0
Modern pig production seeks to optimize growth performance while minimizing nutrient excretion by more closely matching dietary supply to the pig’s changing requirements over time, which typically decrease as animals grow. While traditional phase feeding partially addresses this, diet blending offers a more precise alternative by continuously adjusting nutrient supply through mixing diets to better align with daily requirements, potentially improving nutrient efficiency and reducing feed costs under commercial conditions.
Objective: Two large-scale experiments involving 2,160 and 962 pigs were conducted to compare phase feeding with diet blending in terms of growth performance and profitability.
Methods: Pigs were housed in mixed-sex pens and assigned to treatments using a randomized block design based on initial body weight. In the first experiment, feeding strategies (phase feeding vs. diet blending) were tested alongside two standardized ileal digestible lysine levels (90% and 100% of requirement estimates). Phase-fed pigs received diets in five sequential phases, while in the diet blending system, low- and high-lysine diets were mixed daily to match nutrient requirements.
In the second experiment, phase-fed pigs received three dietary phases followed by a common finishing diet, while diet-blended pigs received two mixed diets adjusted daily until market weight.
Results: Overall growth rate was similar between feeding strategies, but diet blending reduced feed intake and improved feed efficiency. Carcass characteristics such as hot carcass weight, fat depth, and loin depth were not affected, although diet blending showed a tendency to slightly reduce carcass yield and increase lean percentage.
In the second experiment, as in the first, growth rate remained unchanged between strategies, but diet blending consistently reduced feed intake and improved feed efficiency during the growing period. Feed cost per pig tended to be lower with diet blending, while overall profitability was similar between strategies.
Conclusion: In summary, both phase feeding and diet blending supported comparable growth and carcass outcomes, but diet blending consistently reduced feed usage and feed cost efficiency, offering potential economic advantages depending on market conditions.
Navales RAS, Tokach MD, Reard ME, Warner AJ, Hastad C, DeRouchey JM, Gaffield KN, Gebhardt JT, Goodband RD, Woodworth JC. Comparison between phase feeding and diet blending on growth performance, carcass characteristics, and diet economics of finishing pigs raised in a commercial environment. Translational Animal Science. 2026; 10: txag027. https://doi.org/10.1093/tas/txag027