210
Effect of Diet Complexity and Specialty Protein Source on Nursery Pig Performance
Tuesday, March 14, 2017
Grand Ballroom Foyer (Century Link Center)
Aaron M. Jones
,
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS
Jason C. Woodworth
,
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS
Joel M. DeRouchey
,
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS
Gary E. Fitzner
,
Hamlet Protein, Findlay, OH
Mike D. Tokach
,
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS
Steve S Dritz
,
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS
Robert D. Goodband
,
Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS
Seven-hundred twenty nursery pigs (PIC C-29×359, initial BW 5.83 kg and 18-20d of age) with 10 pigs/pen and 12 replications/treatment were used in a 42-d growth study evaluating diet type (DT; complex vs. simple) and protein source (PS; fish meal, HP300, or HP800) on growth performance. Complex diets contained 20 and 10% lactose, while simple diets contained 12 and 5% lactose in phase 1 and 2, respectively. Complex diets contained 10% oat meal in both phases, while all diets contained 2% plasma in Phase 1 only. Soybean meal and SID Lys levels were equal within phase by adjusting fish meal, HP300, and HP800. Pens were allotted to 6 treatments in a 2×3 factorial arrangement with main effects of DT and PS. Dietary treatments were the fixed effect and block and room served as the random effect. Phase 1 was budgeted at 2.27 kg/pig and Phase 2 was fed thereafter until d-21. A common diet was fed from d 21-42. For the overall treatment period (d0-21), pigs fed complex had improved G:F (
P=0.040) compared to pigs fed simple diets, but ADG and ADFI were not affected. Overall, (d0-42), no differences in growth were observed among treatments. In summary, the 3 specialty protein sources used resulted in similar growth. The complex diet had small positive benefits on growth during the first 21d; however, the benefits were not evident at the end of the common diet period. The general lack of responses to DT or PS could be related to health, a common ingredient quality issue or lower than expected performance from this facility.
|
Complex
|
Simple
|
Probability, P<
|
|
Fish meal
|
HP300
|
HP800
|
Fish meal
|
HP300
|
HP800
|
DT×PS
|
DT
|
PS
|
Phase 1, %
|
7.75
|
10.25
|
10.45
|
7.75
|
10.25
|
10.45
|
|
|
|
Phase 2, %
|
6.00
|
8.21
|
8.35
|
6.00
|
8.20
|
8.37
|
|
|
|
d 0,kg
|
5.83
|
5.85
|
5.83
|
5.83
|
5.83
|
5.84
|
0.197
|
0.695
|
0.413
|
d 21,kg
|
9.74
|
9.76
|
9.56
|
9.55
|
9.57
|
9.54
|
0.707
|
0.160
|
0.610
|
d 42,kg
|
21.42
|
21.38
|
21.35
|
21.07
|
21.18
|
21.51
|
0.719
|
0.622
|
0.831
|
d 0 to 21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ADG,g
|
186
|
186
|
178
|
177
|
178
|
176
|
0.755
|
0.169
|
0.650
|
ADFI,g
|
247
|
253
|
248
|
244
|
255
|
248
|
0.927
|
0.973
|
0.279
|
G:F
|
0.76
|
0.73
|
0.72
|
0.72
|
0.70
|
0.71
|
0.462
|
0.040
|
0.131
|
d 0 to 42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ADG,g
|
370
|
370
|
367
|
363
|
366
|
373
|
0.625
|
0.730
|
0.866
|
ADFI,g
|
514
|
506
|
507
|
498
|
508
|
514
|
0.363
|
0.766
|
0.868
|
G:F
|
0.72
|
0.73
|
0.73
|
0.73
|
0.72
|
0.73
|
0.269
|
0.581
|
0.963
|
SEM=BW d0(0.160);d21(0.299);d42(0.320);d0-21 ADG(7.6),ADFI(9.8),G:F(0.408); d0-42 ADG(9.3),ADFI(8.4),G:F(0.011).