Literature DB >> 29873742

Partitioning components of maternal growth to determine efficiency of feed use in gestating sows.

Lori L Thomas1, Robert D Goodband1, Mike D Tokach1, Steve S Dritz2, Jason C Woodworth1, Joel M DeRouchey1.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of parity and stage of gestation on predicted maternal weight gain and efficiency of feed use in gestating sows from a commercial sow farm. A total of 712 females (Camborough, PIC, Hendersonville, TN) were group-housed from days 5 to 112 of gestation and individually fed with electronic sow feeders (ESF). Feed intake and body weight (BW) were recorded daily throughout gestation via the ESF and a scale located in an alleyway just after sows exited the feeding station. Gilts (parity 1) and sows received 6,450 or 7,418 kcal ME, respectively, whereas 12 thin females received 9,675 kcal ME per day. Maternal weight gain, not including products of conceptus, and feed efficiency were predicted using a series of equations to model nutrient utilization in gestation. Data were divided into 3 parity groups: 1, 2, and 3+, and gestation was divided into 3 periods: days 5 to 39, 40 to 74, and 75 to 109. After dividing energy requirements into tissue pools for maintenance, growth (maternal protein and fat deposition), and products of conceptus, the greatest portion of the energy requirement was for maintenance and maternal growth. The predicted energy used for maternal protein and fat deposition decreased (P < 0.05) in each period of gestation, regardless of parity group. Parity 2 sows had the greatest (P < 0.05) energy use for maternal protein and fat deposition in all stages of gestation, whereas parity 1 sows had a negative energy balance during the final stage of gestation. Parity 1 sow BW increased (P < 0.05) in each period of gestation; however, parity 2 and 3+ sow BW remained static from days 75 to 109 of gestation. Parity 3+ sows had the greatest (P < 0.05) maternal BW throughout the course of gestation compared with other parity groups. Regardless of parity, maternal ADG decreased (P < 0.05) from days 40 to 74 before increasing (P < 0.05) during the final stage of gestation. Parity 1 sows had the greatest (P < 0.05) ADG in all gestation periods. Parity 1 sow G:F decreased (P < 0.05) in each sequential period of gestation. Parity 2 and 3+ sow G:F decreased (P < 0.05) from days 40 to 74 but improved (P < 0.05) during the final period of gestation. Parity 1 sow G:F was greater than parity 2 and 3+ sows in most gestation periods. Overall, this study and subsequent prediction models show how stage of gestation and parity affect the growth of different tissue pools, sow maternal BW, and feed usage throughout the course of gestation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29873742      PMCID: PMC6162597          DOI: 10.1093/jas/sky219

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  9 in total

1.  Changes in weight and composition in various tissues of pregnant gilts and their nutritional implications.

Authors:  F Ji; G Wu; J R Blanton; S W Kim
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 2.  Energy utilization in pregnant and lactating sows: modeling of energy requirements.

Authors:  J Noblet; J Y Dourmad; M Etienne
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Effects of dietary enrichment with a marine oil-based n-3 LCPUFA supplement in sows with predicted birth weight phenotypes on birth litter quality and growth performance to weaning.

Authors:  M N Smit; J D Spencer; J L Patterson; M K Dyck; W T Dixon; G R Foxcroft
Journal:  Animal       Date:  2014-09-29       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Effect of parity and stage of gestation on growth and feed efficiency of gestating sows.

Authors:  Lori L Thomas; Robert D Goodband; Mike D Tokach; Jason C Woodworth; Joel M DeRouchey; Steve S Dritz
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 3.159

5.  Effects of amino acids and energy intake during late gestation of high-performing gilts and sows on litter and reproductive performance under commercial conditions.

Authors:  M A D Gonçalves; K M Gourley; S S Dritz; M D Tokach; N M Bello; J M DeRouchey; J C Woodworth; R D Goodband
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  Reconstitution of body reserves in multiparous sows during pregnancy: effect of energy intake during pregnancy and mobilization during the previous lactation.

Authors:  J Y Dourmad; M Etienne; J Noblet
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 3.159

7.  Studies on the energy metabolism of the pregnant sow. 2. The partition and utilization of metabolizable energy intake in pregnant and non-pregnant animals.

Authors:  W H Close; J Noblet; R P Heavens
Journal:  Br J Nutr       Date:  1985-03       Impact factor: 3.718

8.  Studies on the energy metabolism of the pregnant sow. 1. Uterus and mammary tissue development.

Authors:  J Noblet; W H Close; R P Heavens; D Brown
Journal:  Br J Nutr       Date:  1985-03       Impact factor: 3.718

9.  Growth and compositional changes of fetal tissues in pigs.

Authors:  R L McPherson; F Ji; G Wu; J R Blanton; S W Kim
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.159

  9 in total
  3 in total

1.  Effect of parity and stage of gestation on growth and feed efficiency of gestating sows.

Authors:  Lori L Thomas; Robert D Goodband; Mike D Tokach; Jason C Woodworth; Joel M DeRouchey; Steve S Dritz
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 3.159

2.  Exploration of individual variability to better predict the nutrient requirements of gestating sows1.

Authors:  Charlotte Gaillard; Raphaël Gauthier; Laetitia Cloutier; Jean-Yves Dourmad
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Effects of dietary arginine supplementation in pregnant mares on maternal metabolism, placental structure and function and foal growth.

Authors:  Morgane Robles; Anne Couturier-Tarrade; Emilie Derisoud; Audrey Geeverding; Cedric Dubois; Michele Dahirel; Josiane Aioun; Audrey Prezelin; Juliane Calvez; Christophe Richard; Laurence Wimel; Pascale Chavatte-Palmer
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-04-23       Impact factor: 4.379

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.