Department of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA.
Jyga Technologies, St-Lambert-de-Lauzon, QC G0S 2W0, Canada.
J Anim Sci. 2024 Jan 3;102. doi: 10.1093/jas/skae285.
Two experiments evaluated the effects of precision feeding standardized ileal digestible (SID) Lys during lactation. Sows were blocked by parity and allotted to treatment on day 2 of lactation. In both experiments, sow body weight (BW), backfat (BF), loin depth (LD), and estimated N excretion were evaluated as well as litter growth performance. In experiment 1, 95 sows and litters were used. Three dietary treatments were provided using 2 diets: a low (0.25% SID Lys) and high Lys diet (1.10% SID Lys). Treatments included a control diet (1.10% SID Lys) fed throughout lactation, and NRC or INRA treatment curves for Lys intake. Sows fed NRC or INRA treatment curves received blends of low and high Lys diets using a computerized lactation feeder (Gestal Quattro Opti Feeder, Jyga Technologies, St-Lambert-de-Lauzon, Quebec, CA) to target a specific Lys intake each day of lactation based on NRC and INRA models for parity and litter size. In experiment 2, 56 sows and litters were used with 3 treatments, a control diet (1.10% SID Lys fed throughout lactation) and either a static or dynamic blend curve. For both curve treatments, low (0.40% SID Lys) and high Lys (1.10% SID Lys) diets were blended to reach target Lys intake. The difference between the static and dynamic curves was that the dynamic curves were adjusted based on actual Lys intake and static curves were not. Lysine intake curves were based on NRC model estimates, but targets were increased by 20% to target average Lys intake of 60 g/d across parities based on results of experiment 1. In both experiments, no differences (P > 0.05) in sow average daily feed intake or sow BW, BF, or LD change were observed. Sows fed the control diets had greater Lys intake (grams per day; P < 0.05) compared to sows fed either of the blended treatment curves. In experiment 1, pigs from sows fed the control diet had greater (P < 0.05) BW at weaning and preweaning average daily gain (ADG) compared to sows fed the INRA treatment curve, with pigs from sows fed the NRC treatment curve intermediate. However, in experiment 2, no differences (P > 0.05) were observed in pig weight at weaning or ADG. In both experiments, sows fed the blended treatment curves had lower (P < 0.05) calculated N excretion. In summary, for a litter size of 13.5 weaned pigs, 60 g/d of SID Lys is sufficient to maximize litter weight gain and can be achieved through blending low and high Lys diets. Precision feeding reduced N excretion compared to feeding a single diet throughout lactation.
两项实验评估了哺乳期标准化回肠可消化赖氨酸(SID Lys)精喂的效果。母猪按胎次分组,并在哺乳期第 2 天分配到处理组。在两项实验中,均评估了母猪体重(BW)、背膘(BF)、腰深(LD)和估计的氮排泄量以及仔猪生长性能。在实验 1 中,使用了 95 头母猪和仔猪。采用两种日粮提供三种日粮处理:低(0.25% SID Lys)和高 Lys 日粮(1.10% SID Lys)。处理组包括哺乳期全程饲喂的对照日粮(1.10% SID Lys)和 Lys 摄入量的 NRC 或 INRA 处理曲线。饲喂 NRC 或 INRA 处理曲线的母猪使用计算机化哺乳饲养器(Gestal Quattro Opti Feeder,Jyga Technologies,St-Lambert-de-Lauzon,Quebec,CA)根据 NRC 和 INRA 模型混合低和高 Lys 日粮,以根据每头母猪的胎次和仔猪数来达到特定的 Lys 日摄入量。在实验 2 中,使用了 56 头母猪和仔猪,有 3 种处理,即哺乳期全程饲喂的对照日粮(1.10% SID Lys)和静态或动态混合曲线。对于两种曲线处理,混合低(0.40% SID Lys)和高 Lys(1.10% SID Lys)日粮以达到目标 Lys 摄入量。静态和动态曲线的区别在于,动态曲线根据实际 Lys 摄入量进行调整,而静态曲线则不进行调整。Lysine 摄入量曲线基于 NRC 模型估计,但目标提高了 20%,以达到基于实验 1 结果的各胎次平均 Lys 摄入量 60g/d。在两项实验中,母猪平均日采食量或 BW、BF 或 LD 变化均无差异(P>0.05)。与饲喂混合处理曲线的母猪相比,饲喂对照日粮的母猪 Lys 摄入量(克/天;P<0.05)更高。在实验 1 中,与饲喂 INRA 处理曲线的母猪相比,饲喂对照日粮的母猪断奶时和断奶前平均日增重(ADG)更高(P<0.05),饲喂 NRC 处理曲线的母猪居中。然而,在实验 2 中,断奶时的仔猪体重或 ADG 没有差异(P>0.05)。在两项实验中,饲喂混合处理曲线的母猪计算出的氮排泄量更低(P<0.05)。总之,对于 13.5 头断奶仔猪,60g/d 的 SID Lys 足以最大限度地提高仔猪体重增加,可以通过混合低和高 Lys 日粮来实现。与哺乳期全程饲喂单一日粮相比,精准饲喂降低了氮排泄量。