growth performance of the progeny of two swine sire lines reared under different floor space allowances

• Published in: Journal of animal science Vol. 81; no. 5; pp. 1126 - 1135
• Main Authors: Hamilton, D.N, Ellis, M, Wolter, B.F, Schinckel, A.P, Wilson, E.R
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Savoy, IL Am Soc Animal Sci 01.05.2003; American Society of Animal Science; Oxford University Press
• Subjects: Adipose Tissue - growth & development; ancestry; animal drinkers; Animal Husbandry - methods; Animal productions; Animals; barrows; Biological and medical sciences; Body Composition; Breeding of animals; carcass characteristics; Eating; feed intake; Female; Floors and Floorcoverings; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; gender differences; growth performance; growth traits; Hogs; Housing, Animal; Livestock industry; longissimus muscle; Male; Muscle, Skeletal - growth & development; Physical growth; Pietrain; progeny; Random Allocation; Sex Factors; sires; Swine - genetics; Swine - growth & development; Terrestrial animal productions; Time Factors; Vertebrates; Weight; Weight Gain; Performance evaluation; Pigs; Monogastric animal; Farming animal; Growth rate; Growth; Floor Space; Sires; Experimental study; Pig; Progeny test; Vertebrata; Meat animals; Mammalia; Genotype environment interaction; Genetic improvement; Artiodactyla; Surface area; Ungulata; Population density; ANIMAL WELFARE
• ISSN: 0021-8812; 1525-3163; 1525-3163
• DOI: 10.2527/2003.8151126x

A total of 736 pigs was used in a study with a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial arrangement to investigate the effects of and interactions between sire line (Line A vs. B), floor space (unrestricted vs. restricted), and gender (barrow vs. gilt) on growth performance, BW, and protein and estimated lipid accretion curves from 40 to 120 kg of BW. Pigs were by eight Line-A and nine Line-B sires mated with PIC C22 dams. Line A was of Pietrain ancestry and Line B was a synthetic line. The unrestricted floor space treatment consisted of small groups (four pigs) with 0.93 m2/pig of floor space for the entire grow-finish period. Pigs in the restricted floor space were in larger groups (12 pigs) with 0.37 and 0.56 m2/pig of floor space for the grower and finisher phases, respectively. Pigs were given ad libitum access to a three-phase dietary program, and one and three nipple waterers were available in the groups of 4 and 12 pigs, respectively. No sire line × floor space interactions were found for any of the traits measured. Line A pigs grew more slowly (50 g/d, P < 0.05), took longer (4.1 d, P < 0.05) to reach harvest weight (120.3 kg), and had similar feed intakes, but a lower gain:feed ratio (2.8%, P < 0.05) than Line B pigs. Line A pigs had greater longissimus muscle depth (P < 0.05) and estimated protein accretion rate (P < 0.05) than Line B pigs, but Line A and Line B pigs had a similar estimated percentage of lipid-free soft tissue. Pigs reared in the restricted floor space grew more slowly (105 g/d, P < 0.05) and consumed less feed (280 g/d, P < 0.05) but had a similar (P > 0.05) gain:feed ratio to pigs reared in the unrestricted floor space. Pigs reared in the unrestricted floor space had greater (P < 0.05) predicted protein and lipid accretion rates throughout the growth period than pigs reared in the restricted floor space. Differences between genders for growth traits and carcass measurements were in agreement with previous research. The differences in growth performance, carcass measures, and compositional growth curves between these two sire lines were similar in the two floor spaces.