Effects of Two Feeder Designs and Adjustment Strategies on the Growth Performance and Carcass Characteristics of Growing-Finishing Pigs

January 30, 2013 — 

Our objective was to compare effects of a conventional dry (CD, 152.4-cm-wide, 5-space, Staco Inc., Schaefferstown, PA) and a wet-dry (WD, double-sided, each side = 38.1-cm-space, Crystal Springs, GroMaster Inc., Omaha, NE) feeder using various feeder adjustment openings on the growth performance and carcass characteristics of growing-finishing pigs (Sus scrofa). In Exp. 1, 1,296 pigs (BW 19 kg) were used in a 27-d study to evaluate 3 feeder openings nested within each feeder design. From d 0 to 27, pigs fed with a WD feeder had similar ADG, but lower (P < 0.02) ADFI and greater G:F than pigs fed with a CD feeder. Increased adjustment opening increased (linear, P < 0.01) ADG and ADFI by pigs fed with a WD feeder, and increased (linear, P < 0.01) ADFI by pigs fed with a CD feeder. In Exp. 2, 1,248 pigs (BW 33 kg) were used to evaluate 3 feeder openings nested within each feeder design in a 93-d study. Pigs fed with a WD feeder had greater (P < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, final BW, HCW, and backfat, but decreased fat-free lean index (FFLI) than those fed with a CD feeder. Increased opening of the WD feeder resulted in greater (linear, P < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, HCW, and backfat, but lower FFLI. No differences among CD feeder openings were observed, and G:F did not differ among all feeder treatments. In Exp. 3, 1,287 pigs (BW 38 kg) were used in a 92-d factorial experiment with 4 feeder treatments and 2 diet types (low and high byproduct diets). Feeder treatments were CD at approximately a 2.4-cm opening, WD at a 3.2-cm opening, WD changed to a 2.5-cm opening on d 56, and WD changed to a 2.5-cm opening on d 28 and a 1.9-cm opening on d 56. Pigs fed with a WD feeder had greater (P < 0.01) ADG, ADFI, HCW, and backfat, but decreased FFLI than pigs fed with a CD feeder. Decreasing the WD feeder opening during the study decreased (P < 0.05) ADG. Pigs with the WD feeder opening decreased to 1.9 cm had reduced (P < 0.05) ADFI and backfat, but increased FFLI compared with pigs with a WD feeder opening of 3.2 cm. Feed efficiency did not differ among treatments. In conclusion, ADG, ADFI, HCW, and backfat were increased with the WD feeder evaluated in this experiment, but the growth of pigs fed with a WD feeder was more sensitive to differences in feeder adjustment than that of pigs fed with a CD feeder.

J ANIM SCI December 2012 vol. 90 no. 12 4555-4566 http://journalofanimalscience.org/content/90/12/4555.abstract