Nemechek J E, Tokach M D, Dritz S S, Fruge E D, Hansen E L, Goodband R D, DeRouchey J M, Woodworth J C
J Anim Sci. 2015 Aug;93(8):4172-80. doi: 10.2527/jas.2015-9028.
Three experiments were conducted to determine the effects of feeder adjustment and diet form on growth performance of nursery (Exp. 1 and 2) and finishing (Exp. 3) pigs. Treatments were arranged as a 2 × 3 factorial with the main effects of feeder adjustment and diet form. The 2 feeder adjustments were a narrow and wide feeder adjustment (minimum gap opening of 1.27 and 2.54 cm, respectively). The 3 diet forms were meal, poor-quality pellets (70% pellets and 30% fines for Exp. 1 and 2 and 50% pellets and 50% fines for Exp. 3), and screened pellets with minimal fines (3 to 10%). In Exp. 1, 210 pigs (initially 11.9 kg BW) were used in a 21-d trial with 7 pigs per pen and 5 pens per treatment. No feeder adjustment × diet form interactions were observed. There were no differences in ADG, ADFI, or G:F due to feeder adjustment. Pigs fed the meal diet had increased ( < 0.05) ADG and ADFI compared with pigs fed the poor-quality or screened pellets. Pigs fed meal or poor-quality pellets had decreased ( < 0.05) G:F compared with pigs fed screened pellets. In Exp. 2, 1,005 nursery pigs (initially 14.1 kg BW) were used in a 28-d trial with 26 to 28 pigs per pen and 6 pens per treatment. Pigs fed from the narrow feeder adjustment had decreased ( < 0.05) ADG and ADFI compared with pigs fed from the wide adjustment with no differences in G:F. Pigs fed the meal diet had decreased ( < 0.05) ADG compared with pigs fed poor-quality or screened pellets. Pigs fed meal or poor-quality pellets had decreased ( < 0.05) G:F compared with pigs fed screened pellets. In Exp. 3, 246 pigs (initially 56.8 kg BW) were used in a 69-d trial with 5 pens per treatment and 6 or 7 pigs per pen. Overall, ADFI decreased ( < 0.05) and G:F increased ( < 0.05) for pigs fed from the narrow adjusted feeders compared with the wide adjustment with no differences in ADG. Overall, pigs fed meal diets tended to have decreased ( < 0.10) ADG and had decreased ( < 0.05) G:F compared with pigs fed screened pellets; ADG and G:F in those fed poor-quality pellets were intermediate. Feeding meal or poor-quality pellets increased ( < 0.05) ADFI compared with pigs fed screened pellets. In conclusion, feeding nursery pigs from a wide feeder gap may increase ADG and ADFI with no negative effects on G:F. For finishing pigs, reducing feeder gap reduced feed disappearance and improved G:F. In all experiments, the greatest G:F improvements from pelleting were observed when the percentage of fines was minimized.
进行了三项试验，以确定饲喂器调节和日粮形态对保育猪（试验1和2）及育肥猪（试验3）生长性能的影响。试验处理采用2×3析因设计，主要因素为饲喂器调节和日粮形态。两种饲喂器调节方式分别为窄型和宽型饲喂器调节（最小间隙开口分别为1.27厘米和2.54厘米）。三种日粮形态分别为粉料、低质量颗粒料（试验1和2中颗粒料占70%、细粉占30%，试验3中颗粒料占50%、细粉占50%）和细粉含量最低（3%至10%）的筛选颗粒料。在试验1中，选用210头猪（初始体重11.9千克）进行为期21天的试验，每栏7头猪，每个处理5栏。未观察到饲喂器调节×日粮形态的交互作用。饲喂器调节对平均日增重（ADG）、平均日采食量（ADFI）或料重比（G:F）没有影响。与饲喂低质量颗粒料或筛选颗粒料的猪相比，饲喂粉料日粮的猪ADG和ADFI有所增加（P<0.05）。与饲喂筛选颗粒料的猪相比，饲喂粉料或低质量颗粒料的猪G:F有所降低（P<0.05）。在试验2中，选用1005头保育猪（初始体重14.1千克）进行为期28天的试验，每栏26至28头猪，每个处理6栏。与宽型饲喂器调节的猪相比，窄型饲喂器调节的猪ADG和ADFI有所降低（P<0.05），G:F无差异。与饲喂低质量颗粒料或筛选颗粒料的猪相比，饲喂粉料日粮的猪ADG有所降低（P<0.05）。与饲喂筛选颗粒料的猪相比，饲喂粉料或低质量颗粒料的猪G:F有所降低（P<0.05）。在试验3中，选用246头猪（初始体重56.8千克）进行为期69天的试验，每个处理5栏，每栏6或7头猪。总体而言，与宽型饲喂器调节相比，窄型饲喂器调节的猪ADFI降低（P<0.05），G:F升高（P<0.05），ADG无差异。总体而言，与饲喂筛选颗粒料的猪相比，饲喂粉料日粮的猪ADG有降低趋势（P<0.10），G:F降低（P<0.05）；饲喂低质量颗粒料的猪ADG和G:F处于中间水平。与饲喂筛选颗粒料的猪相比，饲喂粉料或低质量颗粒料的猪ADFI增加（P<0.05）。总之，宽间隙饲喂保育猪可能会增加ADG和ADFI，且对G:F无负面影响。对于育肥猪，减小饲喂器间隙可减少饲料浪费并提高G:F。在所有试验中，当细粉比例降至最低时，制粒对G:F的改善效果最佳。
