Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T13:57:36.694Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of a method estimating real-time individual lysine requirements in two lines of growing–finishing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 December 2014

L. Cloutier ,
C. Pomar ,
M. P. Létourneau Montminy ,
J. F. Bernier  and
J. Pomar
L. Cloutier
Affiliation:
Dairy and Swine Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2000 College Street, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada Département des sciences animales, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada
C. Pomar*
Affiliation:
Dairy and Swine Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2000 College Street, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada
M. P. Létourneau Montminy
Affiliation:
Dairy and Swine Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2000 College Street, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada Département des sciences animales, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada
J. F. Bernier
Affiliation:
Département des sciences animales, Université Laval, Quebec City, QC, Canada
J. Pomar
Affiliation:
School of Agricultural Engineering, University of Lleida, 191 Alcalde Rovira Roure Avenue, Lleida, Spain
*
†E-mail: candido.pomar@agr.gc.ca
Get access

Abstract

The implementation of precision feeding in growing–finishing facilities requires accurate estimates of the animals’ nutrient requirements. The objectives of the current study was to validate a method for estimating the real-time individual standardized ileal digestible (SID) lysine (Lys) requirements of growing–finishing pigs and the ability of this method to estimate the Lys requirements of pigs with different feed intake and growth patterns. Seventy-five pigs from a terminal cross and 72 pigs from a maternal cross were used in two 28-day experimental phases beginning at 25.8 (±2.5) and 73.3 (±5.2) kg BW, respectively. Treatments were randomly assigned to pigs within each experimental phase according to a 2×4 factorial design in which the two genetic lines and four dietary SID Lys levels (70%, 85%, 100% and 115% of the requirements estimated by the factorial method developed for precision feeding) were the main factors. Individual pigs’ Lys requirements were estimated daily using a factorial approach based on their feed intake, BW and weight gain patterns. From 25 to 50 kg BW, this method slightly underestimated the pigs’ SID Lys requirements, given that maximum protein deposition and weight gain were achieved at 115% of SID Lys requirements. However, the best gain-to-feed ratio (G : F) was obtained at a level of 85% or more of the estimated Lys requirement. From 70 to 100 kg, the method adequately estimated the pigs’ individual requirements, given that maximum performance was achieved at 100% of Lys requirements. Terminal line pigs ate more (P=0.04) during the first experimental phase and tended to eat more (P=0.10) during the second phase than the maternal line pigs but both genetic lines had similar ADG and protein deposition rates during the two phases. The factorial method used in this study to estimate individual daily SID Lys requirements was able to accommodate the small genetic differences in feed intake, and it was concluded that this method can be used in precision feeding systems without adjustments. However, the method’s ability to accommodate large genetic differences in feed intake and protein deposition patterns needs to be studied further.

Keywords

lysine requirementspigprecision feedinggenotype
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , April 2015 , pp. 561 - 568
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium. Parts of this are a work of the Government of Canada, represented by the Agriculture and Agri-Food Agency of Canada 2014. 

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

Andretta, I, Pomar, C, Rivest, J, Pomar, J, Lovatto, PA and Neto, JR 2014. The impact of feeding growing–finishing pigs with daily tailored diets using precision feeding techniques on animal performance, nutrient utilization, and body and carcass composition. Journal of Animal Science 92, 3925–3936.Google Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) 1990. Official methods of analysis, 15th edition. AOAC, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Brossard, L, Dourmad, JY, van Milgen, J and Quiniou, N 2007. Analysis of the variation of performance of a growing pigs population as affected by the lysine supply and number of diets in the feeding strategy. Journées de la Recherche Porcine 39, 95–102.Google Scholar
Calder, AG, Garden, KE, Anderson, SE and Lobley, GE 1999. Quantitation of blood and plasma amino acids using isotope dilution electron impact gas chromatography/mass spectrometry with U-13C amino acids as internal standards. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry 13, 2080–2083.3.0.CO;2-O>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC) 2009. CCAC guidelines on: the care and use of farm animals in research, teaching and testing. Canadian Council on Animal Care, Ottawa, ON.Google Scholar
de Lange, CFM, Morel, PCH and Birkett, SH 2003. Modeling chemical and physical body composition of the growing pig. Journal of Animal Science 81, E159–E165.Google Scholar
Desmoulin, B and Bonneau, M 1979. Meat production from entire or castrated males: feed efficiency and body composition in high muscle breeds. Annales de Zootechnie 28, 35–51.Google Scholar
Fortin, A, Wood, JD and Whelehan, OP 1987. Breed and sex effects on the development and proportions of muscle, fat and bone in pigs. Journal of Agricultural Science 108, 39–45.Google Scholar
Hauschild, L, Lovatto, PA, Pomar, J and Pomar, C 2012. Development of sustainable precision farming systems for swine: estimating real-time individual amino acid requirements in growing–finishing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 90, 2255–2263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jondreville, C and Dourmad, JY 2005. Le phosphore dans la nutrition des porcs. INRA Productions Animales 18, 183–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamalakar, RB, Chiba, LI, Divakala, KC, Rodning, SP, Welles, EG, Bergen, WG, Kerth, CR, Kuhlers, DL and Nadarajah, NK 2009. Effect of the degree and duration of early dietary amino acid restrictions on subsequent and overall pig performance and physical and sensory characteristics of pork. Journal of Animal Science 87, 3596–3606.Google Scholar
Le Floc’h, N and Seve, B 2007. Biological roles of tryptophan and its metabolism: potential implications for pig feeding. Livestock Science 112, 23–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahan, DC and Shields, RG Jr 1998. Essential and nonessential amino acid composition of pigs from birth to 145 kilograms of body weight, and comparison to other studies. Journal of Animal Science 76, 513–521.Google Scholar
Martinez, GM and Knabe, DA 1990. Digestible lysine requirement of starter and grower pigs. Journal of Animal Science 68, 2748–2755.Google Scholar
Mohn, S, Gillis, AM, Moughan, PJ, de Lange, CFM 2000. Influence of dietary lysine and energy intakes on body protein deposition and lysine utilization in the growing pig. Journal of Animal Science 78, 1510–1519.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Research Council (NRC) 1998. Nutrient requirements of swine, 10th revised edition. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Pomar, C and Rivest, J 1996. The effect of body position and data analysis on the estimation of body composition of pigs by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). In Proceedings of the 46th Annual conference of the Canadian Society of Animal Science (Abstr.), Lethbridge, Alberta, p. 26.Google Scholar
Pomar, C, Hauschild, L, Zhang, GH, Pomar, J and Lovatto, PA 2009. Applying precision feeding techniques in growing–finishing pig operations. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 38 (special issue), 226–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pomar, C, Hauschild, L, Zhang, GH, Pomar, J and Lovatto, PA 2010. Precision feeding can significantly reduce feeding cost and nutrient excretion in growing animals. In Modelling nutrient digestion and utilisation in farm animals (ed. D Sauvant, J van Milgen, P Faverdin and N Friggens), pp. 327–334. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Pomar, C, Pomar, J, Rivest, J, Cloutier, L, Letourneau-Montminy, MP, Andretta, I and Hauschild, L 2014. Estimating real-time individual amino acid requirements in growing–finishing pigs: towards a new definition of nutrient requirements?. In Modelling in pig and poultry production (ed. R Gous and I Kyriazakis), pp. 157–174. CAB International, Wallingford, UK. in press.Google Scholar
Pomar, J, López, V and Pomar, C 2011. Agent-based simulation framework for virtual prototyping of advanced livestock precision feeding systems. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 78, 88–97.Google Scholar
Quiniou, N and Noblet, J 1995. Prediction of tissular body composition from protein and lipid deposition in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 73, 1567–1575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodriguez-Sanchez, JA, Sanz, MA, Blanco, M, Serrano, MP, Joy, M and Latorre, MA 2011. The influence of dietary lysine restriction during the finishing period on growth performance and carcass, meat, and fat characteristics of barrows and gilts intended for dry-cured ham production. Journal of Animal Science 89, 3651–3662.Google Scholar
Sauvant, D, Perez, JM and Tran, G 2004. Tables de composition et de valeur nutritive des matières premières destinées aux animaux d’élevage: Porcs, volailles, bovins, ovins, caprins, lapins, chevaux, poissons. Éditions INRA, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Schinckel, AP, de Lange, CFM 1996. Characterization of growth parameters needed as inputs for pig growth models. Journal of Animal Science 74, 2021–2036.Google Scholar
van Milgen, J, Valancogne, A, Dubois, S, Dourmad, JY, Sève, B and Noblet, J 2008. InraPorc: a model and decision support tool for the nutrition of growing pigs. Animal Feed Science and Technology 143, 387–405.Google Scholar
Yang, YX, Jin, Z, Yoon, SY, Choi, JY, Shinde, PL, Piao, XS, Kim, BW, Ohh, SJ and Chae, BJ 2008. Lysine restriction during grower phase on growth performance, blood metabolites, carcass traits and pork quality in grower finisher pigs. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section A – Animal Science 58, 14–22.Google Scholar
Zhang, GH, Pomar, C, Pomar, J and Del Castillo, JRE 2012. Precision feeding in growing–finishing pigs: estimating the dynamic requirements of lysine supporting maximal daily gain. Journées de la Recherche Porcine 44, 171–176.Google Scholar