The influence of feeding behaviour on growth performance, carcass and meat characteristics of growing pigs

Abstract

This study investigated the effect of the feeding behaviour on growth performance, and carcass and meat characteristics of 96 barrows fed ad libitum or restrictively with high or low amino acids (AA) diets according to a 2 × 2 factorial design. The feeding behaviour traits were measured with automated feeders. From 86 kg BW, half of the pigs were given feeds with high indispensable (AA) contents, while the other half received feeds with indispensable AA contents reduced by 9% in early finishing (86-118 kg BW) and by 18% in late finishing (118-145 kg BW). Body lipid and protein retentions were estimated from BW and backfat depth measures recorded at the beginning and end of each period. Pigs were slaughtered at 145 kg BW and carcass and meat quality data were recorded. Phenotypic correlations among feeding behaviours, growth performances, and carcass and meat traits were computed from all the data after adjustment for the effects of feeding treatments. As feeding rate was the behavioural trait most highly correlated with performance and carcass traits, the records of each pig were classified into feeding rate tertiles. Then, the data were statistically analysed using a mixed model, which included feed restriction (FR), AA reduction (AAR), the FR × AAR interaction and the feeding rate tertile as fixed factors, and pen as a random factor. Pigs eating faster (52.1 to 118.9 g/min) had significantly greater final body weights (16%), average daily weight gains (27%), estimated protein gains (22%), estimated lipid retention (46%), carcass weights (16%), weights of lean cuts (14%), weights of fat cuts (21%), proportions of fat in the carcass (14%), and 4% lower proportions of carcass lean cuts than pigs eating slowly (12.6 to 38.2 g/min). Manipulating the eating rate, through management or genetic strategies, could affect feed intake and subsequent growth performance, hence carcass quality, but have little influence on feed efficiency.

Fig 1. Growing pigs’ individual patterns in feed intake (A) and time spent eating (B) with increasing days on feeding regimes (n = 92, Mean = thick line; mean ± standard deviation = dotted line, trend = thin line; the experiment started on the 13^th day after the pigs’ arrival).

Fig 2. Growing pigs’ individual patterns in the number of feeding visits (A) and feed intake per visit (B) with increasing days on feeding regimes (n = 92, Mean = thick line; mean ± standard deviation = dotted line, trend = thin line; the experiment started on the 13^th day after the pigs’ arrival).

Fig 3. Growing pigs’ individual patterns in duration of feeding time per visit (A) and feeding rate (B) with increasing days on feeding regime (n = 92, Mean = thick line; mean ± standard deviation = dotted line, trend = thin line; the experiment started on the 13^th day after the pigs’ arrival).