Literature DB >> 27173889

Pigs that are divergent in feed efficiency, differ in intestinal enzyme and nutrient transporter gene expression, nutrient digestibility and microbial activity.

S Vigors1, T Sweeney2, C J O'Shea3, A K Kelly1, J V O'Doherty1.   

Abstract

Feed efficiency is an important trait in the future sustainability of pig production, however, the mechanisms involved are not fully elucidated. The objective of this study was to examine nutrient digestibility, organ weights, select bacterial populations, volatile fatty acids (VFA's), enzyme and intestinal nutrient transporter gene expression in a pig population divergent in feed efficiency. Male pigs (n=75; initial BW 22.4 kg SEM 2.03 kg) were fed a standard finishing diet for 43 days before slaughter to evaluate feed intake and growth for the purpose of calculating residual feed intake (RFI). Phenotypic RFI was calculated as the residuals from a regression model regressing average daily feed intake (ADFI) on average daily gain (ADG) and midtest BW0.60 (MBW). On day 115, 16 pigs (85 kg SEM 2.8 kg), designated as high RFI (HRFI) and low RFI (LRFI) were slaughtered and digesta was collected to calculate the coefficient of apparent ileal digestibility (CAID), total tract nutrient digestibility (CATTD), microbial populations and VFA's. Intestinal tissue was collected to examine intestinal nutrient transporter and enzyme gene expression. The LRFI pigs had lower ADFI (P<0.001), improved feed conversion ratio (P<0.001) and an improved RFI value relative to HRFI pigs (0.19 v. -0.14 SEM 0.08; P<0.001). The LRFI pigs had an increased CAID of gross energy (GE), and an improved CATTD of GE, nitrogen and dry matter compared to HRFI pigs (P<0.05). The LRFI pigs had higher relative gene expression levels of fatty acid binding transporter 2 (FABP2) (P<0.01), the sodium/glucose co-transporter 1 (SGLT1) (P<0.05), the glucose transporter GLUT2 (P<0.10), and the enzyme sucrase-isomaltase (SI) (P<0.05) in the jejunum. The LRFI pigs had increased populations of lactobacillus spp. in the caecum compared with HRFI pigs. In colonic digesta HRFI pigs had increased acetic acid concentrations (P<0.05). Differences in nutrient digestibility, intestinal microbial populations and gene expression levels of intestinal nutrient transporters could contribute to the biological processes responsible for feed efficiency in pigs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  nutrient digestibility; nutrient transporter gene expression; pigs; residual feed intake; volatile fatty acids

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27173889     DOI: 10.1017/S1751731116000847

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Animal        ISSN: 1751-7311            Impact factor:   3.240


  20 in total

1.  Activation of inflammatory immune gene cascades by lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in the porcine colonic tissue ex-vivo model.

Authors:  B Bahar; J V O'Doherty; S Vigors; T Sweeney
Journal:  Clin Exp Immunol       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 4.330

2.  Exploring a Possible Link between the Intestinal Microbiota and Feed Efficiency in Pigs.

Authors:  Ursula M McCormack; Tânia Curião; Stefan G Buzoianu; Maria L Prieto; Tomas Ryan; Patrick Varley; Fiona Crispie; Elizabeth Magowan; Barbara U Metzler-Zebeli; Donagh Berry; Orla O'Sullivan; Paul D Cotter; Gillian E Gardiner; Peadar G Lawlor
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2017-07-17       Impact factor: 4.792

3.  Fecal microbial composition associated with variation in feed efficiency in pigs depends on diet and sex.

Authors:  Lisanne M G Verschuren; Mario P L Calus; Aalfons J M Jansman; Rob Bergsma; Egbert F Knol; Hélène Gilbert; Olivier Zemb
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-04-14       Impact factor: 3.159

4.  Maternal and/or direct supplementation with a combination of a casein hydrolysate and yeast β-glucan on post-weaning performance and intestinal health in the pig.

Authors:  Eadaoin Conway; John V O'Doherty; Anindya Mukhopadhya; Alison Dowley; Stafford Vigors; Shane Maher; Marion T Ryan; Torres Sweeney
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-15       Impact factor: 3.752

5.  Mapping and analysis of a spatiotemporal H3K27ac and gene expression spectrum in pigs.

Authors:  Yaling Zhu; Zhimin Zhou; Tao Huang; Zhen Zhang; Wanbo Li; Ziqi Ling; Tao Jiang; Jiawen Yang; Siyu Yang; Yanyuan Xiao; Carole Charlier; Michel Georges; Bin Yang; Lusheng Huang
Journal:  Sci China Life Sci       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 10.372

6.  Finishing pigs that are divergent in feed efficiency show small differences in intestinal functionality and structure.

Authors:  Barbara U Metzler-Zebeli; Peadar G Lawlor; Elizabeth Magowan; Ursula M McCormack; Tânia Curião; Manfred Hollmann; Reinhard Ertl; Jörg R Aschenbach; Qendrim Zebeli
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-04-05       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Effects of dietary supplementation of formaldehyde and crystalline amino acids on gut microbial composition of nursery pigs.

Authors:  H E Williams; R A Cochrane; J C Woodworth; J M DeRouchey; S S Dritz; M D Tokach; C K Jones; S C Fernando; T E Burkey; Y S Li; R D Goodband; R G Amachawadi
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-05-25       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Unraveling the Fecal Microbiota and Metagenomic Functional Capacity Associated with Feed Efficiency in Pigs.

Authors:  Hui Yang; Xiaochang Huang; Shaoming Fang; Maozhang He; Yuanzhang Zhao; Zhenfang Wu; Ming Yang; Zhiyan Zhang; Congying Chen; Lusheng Huang
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2017-08-15       Impact factor: 5.640

9.  Strategies towards Improved Feed Efficiency in Pigs Comprise Molecular Shifts in Hepatic Lipid and Carbohydrate Metabolism.

Authors:  Henry Reyer; Michael Oster; Elizabeth Magowan; Dirk Dannenberger; Siriluck Ponsuksili; Klaus Wimmers
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 5.923

10.  A global comparison of the microbiome compositions of three gut locations in commercial pigs with extreme feed conversion ratios.

Authors:  Jianping Quan; Gengyuan Cai; Jian Ye; Ming Yang; Rongrong Ding; Xingwang Wang; Enqin Zheng; Disheng Fu; Shaoyun Li; Shenping Zhou; Dewu Liu; Jie Yang; Zhenfang Wu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-03-14       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.