Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Effects of feed processing method on litter performance in lactation sowsa

From: Crumbled or mashed feed had no significant effect on the performance of lactating sows or their offspring

Items Cb Mb p-value
Litter size, head    
 Birth piglets No. 11.3 ± 0.5 11.7 ± 0.6 0.6307
 Live piglets No. 10.4 ± 0.5 10.4 ± 0.6 1.0000
 Weaning piglets No. 9.9 ± 0.4 9.8 ± 0.7 0.8973
 Stillbirth ratec (%) 7.61 ± 2.39 10.93 ± 3.78 0.4672
 Survival rated (%) 95.19 ± 1.50 94.23 ± 2.33 0.6292
Body weight (kg)    
 d 4 Before farrowing 263.7 ± 5.0 268.5 ± 5.1 0.5144
 d 1 After farrowing 243.6 ± 5.0 246.8 ± 5.4 0.6637
 Weaning (d 28) 236.1 ± 5.5 240.1 ± 5.6 0.6187
 Body weight loss 1e 20.2 ± 0.6 21.7 ± 0.7 0.1112
 Body weight loos 2e 7.5 ± 1.0 6.8 ± 1.1 0.6489
Backfat thickness (mm)    
 d 4 Before farrowing 19.8 ± 0.5 19.9 ± 0.5 0.8932
 d 1 After farrowing 19.5 ± 0.4 19.6 ± 0.5 0.8705
 Weaning 15.3 ± 0.4 15.1 ± 0.4 0.7521
 Backfat thickness loss 1f 0.3 ± 0.2 0.3 ± 0.2 1.0000
 Backfat thickness loos 2f 4.2 ± 0.3 4.5 ± 0.3 0.4872
Average daily feed intake (g) 6.45 ± 0.01 6.45 ± 0.01 0.9784
Estrus interval (d) 5.3 ± 0.3 5.2 ± 0.2 0.7642
  1. aAbbreviation: C; Crumble diet, M; Mash diet
  2. bMean ± Standard error
  3. cStillbirth rate : (Birth piglets No. – Live piglets No.) / Birth piglets No. × 100
  4. dSurvival rate : Weaning piglets No. / Live piglets No. × 100
  5. eBody weight loss: 1, d 4 Before farrowing to d 1 After farrowing; 2, d 1 After farrowing to weaning
  6. fBackfat thickness loss: 1, d 4 Before farrowing to d 1 After farrowing; 2, d 1 After farrowing to weaning