Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:12:26.215Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Compensatory growth feeding strategy does not overcome negative effects on growth and carcass composition of low birth weight pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2014

J. G. Madsen  and
G. Bee
J. G. Madsen
Affiliation:
Agroscope, Institute for Livestock Sciences ILS, Posieux 1725, Switzerland
G. Bee*
Affiliation:
Agroscope, Institute for Livestock Sciences ILS, Posieux 1725, Switzerland
*
†E-mail: giuseppe.bee@agroscope.admin.ch
Get access

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the compensatory growth feeding strategy could be a suitable solution for overcoming the negative effects on growth, carcass composition and meat quality of low birth weight pigs. Forty-two Swiss Large White barrows from 21 litters were selected at weaning and categorized into either being light (L; >0.8 and <1.3 kg) or heavy (H; >1.7 kg) birth weight pigs. From 27.8 kg BW, pigs were assigned within birth weight group to one of three feeding groups: AA: ad libitum access to the grower and finisher diet, RR: restricted access to the grower and finisher diet or RA: restricted access to the grower diet and ad libitum access to the finisher diet. At slaughter, the longissimus (LM) and semitendinosus (STM) muscles were removed from the right side of the carcass. Weight, girth and length of the STM and the LM area were determined after muscle excision. Carcass characteristics and meat quality traits were assessed. Using mATPase histochemistry, myofibre size and myofibre type distribution were determined in the LM and STM. Because of longer days on feed, total feed intake was greater (P<0.01) and feed efficiency was lower (P<0.01) in L than H barrows. Regardless of the birth weight group, AA and RA barrows grew faster (P<0.05) than RR barrows. During the compensatory growth period, RA barrows grew faster (P<0.05) than AA or RR barrows. Growth efficiency did not differ between RA and RR barrows but was greater (P<0.05) compared with AA barrows. Carcasses of L barrows were fatter as indicated by the lower (P⩽≤0.05) lean meat and greater (P⩽0.02) omental and subcutaneous fat percentage. Lean meat percentage was lower (P⩽0.05) in AA and RA than RR barrows. These differences caused by ad libitum feed access tended to be greater (feeding regime × birth weight group interaction; P<0.08) in L than H barrows. In L barrows, slow oxidative, fast oxidative glycolytic and overall average myofibre size of the LM and the fast glycolytic myofibres and overall average myofibre size of the dark portion of the STM were larger (P⩽0.03) than in H barrows. The study revealed that the compensatory growth feeding strategy was inadequate in overcoming the disadvantages of low birth weight.

Keywords

birth weightcarcass qualitycompensatory growthgrowth efficiencypig
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 9 , Supplement 3 , March 2015 , pp. 427 - 436
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 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

Agroscope Liebefeld Posieux Research Station (ALP) 2012. Fütterungsempfehlungen und Nährwerttabellen für Schweine 3 Lehrmittel Zentrale, Zollikofen, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Attig, L, Djiane, J, Gertler, A, Rampin, O, Larcher, T, Boukthir, S, Anton, PM, Madec, JY, Gourdou, I and Abdennebi-Najar, L 2008. Study of hypothalamic leptin receptor expression in low-birth-weight piglets and effects of leptin supplementation on neonatal growth and development. American Journal of Physiology – Endocrinology and Metabolism 295, E1117–E1125.Google Scholar
Beaulieu, AD, Aalhus, JL, Williams, NH and Patience, JF 2010. Impact of piglet birth weight, birth order, and litter size on subsequent growth performance, carcass quality, muscle composition, and eating quality of pork. Journal of Animal Science 88, 2767–2778.Google Scholar
Bee, G, Guex, G and Herzog, W 2004. Free-range rearing of pigs during the winter: adaptations in muscle fiber characteristics and effects on adipose tissue composition and meat quality traits. Journal of Animal Science 82, 1206–1218.Google Scholar
Bérard, J, Kreuzer, M and Bee, G 2008. Effect of litter size and birth weight on growth, carcass and pork quality, and their relationship to postmortem proteolysis. Journal of Animal Science 86, 2357–2368.Google Scholar
Bérard, J, Kreuzer, M and Bee, G 2010a. In large litters birth weight and gender is decisive for growth performance but less for carcass and pork quality traits. Meat Science 86, 845–851.Google Scholar
Bérard, J, Pardo, CE, Bethaz, S, Kreuzer, M and Bee, G 2010b. Intra-uterine crowding decreases average birth weight and affects muscle fiber hyperplasia in piglets. Journal of Animal Science 88, 3242–3250.Google Scholar
Bérard, J, Kalbe, C, Lösel, D, Tuchscherer, A and Rehfeldt, C 2011. Potential sources of early-postnatal increase in myofibre number in pig skeletal muscle. Histochemistry and Cell Biology 136, 217–225.Google Scholar
Campos, P, Silva, B, Donzele, J, Oliveira, R and Knol, E 2012. Effects of sow nutrition during gestation on within-litter birth weight variation: a review. Animal 6, 797–806.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
da Costa, N, Blackley, R, Alzuherri, H and Chang, KC 2002. Quantifying the temporospatial expression of postnatal porcine skeletal myosin heavy chain genes. Journal of Histochemistry & Cytochemistry 50, 353–364.Google Scholar
Fix, JS, Cassady, JP, Holl, JW, Herring, WO, Culbertson, MS and See, MT 2010. Effect of piglet birth weight on survival and quality of commercial market swine. Livestock Science 132, 98–106.Google Scholar
Foxcroft, GR, Dixon, WT, Novak, S, Putman, CT, Town, SC and Vinsky, MDA 2006. The biological basis for prenatal programming of postnatal performance in pigs. Journal of Animal Science 84, E105–E112.Google Scholar
Goll, DE, Neti, G, Mares, SW and Thompson, VF 2008. Myofibrillar protein turnover: the proteasome and the calpains. Journal of Animal Science 86, E19–E35.Google Scholar
Gondret, F, Lefaucheur, L, Juin, H, Louveau, I and Lebret, B 2006. Low birth weight is associated with enlarged muscle fiber area and impaired meat tenderness of the longissimus muscle in pigs. Journal of Animal Science 84, 93–103.Google Scholar
Gondret, F, Perruchot, MH, Tacher, S, Bérard, J and Bee, G 2011. Differential gene expressions in subcutaneous adipose tissue pointed to a delayed adipocytic differentiation in small pig fetuses compared to their heavier siblings. Differentiation 81, 253–260.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gondret, F, Lefaucheur, L, Louveau, I, Lebret, B, Pichodo, X and Le Cozler, Y 2005. Influence of piglet birth weight on postnatal growth performance, tissue lipogenic capacity and muscle histological traits at market weight. Livestock Production Science 93, 137–146.Google Scholar
Honikel, KO 1998. Reference methods for the assessment of physical characteristics of meat. Meat Science 49, 447–457.Google Scholar
Huff Lonergan, E, Zhang, W and Lonergan, SM 2010. Biochemistry of postmortem muscle – lessons on mechanisms of meat tenderization. Meat Science 86, 184–195.Google Scholar
Lösel, D, Kalbe, C and Rehfeldt, C 2009. l-Carnitine supplementation during suckling intensifies the early postnatal skeletal myofiber formation in piglets of low birth weight. Journal of Animal Science 87, 2216–2226.Google Scholar
Medhurst, AD, Harrison, DC, Read, SJ, Campbell, CA, Robbins, MJ and Pangalos, MN 2000. The use of TaqMan RT-PCR assays for semiquantitative analysis of gene expression in CNS tissues and disease models. Journal of Neuroscience Methods 98, 9–20.Google Scholar
Oksbjerg, N and Therkildsen, M 2007. Compensatory growth in pigs: effects on performance, protein turnover and meat quality. In Paradigms in pig science (ed. J Wiseman, MA Varley, S McOrist and B Kemp), pp. 417–426. Nottingham University Press.Google Scholar
Oksbjerg, N, Sorensen, MT and Vestergaard, M 2002. Compensatory growth and its effect on muscularity and technological meat quality in growing pigs. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section A-Animal Science 52, 85–90.Google Scholar
Oksbjerg, N, Petersen, JS, Sorensen, IL, Henckel, P, Vestergaard, M, Ertbjerg, P, Moller, AJ, Bejerholm, C and Stoier, S 2000. Long-term changes in performance and meat quality of Danish Landrace pigs: a study on a current compared with an unimproved genotype. Animal Science 71, 81–92.Google Scholar
Pardo, CE, Bérard, J, Kreuzer, M and Bee, G 2013. Intrauterine crowding in pigs impairs formation and growth of secondary myofibers. Animal 7, 430–438.Google Scholar
Quesnel, H, Brossard, L, Valancogne, A and Quiniou, N 2008. Influence of some sow characteristics on within-litter variation of piglet birth weight. Animal 2, 1842–1849.Google Scholar
Quiniou, N, Dagorn, J and Gaudré, D 2002. Variation of piglets' birth weight and consequences on subsequent performance. Livestock Production Science 78, 63–70.Google Scholar
Rehfeldt, C and Kuhn, G 2006. Consequences of birth weight for postnatal growth performance and carcass quality in pigs as related to myogenesis. Journal of Animal Science 84, E113–E123.Google Scholar
Rehfeldt, C, Kuhn, G, Fiedler, I and Ender, K 2004. Muscle fiber characteristics are important in the relationship between birth weight and carcass quality. Journal of Animal Science 82 (suppl.1), 250.Google Scholar
Solomon, MB and Montgomery, AR 1988. Comparison of methods for quantifying fiber types in skeletal muscle tissue. Journal of Food Science 53, 973–974.Google Scholar
Ward, SS and Stickland, NC 1991. Why are slow and fast muscles differentially affected during prenatal undernutrition? Muscle Nerve 14, 259–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, PJ, Marten, N, Wilson, V, Litten-Brown, JC, Corson, AM, Clarke, L, Symonds, ME and Mostyn, A 2009. Influence of birth weight on gene regulators of lipid metabolism and utilization in subcutaneous adipose tissue and skeletal muscle of neonatal pigs. Reproduction 138, 609–617.Google Scholar
Wu, G, Bazer, FW, Wallace, JM and Spencer, TE 2006. Board-invited review: intrauterine growth retardation: implications for the animal sciences. Journal of Animal Science 84, 2316–2337.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Madsen and Bee Supplementary Material

Table S1

Download Madsen and Bee Supplementary Material(File)
File 17 KB