Simulated amino acid requirements of growing pigs differ between current factorial methods

Página do item simplificado
dc.contributor.authorRemus, A. [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorHauschild, L. [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorPomar, C. [UNESP]
dc.contributor.institutionAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-12T01:18:40Z
dc.date.available2020-12-12T01:18:40Z
dc.date.issued2020-04-01
dc.description.abstractSignificant differences in the estimation of amino acid requirements exist between the available factorial methods. This study aimed to compare current factorial models used to estimate the individual and population standardised ileal digestible (SID) lysine (Lys) requirements of growing pigs during a 26-day feeding phase. Individual daily feed intake and BW data from 40 high-performance pigs (25-kg initial BW) were smoothed by linear regression. Body weight gain was constant (regression slope not different from 0) for all the pigs. The CV of the SID Lys requirements ranged from 22% at the beginning of the trial to 8% at the end. The population Brazilian tables (BT-2017) and National Research Council (NRC-2012) SID Lys requirements for the average pig were 16% higher than the average requirement estimated by the individual precision-feeding model (IPF), but similar to the estimated for the population assuming that population requirements are those of the 80th-percentile pig of the population (IPF-80). Meaning that, the IPF-80, BT-2017, and NRC-2012 models would yield similar recommendations when pigs are group-fed in conventional multi-phase systems. Additionally, the IPF-80 estimates are independent of the phase length, whereas the BT-2017 and NRC-2012 models use average population values in the middle of the feeding phase for the calculations and therefore, conventional requirement estimations decrease as the length of the feeding phase increases. In conclusion, the BT-2017 and NRC-2012 methods were calibrated for maximum population responses, which explains why these methods yield higher values than those estimated for the average pig by the IPF model. This study shows the limitations of conventional factorial methods to estimate amino acid requirements for precision-feeding systems.en
dc.description.affiliationSherbrooke Research and Development Centre Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Animal Science School of Agricultural and Veterinary Studies São Paulo State University (Unesp)
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Animal Science School of Agricultural and Veterinary Studies São Paulo State University (Unesp)
dc.format.extent725-730
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1751731119002660
dc.identifier.citationAnimal, v. 14, n. 4, p. 725-730, 2020.
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/S1751731119002660
dc.identifier.issn1751-732X
dc.identifier.issn1751-7311
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85082006900
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/198655
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofAnimal
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectlysine
dc.subjectnutritional modelling
dc.subjectprecision feeding
dc.subjectprecision nutrition
dc.subjectswine
dc.titleSimulated amino acid requirements of growing pigs differ between current factorial methodsen
dc.typeArtigo

Arquivos

Coleções

Artigos