC for 14 days. The other half were maintained at 12ºC for a period of 14 days followed by a temperature of 22ºC for 14 days. Food intake was recorded daily and live weight twice weekly.

There was a highly significant food ✕ temperature interaction ( P < 0·001) for food intake. A reduction in temperature resulted in an increase in food intake on C and WB but had no effect on the intake of SBP. There was a highly significant effect of both temperature and food on intake ( P < 0·001). A reduction in temperature resulted in a significant increase in food intake, intake on WB was higher than that of either C or SBP. There was no overall effect of temperature on live-weight gain although a reduction in temperature resulted in a non-significant increase in the gain of C and reduction in the gain of WB and SBP. There was a highly significant effect of food ( P < 0·001) on live-weight gain, as gain on C was higher than that on either WB or SBP.

The results of the experiment were in agreement with the predictions set forward by the first framework that growing pigs are eating to achieve maximum performance subject to constraints.

Keywords

fibrefood intakepigstemperature.
Type
Non-ruminant nutrition, behaviour and production
Information
Animal Science , Volume 72 , Issue 2 , April 2001 , pp. 351 - 360
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2001

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

Agricultural Research Council. 1981. The nutrient requirements of pigs. Technical review by an ARC working party. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Farnham Royal, UK.Google Scholar
Bedford, M. R. and Classen, H. L. 1993. An in vitro assay for prediction of broiler intestinal viscosity and growth when fed rye-based diets in the presence of exogenous enzymes. Poultry Science 72: 137–143.Google Scholar
Black, J. L. 1984. Integration of data for predicting feed intake, nutrient requirements and animal performance. In Heribvore nutrition in sub tropics and tropics (ed. F. Gilchrist, M. C. and Mackie, R. I.), pp. 648–671. Donker, Johannesburg.Google Scholar
Black, J. L. 2000. Modelling growth and lactation in pigs. In Feeding systems and feed evaluation models (ed. Theodorou, M. K. and France, J.), pp. 363–392. CAB International, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Black, J. L., Bray, H. J. and Giles, L. R. 1999. The thermal and infectious environment. In A quanatative biology of the pig (ed. Kyriazakis, I.), pp. 71–97. CAB International, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Brouns, F., Edwards, S. A. and English, P. R. 1991. Fibrous raw materials in sow diets: effects on voluntary food intake, digestibility and diurnal activity patterns. Animal Production 52: 598 (abstr. ).Google Scholar
Brouns, F., Edwards, S. A. and English, P. R. 1995. Influence of fibrous feed ingredients on voluntary intake of sows. Animal Feed Science and Technology 54: 301–313.Google Scholar
Close, W. H. 1989. The influence of the thermal environment on the voluntary food intake of pigs. In The voluntary food intake of pigs> (ed. Forbes, J. M., Varley, M. A. and Lawrence, T. L. J.), British Society of Animal Production occasional publication no. 13, pp. 87–96.Google Scholar
Conrad, H. R., Pratt, A. D. and Hibbs, J. W. 1964. Regulation of feed intake in dairy cows. I. Change in the importance of physical and physiological factors with increasing digestibility. Journal of Dairy Science 47: 54–62.Google Scholar
Emmans, G. C. 1981. A model of the growth and feed intake of ad libitum fed animals, particularly poultry. In Computers in animal production (ed. Hillyer,, G. M. Whittemore, C. T. and Gunn, R. G.), British Society of Animal Production, occasional publication no. 5, pp. 103–110.Google Scholar
Emmans, G. C. 1995. Energy systems and the prediction of energy and feed intakes. In Modelling growth in the pig (ed. Moughan, P. J., Verstegen, M. W. A. and M. I.Visser-Reyneveld, ), European Association for Animal Production publication no. 78, pp. 115–122. Wageningen Pers, Wageningen.Google Scholar
Goering, H. K. and Van Soest, P. J. 1970. Forage fiber analysis (apparatus, reagents, procedures and some applications). Agricultural handbook no. 379, Agricultural Research Service, USDA, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Grovum, W. L. 1987. A new look at what is controlling food intake. Proceedings of a symposium: feed intake by beef cattle, 20-22 November 1986, pp. 1–39.Google Scholar
Ketelaars, J. J. M. H. and Tolkamp, B. J. 1992. Toward a new theory of feed intake regulation in ruminants. 1. Causes of differences in voluntary feed intake: critique of current views. Livestock Production Science 30: 269–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyriazakis, I. and Emmans, G. C. 1995. The voluntary feed intake of pigs given feeds based on wheatbran, dried citrus pulp and grass meal in relation to measurements of feed bulk. British Journal of Nutrition 73: 191–207.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I. and Emmans, G. C. 1999. Voluntary feed intake and diet selection. In A quanatative biology of the pig (ed. Kyriazakis, I.), pp. 229–248. CAB International, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I., Stamataris, C., Emmans, G. C. and Whittemore, C. T. 1991. The effects of food protein content on the performance of pigs previously given foods with low or moderate protein contents. Animal Production 52: 165–173.Google Scholar
Lawes Agricultural Trust. 1993. GENSTAT 5 release 3·2 reference manual, second edition. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Lee, P. A. and Close, W. H. 1987. Bulky feeds for pigs: a consideration of some non-nutritional aspects. Livestock Production Science 16: 395–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lynch, P. B. 1989. Voluntary food intake of sows and gilts. In The voluntary food intake of pigs (ed. Forbes, J. M., Varley, M. A. and Lawrence, T. L. J.), British Society of Animal Production occasional publication no. 13, pp. 71–78.Google Scholar
National Research Council. 1987. Predicting feed intake of food-producing animals. National Academy Press, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Poppi, D. P., Gill, M. and France, J. 1994. Integration of theories of feed intake regulation in growing ruminants. Journal of Theoretical Biology 167: 129–145.Google Scholar
Quiniou, N., Noblet, J., Le Dividich, J., Dubois, S. and Labroue, F. 1997. Influence of lowering temperature and liveweight on the feeding behaviour of group housed growing pigs. Journées de la Recherche Porcine en France 29: 135–140.Google Scholar
Robertson, J. A. and Van Soest, P. J. 1977. Dietary estimation in concentrate animal feedstuffs. Journal of Animal Science 54: (suppl. 1) 254–255.Google Scholar
Tolkamp, B. J. 1999. Limitations in the use of constraints for intake predictions. In Regulation of feed intake (ed. Heide, D. van der, Huisman, E. A., Kanis, E., Osse, J. W. M. and Verstegen, M. W. A.), pp. 151–166. CAB International, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Tolkamp, B. J. and Ketelaars, J. J. M. H. 1992. Toward a new theory of feed intake regulation in ruminants. 2. Cost and benefits of food consumption: and optimisation approach. Livestock Production Science 30: 297–317.Google Scholar
Tsaras, L. N., Kyriazakis, I. and Emmans, G. C. 1998. The prediction of voluntary feed intake of pigs on poor quality feeds. Animal Science 66: 713–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verhagen, J. M. F., Groen, A., Jacobs, J. and Boon, J. H. 1987. The effect of different climatic environments on metabolism and its relation to time of Haemophilus pleuropneumonia infection in pigs. Livestock Production Science 17: 365–379.Google Scholar
Verstegen, M. W. A., Brandsma, H. A. and Mateman, G. 1982. Feed requirement of growing pigs at low environmental temperatures. Journal of Animal Science 55: 88–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verstegen, M. W. A., Close, W. H., Start, I. B. and Mount, L. E. 1973. The effects of environmental temperature and plane of nutrition on heat loss, energy retention and deposition of protein and fat in groups of growing pigs. British Journal of Nutrition 30: 21–35.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. 1998. The science and practice of pig production, second edition. Blackwell Science, Oxford.Google Scholar
Zhu, J. Q., Fowler, V. R. and Fuller, M. R. 1993. Assesment of fermentation in growing pigs given unmolassed suagr beet pulp — a stochiometric approach. British Journal of Nutrition 69: 511–525.Google Scholar