Evaluating the Performace Economic and Enviromental Impacts of Using Precisio...

小马哥

Evaluating the Performace Economic and Enviromental Impacts of Using Precision Feeding Techniques in Pigs 2014 Ines Andretta

Precision feeding can reduce amino acidrequirements of growing pigs by more than 25%

Feeding growing-finishing pigswith daily tailored diets using precision feeding techniques is an effectiveapproach to reduce nutrient excretion, without compromising pig performance orcarcass composition

Introduction

Precision livestock farming isan innovative production system approach based on the intensive and integrateduse of advances in animal sciences and in the new technologies of informationand communication (Berckmans 2004). Its main objective is to optimize animalproduction and the management of the productive processes (Bos et al. 2003).Precision feeding as part of the precision livestock farming approach offerstoday many opportunities such as the increased nutrient efficiency that can beobtained by reducing excess nutrients controlling the variability that existsamong farm animals (Pomar et al. 2014; Wathes et al. 2008).

Precision feeding

Feed cost is by far thegreatest input cost in pork production (65-75%) and improving nutrientefficiency has great impact on profitability. In growing-finishing pigoperations, feeding programs are proposed to optimize population responses atminimal feed costs. However, nutrient requirements vary greatly between thepigs of a given population (Brossard et al. 2009; Hauschild et al. 2010; Pomaret al. 2003) and for each pig these requirements change over time followingindividual patterns. In order to optimize population responses nutrients areprovided at levels that satisfy the requirements of the most demanding pigs ofthe herd, with the result that most of the pigs receive more nutrients thanthey need to express their growth potential (Hauschild et al. 2010). This isbecause, for most nutrients, underfed pigs will exhibit reduced growthperformance and overfed ones will exhibit near optimal performance.

Precision feeding is based onthe fact that animals within a herd differ from each other in terms of age,weight and production potential and therefore, each has different nutrientrequirements. Precision feeding involves the use of feeding techniques thatallow the right amount of feed with the right composition to be provided at theright time to each pig in the herd (Pomar et al. 2009). Essential elements forprecision feeding in livestock production systems include,

• Evaluating the nutritional potential of feed     ingredients;
  
• Estimating the real-time nutrient requirements of     individual pigs;
  
• Formulating balanced complementary feeds at minimal     cost and limiting excess nutrients;
  
• Providing individual pigs with daily tailored diets.
  

Managing feedsand animals by advanced computerized technologies

The proposed sustainableprecision livestock farming system automatically collect in real-timeindividual feed intake and body weight information. This information is used toestimate optimal nutrient concentration of diets to be given daily to each pigof the herd using new modelling approaches (Hauschild et al. 2010). To thisend, automatic and intelligent precision feeders (AIPF) developed at theUniversity of Lleida, Spain in collaboration with Agriculture and Agri-FoodCanada (Pomar et al. 2011) identifies each pig that introduces his head intothe feeder and then blends two or more feeds delivered, upon animal requests,in small meals providing the estimated optimal nutrient concentration.

Intelligent Precission Feeders (AIPF).

The impact of movingfrom conventional to precision feeding systems in growing-finishing pigoperations on animal performance, nutrient utilization, and body and carcasscomposition was studied in a recent experiment (Andretta et al. 2014). Fifteenanimals per treatment for a total of 60 pigs of 41.2 (SE = 0.5) kg of BW wereused in a performance trial (84 d) with 4 treatments: a 3-phase feeding program(3P) obtained by blending fixed proportions of feeds A (high nutrient density)and B (low nutrient density); a 3-phase commercial feeding program (COM); and 2daily-phase feeding programs in which the blended proportions of feeds A and Bwere adjusted daily to meet the estimated nutritional requirements of the group(MPG) or of each pig individually (MPI). Daily feed intake was recorded eachday and pigs were weighed weekly during the trial. Body composition wasassessed at the beginning of the trial and every 28 d by dual-energy X-raydensitometry. Nitrogen and phosphorus excretion was estimated as the differencebetween retention and intake. Organ, carcass, and primal cut measurements weretaken after slaughter.

Table 1.Performance of pigs fed according to a 3-phase feeding program (3P) obtained byblending fixed proportions of diets A and B, a commercial 3-phase feedingprogram (COM), or two daily-phase feeding programs in which the blendingproportions of diets A and B were estimated daily to match the lysinerequirements of the group (MPG) or of each individual pig (MPI) (trial AIPF I)1

	Treatments				SEM	P-value2
	3P	COM	MPG	MPI
ADFI3, kg/d	3.05a	2.73b	3.07a	3.05a	0.043	0.0025
ADG, kg/d	1.11	1.07	1.11	1.10	0.011	0.5805
FCR, kg/kg	2.76a	2.58b	2.81a	2.78a	0.035	0.0095
APD, g/d	161	155	155	154	0.210	0.6492
Final BW, kg	134	131	135	136	1.170	0.2422

1 LSmeans obtained from a repeated measures analysis,ADFI: average daily feed intake, ADG: average daily gain, FCR: feed conversionratio, APD: average daily protein deposition, BW: body weight.

2 Effects of treatment, period and interaction wereconsidered in the analysis. Period was significant (P < 0.01) for allvariables. Interaction period*treatment was significant for ADFI (P < 0.01),ADG (P < 0.01) and FCR (P < 0.05).

3 Means within lines followed by different letters aresignificantly different (P < 0.05).

The between-animal variation in SID Lys requirements was high(Figure 1) with intra-day SD of 2.9, 3.8 and 4.8 g during the first, second andthird feeding phases.The COM feeding program reduced (P< 0.05) ADFI andimproved G:F rate in relation to other treatments. The MPG and MPI programsshowed values for ADFI, ADG, G:F, final BW, and nitrogen and phosphorusretention that were similar to those obtained for the 3P feeding program.However, compared with the 3P treatment, the MPI feeding program reduced thestandardized ileal digestible lysine intake by 27%, the estimated nitrogenexcretion by 22%, and the estimated phosphorus excretion by 27% (P< 0.05).Organs, carcass, and primal cut weights did not differ among treatments. Inrelation to the 3P conventional system, feeding pigs with daily individual tailoreddiets allowed reducing (P< 0.05) total feed cost by $7/pig (-8%).

Conclusion

Feeding growing-finishing pigs with daily tailored diets using precisionfeeding techniques is an effective approach to reduce nutrient excretion,without compromising pig performance or carcass composition. Furthermore,feeding pigs individually with daily tailored diets formulated based on its ownreal-time patterns of feed intake and growth represents a fundamental paradigmshift in pig feeding. Besides the fact that animals are fed individually, theapplication of precision feeding techniques in growing-finishing operationsimplies that optimal dietary nutrient concentration is no longer a staticpopulation characteristic, but a dynamic process that evolves independently foreach animal modulated by its own intrinsic (e.g., genetics, health, nutritionalstatus, etc.) and extrinsic (e.g., environmental and social stressors,management, etc.) driving forces.