Effects of feeder design on growth performance and carcass characteristics of finishing pigs
JR Bergstrom, MD Tokach, SS Dritz, JL Nelssen, JM DeRouchey and RD Goodband, 2008, Swine Day, Kansas State University, 196
06-Oct-2009 (16 years 8 months ago)The objective of this study was to determine whether use of a wet-dry feeder would improve performance and profitability of finishing pigs housed in commercial conditions.
Two experiments were conducted to compare the effects of feeder design (conventional dry vs. wet-dry feeder) on finishing pig performance. In Exp. 1, 1,186 pigs were used in a 69-d experiment. Pigs were weighed (avg. 32.1 kg) and allotted to 1 of 2 feeder types in a completely randomized design. There were 22 pens per feeder type with 26 to 28 pigs per pen. All pigs were fed the same dietary sequence in 4 phases (d 0 to 10, 10 to 28, 28 to 50, and 50 to 69). Overall (d 0 to 69), pigs using the wet-dry feeder had greater (P < 0.001) ADG, ADFI, and final weight compared with pigs using the conventional dry feeder.
In Exp. 2, 1,236 pigs were used in a 104-d experiment. Pigs were weighed (avg. 28.7 kg) and allotted to 1 of the 2 feeder types in a completely randomized design. There were 23 pens per feeder type with 25 to 28 pigs per pen. All pigs were fed the same feed budget (diet 1 = 26.8 kg/pig, diet 2 = 39.9 kg/pig, diet 3 = 54.9 kg/pig, and diet 4 = 58.9 kg/pig). On d 84, the 3 largest pigs per pen were marketed. Afterward, all remaining pigs were fed a fifth dietary phase containing ractopamine hydrochloride until d 104. Carcass measurements were obtained after pigs were transported to a commercial slaughterhouse on d 104. Overall (d 0 to 104), pigs using the wet-dry feeder had greater (P < 0.001) ADG, ADFI, and final weight compared with those using the conventional dry feeder. However, pigs using the wet-dry feeder had poorer F/G and increased feed cost per pig (P < 0.002) than pigs using the conventional dry feeder. Carcass yield, fat free lean index, premium per pig was increased, whereas average backfat depth was decreased (P < 0.03) for pigs using the conventional dry feeder compared with pigs using the wet-dry feeder. The combination of these effects resulted in a numerically lower net income per pig for pigs fed with the wet-dry feeder.
These experiments demonstrate that growth performance of finishing pigs was improved with a wet-dry feeder compared with a conventional dry feeder
Two experiments were conducted to compare the effects of feeder design (conventional dry vs. wet-dry feeder) on finishing pig performance. In Exp. 1, 1,186 pigs were used in a 69-d experiment. Pigs were weighed (avg. 32.1 kg) and allotted to 1 of 2 feeder types in a completely randomized design. There were 22 pens per feeder type with 26 to 28 pigs per pen. All pigs were fed the same dietary sequence in 4 phases (d 0 to 10, 10 to 28, 28 to 50, and 50 to 69). Overall (d 0 to 69), pigs using the wet-dry feeder had greater (P < 0.001) ADG, ADFI, and final weight compared with pigs using the conventional dry feeder.
In Exp. 2, 1,236 pigs were used in a 104-d experiment. Pigs were weighed (avg. 28.7 kg) and allotted to 1 of the 2 feeder types in a completely randomized design. There were 23 pens per feeder type with 25 to 28 pigs per pen. All pigs were fed the same feed budget (diet 1 = 26.8 kg/pig, diet 2 = 39.9 kg/pig, diet 3 = 54.9 kg/pig, and diet 4 = 58.9 kg/pig). On d 84, the 3 largest pigs per pen were marketed. Afterward, all remaining pigs were fed a fifth dietary phase containing ractopamine hydrochloride until d 104. Carcass measurements were obtained after pigs were transported to a commercial slaughterhouse on d 104. Overall (d 0 to 104), pigs using the wet-dry feeder had greater (P < 0.001) ADG, ADFI, and final weight compared with those using the conventional dry feeder. However, pigs using the wet-dry feeder had poorer F/G and increased feed cost per pig (P < 0.002) than pigs using the conventional dry feeder. Carcass yield, fat free lean index, premium per pig was increased, whereas average backfat depth was decreased (P < 0.03) for pigs using the conventional dry feeder compared with pigs using the wet-dry feeder. The combination of these effects resulted in a numerically lower net income per pig for pigs fed with the wet-dry feeder.
These experiments demonstrate that growth performance of finishing pigs was improved with a wet-dry feeder compared with a conventional dry feeder