Effects of mat-feeding duration and different waterer types on nursery pig performance in a wean-to-finish barn
ML Potter, SS Dritz, MD Tokach, JM DeRouchey, RD Goodband, and JL Nelssen, 2010. Swine day, Kansas State University, Report progress 1038: 62-71.
09-Mar-2011 (15 years 2 months 27 days ago)A total of 3,680 weanling pigs were used in 2 experiments to determine the effects of mat-feeding strategies and different waterer types on pig performance and removal rates. In Exp. 1, a total of 24 pens (58 pigs per pen) were blocked by source farm and allotted to 1 of 4 gender (barrow or gilt) x feeding (control or mat-fed) treatments in a 27-d trial. Pigs were initially 6.98 kg. Control pigs did not receive any pelleted feed placed on mats, while pigs assigned to the mat-fed treatment were given 2.8 kg of pelleted diet on the mats 3 times daily for 6 d. Pigs were weighed and feed intake by pen was recorded on d 0, 11, and 27 to calculate ADG, ADFI, and F/G. In Exp. 2, a total of 44 pens (52 pigs per pen) were allotted to 1 of 8 waterer types (swinging or pan) x gender (barrow or gilt) × mat-feeding duration (0.726 kg of pelleted feed given 3 times daily for either 3 or 7 d) treatments in a 32-d trial. Pigs were initially 6.17 kg. Waterer types evaluated in this study were a dual swinging waterer or an under-the-fence-line 35.6 cm pan waterer. Pigs were weighed and feed intake by pen was recorded on d 0, 7, 20, and 32 to calculate ADG, ADFI, and F/G. Removed and dead pigs were tracked, and for Exp. 2, all removed pigs were individually weighed and included in calculations involving gain.
Results from Exp. 1 indicate a difference (P = 0.04) in overall (d 0 to 27) removal percentage between control and mat-fed pigs. Fewer pigs fed on mats died or were removed from pens (5.9%) than control pigs (9.8%), with most removals between treatments occurring within the first 11 d (control: 8.0% vs. mat-fed: 4.6%; P = 0.03). Because of the difference in removal percentages, overall ADG and F/G tended to be improved (P = 0.06) for mat-fed pigs compared to the controls. Thus, the results of Exp. 1 indicate a benefit by feeding on mats for 6 d in reducing the percentage of removed pigs, but no advantages on growth performance were observed.
For Exp. 2, removal percentages from d 0 to 7 were similar (P ≥ 0.17) regardless of treatment. By d 20 and through the end of the trial (d 32), a 2-way interaction (P = 0.03) was observed between water source and mat-feeding duration on removal percentages. Pigs that were fed on mats for 3 d and provided swinging waterers had the lowest removal rate among treatments. Overall, there was a trend (P ≥ 0.08) for pigs using the swinging waterer to have increased ADG and improved F/G, resulting in pigs having a 0.635 kg numeric advantage in weight at d 32 compared with pigs drinking from the pan waterer. Much of the overall effect was due to pigs using the swinging waterer having improved (P = 0.02) ADG and F/G compared with pigs with pan waterer access in the early stages (d 7 to 20) of the nursery period.
It is concluded that, in periods during these trials, performance and removal rates of pigs post-weaning were able to be improved by feeding on mats and using swinging waterers instead of pan waterers.
Results from Exp. 1 indicate a difference (P = 0.04) in overall (d 0 to 27) removal percentage between control and mat-fed pigs. Fewer pigs fed on mats died or were removed from pens (5.9%) than control pigs (9.8%), with most removals between treatments occurring within the first 11 d (control: 8.0% vs. mat-fed: 4.6%; P = 0.03). Because of the difference in removal percentages, overall ADG and F/G tended to be improved (P = 0.06) for mat-fed pigs compared to the controls. Thus, the results of Exp. 1 indicate a benefit by feeding on mats for 6 d in reducing the percentage of removed pigs, but no advantages on growth performance were observed.
For Exp. 2, removal percentages from d 0 to 7 were similar (P ≥ 0.17) regardless of treatment. By d 20 and through the end of the trial (d 32), a 2-way interaction (P = 0.03) was observed between water source and mat-feeding duration on removal percentages. Pigs that were fed on mats for 3 d and provided swinging waterers had the lowest removal rate among treatments. Overall, there was a trend (P ≥ 0.08) for pigs using the swinging waterer to have increased ADG and improved F/G, resulting in pigs having a 0.635 kg numeric advantage in weight at d 32 compared with pigs drinking from the pan waterer. Much of the overall effect was due to pigs using the swinging waterer having improved (P = 0.02) ADG and F/G compared with pigs with pan waterer access in the early stages (d 7 to 20) of the nursery period.
It is concluded that, in periods during these trials, performance and removal rates of pigs post-weaning were able to be improved by feeding on mats and using swinging waterers instead of pan waterers.