Better Pork
December 2016
33
meals accounting for 64 per cent of
total meals in the first feeding phase,
74 per cent in the second phase, and
82 per cent in the last phase.
Treatment did not affect number
of meals, duration of meals, time
between meals, feed consumed per
meal, and feed consumption rate
(Table 1). Gilts consumed 19 per cent
less feed per meal and had a signifi-
cantly lower feed consumption rate
compared with barrows.
Pig feeding behavior was not
affected by diet composition. How-
ever, there was a significant negative
correlation between feed efficiency,
the amount of feed consumed per
meal, and feed consumption rate. The
researchers found that the variables
which related most closely to pig per-
formance results were feed consump-
tion rate and number of meals per
day. Given the limitations of the cur-
rent experimental design, the scien-
tists determined that more research is
needed to pinpoint and interpret the
importance of these traits with larger
groups of pigs.
Precision feeding (at 100 per cent
of estimated lysine requirement)
NUTRITION
March 28 March 29 SPEAKING LINE UP FOR 2017 INCLUDES: Nikolas Badminton Futurist Ron Plain Economist LSC FOR UP TO DATE AGENDA,TOPICS & SPEAKERSVISIT: www.londonswineconference.ca &LSC AD-Dec BP 2017-final.pdf 1 2016-11-03 9:10 PM
Table 1. Feeding behavior of pigs fed in a group according to a three-phase feeding program or indi-
vidually with daily tailored diets providing a percentage of the estimated lysine requirements
Response
Treatments
Sex
Feeding phases
3-phase
110
100
90
80 Barrows Gilts
1
2
3
Interval between meals, min
280
275
234
241
241
263
267
227c
301a
268b
Feeding time per meal, min
6.39
5.85
5.77
5.70
5.44
6.46
5.82
6.21a
6.44a 5.76b
Feed intake per meal, g
258
250
243
239
217
286
231
194c
279b 301a
Feed consumption rate, g/min
39.8
41.5
41.7
41.0
39.7
42.7
39.9
31.4c
42.4b 50.2a
Number of meals per day
9.81
10.1
10.8
11.1
11.1
10.5
10.7
11.0a
9.42b 11.3a
a–cValues within a row and within the comparison (among treatments or feeding phases) with different superscripts differ significantly at P < 0.05
Source: Andretta, I., Pomar, C., Kipper, M., Hauschild, L., and Rivest, J. 2016. Feeding behavior of growing–finishing pigs reared under precision feeding strategies. J. Anim. Sci. 94: 7: 3042-3050.