Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-shngb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-12T08:52:28.237Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Previous feeding level influences plateau heat production following a 24 h fast in growing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2007

Kees de Lange ,
Jaap van Milgen ,
Jean Noblet ,
Serge Dubois  and
Stephen Birkett
Kees de Lange*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Poultry ScienceUniversity of GuelphGuelphONCanada
Jaap van Milgen
Affiliation:
Unité Mixte de Recherches Systémes d'elevageNutrition Animale et HumaineInstitut National de la Recherche AgronomiqueSt Gilles France
Jean Noblet
Affiliation:
Unité Mixte de Recherches Systémes d'elevageNutrition Animale et HumaineInstitut National de la Recherche AgronomiqueSt Gilles France
Serge Dubois
Affiliation:
Unité Mixte de Recherches Systémes d'elevageNutrition Animale et HumaineInstitut National de la Recherche AgronomiqueSt Gilles France
Stephen Birkett
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Poultry ScienceUniversity of GuelphGuelphONCanada
*
*Corresponding author: Dr C. de Lange, fax +1 519 836 9873, Email cdelange@uoguelph.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Factorial approaches to estimate energy requirements of growing pigs require estimation of maintenance energy requirements. Heat production (HP) during fasting (FHP) may provide an estimate of maintenance energy requirements. Six barrows were used to determine effects of feedinglevel on components of HP, including extrapolated plateau HP following a 24h fast (FHPp). Based on a cross-over design, each pig was exposed to three feeding levels (1·55, 2·05 and 2·54MJ metabolisable energy/kg body weight (BW)0·60 per d) between 30 and 90kg BW. Following a 14d adaptation period, HP wasestimated using indirect calorimetry on pigs housed individually. Dynamics of HP were recordedin pigs for 5d during the fed state and during a subsequent 24h fast. Metabolisable energy intake was partitioned between thermal effect of feeding (HPf), activity HP (HPa), FHPp and energy retention. Feeding level influenced (P<0·05) total HP during the fed state, HPf and activity-free FHPp (609, 644 and 729 (se 31) kJ/kg BW0·60 per d for low, medium and high ME intakes, respectively). The value of FHPp when expressed per kg BW0·60 did not differ (P=0·34) between the three subsequent experimental periods. Feeding level did not (P=0·75) influence HPa. Regression of total HP during the fed state to zero metabolisable energy intake yielded a value of 489 (se 69) kJ/kg BW0·60 per d, which is a lower estimate ofmaintenanceenergy requirement than FHPp. Duration of adaptation of pigs to changes in feeding level and calculation methods should be considered when measuring or estimating FHPp, maintenance energy requirements and diet net energy content.

Keywords

EnergyFastingHeat productionMaintenancePigs

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 95 , Issue 6 , June 2006 , pp. 1082 - 1087
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2006

References

Agricultural Research Council The Nutrient Requirements of Pigs Slough, UKCommonwealth Agricultural Bureaux 1981Google Scholar
Association of Official Analytical Chemists Official Methods of Analysis, 15th ed. Washington, DCAssociation of Official Analytical Chemists 1990Google Scholar
Birkett, SH & de Lange, CFMLimitations of conventional models and a conceptual framework for a nutrient flow representation of energy utilization by animals. Br J Nutr 2001a 86 647–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkett, SH & de Lange, CFMA computational framework for a nutrient flow representation of energy utilization by growing mono-gastric animals. Br J Nutr 2001b 86 661–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkett, SH & de Lange, CFMCalibration of a nutrient flow model of energy utilization by growing pigs. Br J Nutr 2001c 86 675–689CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Black, JLModelling energy metabolism in the pig – critical evaluation of a simple reference model. In Modelling Growth in the Pig, Moughan, PJ, Verstegen, MWA and Visser-Reyneveld, MWageningen, The NetherlandsWageningen Pers 1995 87–102Google Scholar
Blaxter, KEnergy Metabolism in Animals and Man Cambridge, UKCambridge University Press 1989Google Scholar
Brouwer, EReport of sub-committee on constants and factors. InEnergy Metabolism, Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium of the European Association for Animal Production, Blaxter, KL Troon, Scotland, May 1964, publication no. 11 LondonAcademic Press 1965 441–443Google Scholar
Chwalibog, A, Tauson, A-H & Thorbek, GEnergy metabolism and substrate oxidation in pigs during feeding, starvation and refeeding. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr 2004 88 101–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corring, T, Aumaitre, A & Rerat, AFistulation permanente du pancréas exocrine chez le porc. Application: réponse de la sécrétion pancréatique au repas (Permanent fistulisation of the exocrine pancreas in the pig. Application: response of pancreatic secretion to feeding). Ann Biol Anim Biochim Biophys 1972 12 109–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique. Tables de composition et de valeur nutritive des matiéres premiéres destinées aux animaux d'élevage: Porcs, volailles, bovins, ovins, caprins, lapins, chevaux, poissons Sauvant, D, Perez, JM & Tran, GVersailles, FranceINRA Editions 2002Google Scholar
Koong, LJ, Nienaber, JA & Mershman, HJEffect of plane of nutrition on organ size and fasting heat production in genetically obese and lean pigs. J Nutr 1983 113 1626–1631CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Research Council Nutrient Requirements of Swine, 10th revised ed. Washington, DCNational Academic Press 1998Google Scholar
Noblet, J, Fortune, H, Shi, XS & Dubois, SPrediction of net energy value of feeds for growing pigs. J Anim Sci 1994 72 344–354CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noblet, J, Karege, C, Dubois, S & van Milgen, JMetabolic utilization of energy and maintenance requirements in growing pigs:effects of sex and genotype. J Anim Sci 1999 77 1208–1216CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noblet, J, Shi, XS & Dubois, SMetabolic utilization of dietary energy and nutrients for maintenance energy requirements in pigs:basis for a net energy system. Br J Nutr 1993 70 407–419CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nyachoti, CM, de Lange, CFM, McBride, BW, Leeson, S & Schulze, HDietary influence on organ size and in vitro oxygen consumption by visceral organs of growing pigs. Livest Prod Sci 2000 65 229–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quiniou, N, Noblet, J, van Milgen, J & Dourmad, JYEffect of energy intake on performance, nutrient and tissue gain and protein and energy utilization in growing boars. Anim Sci 1995 61 133–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tess, MW, Dickersen, GE, Nienaber, JA & Ferrell, CLThe effects of body composition on fasting heat production in pigs. Anim Sci 1984 58 99–110CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Milgen, J, Bernier, JF, Lecozler, Y, Dubois, S & Noblet, JMajor determinants of fasting heat production and energetic cost of activity in growing pigs of different body weight and breed/castration combination. Br J Nutr 1998 79 1–9Google ScholarPubMed
van Milgen, J & Noblet, JModelling energy expenditure in pigs. In Modelling Nutrient Utilization in Farm Animals, McNamara, JP, France, J and Beever, DWallingfordCABI Publishing 2000 103–114Google Scholar
van Milgen, J, Noblet, J & Dubois, SEnergetic efficiency of starch, protein and lipid utilization in growing pigs. J Nutr 2001 131 1309–1318CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Milgen, J, Noblet, J, Dubois, S & Bernier, JFDynamic aspects of oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production in swine. Br J Nutr 1997 78 397–410CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yen, J-TOxygen consumption and energy fluxes of porcine splanchnic tissues. In Digestive Physiology in Pigs, Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Digestive Physiology in Pigs, Laplace, J-P, Fevrier, C and Barbeau, A EAAP publication no. 88., ParisINRA 1997 260–269Google Scholar