» Articles » PMID: 34791287

Relationship Between Energy Intake and Growth Performance and Body Composition in Pigs Selected for Low Backfat Thickness

Overview
Journal J Anim Sci
Date 2021 Nov 18
PMID 34791287
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Genetic selection of pigs over recent decades has sought to reduce carcass fat content to meet consumer demands for lean meat in many countries (e.g., Australia). Due to the impacts of genetic changes, it is unknown whether the carcass fat measures are still responsive to energy intake. Thus, the present experiment aimed to quantify the relationship between tissue composition and dietary energy intake in finisher pigs selected for low carcass backfat. Intact male and female pigs (n = 56 for each sex; Primegro Genetics, Corowa, NSW, Australia) were fed seven different amounts of an amino acid adequate wheat-based diet containing 14.3 MJ digestible energy (DE)/kg to provide the following daily DE intakes- 25.8, 29.0, 32.6, 35.3, 38.5, 41.5, and 44.2 (ad libitum) MJ DE/d for males, and 25.8, 28.9, 32.0, 35.6, 38.3, 40.9, and 44.5 (ad libitum) MJ DE/d for females between 60 and 108 kg live weight. Body composition of anesthetized pigs was measured using the dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) method when individual pigs reached 108 kg, and protein, fat, and ash deposition rates were calculated. Pigs were slaughtered on the second day post-DXA scan for carcass backfat measurement. The results showed that the carcass backfat thickness (standardized at 83.7 kg carcass) increased by 0.125 mm for every MJ increase in daily DE intake in male pigs (P = 0.004; R2 = 0.130), but carcass backfat of female pigs (standardized at 85.1 kg carcass) was not responsive to daily DE intake. Whole-body fat composition and fat deposition rate increased linearly (both P < 0.01) in male pigs but quadratically (both P < 0.01) in female pigs in response to DE intake. Every MJ increase of daily DE intake increased the rate of daily protein deposition by 3.8 g in intact male pigs (P < 0.001; R2 = 0.781) and by 2.5 g in female pigs (P < 0.001; R2 = 0.643). In conclusion, the selection for low backfat thickness over the last two decades has altered the response of fat deposition and backfat thickness to energy intake, particularly in female pigs. Despite this change, the linear relationship between DE intake and protein deposition rate was maintained in these modern genetics.

Citing Articles

A genome-wide association study identified candidate regions and genes for commercial traits in a Landrace population.

Ma G, Tan X, Yan Y, Zhang T, Wang J, Chen X Front Genet. 2025; 15():1505197.

PMID: 39834545 PMC: 11743953. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2024.1505197.


Differential Expression Analysis of tRNA-Derived Small RNAs from Subcutaneous Adipose Tissue of Obese and Lean Pigs.

Gu H, Gan M, Wang L, Yang Y, Wang J, Chen L Animals (Basel). 2022; 12(24).

PMID: 36552481 PMC: 9774726. DOI: 10.3390/ani12243561.

References
1.
Noblet J, Perez J . Prediction of digestibility of nutrients and energy values of pig diets from chemical analysis. J Anim Sci. 1993; 71(12):3389-98. DOI: 10.2527/1993.71123389x. View

2.
Yen J, Pond W . Plasma thyroid hormones, growth and carcass measurements of genetically obese and lean pigs as influenced by thyroprotein supplementation. J Anim Sci. 1985; 61(3):566-72. DOI: 10.2527/jas1985.613566x. View

3.
Oliver W, McCauley I, Harrell R, Suster D, Kerton D, Dunshea F . A gonadotropin-releasing factor vaccine (Improvac) and porcine somatotropin have synergistic and additive effects on growth performance in group-housed boars and gilts. J Anim Sci. 2003; 81(8):1959-66. DOI: 10.2527/2003.8181959x. View

4.
Dunshea F, Suster D, Kerton D, Leury B . Exogenous porcine somatotropin administered to neonatal pigs at high doses can alter lifetime fat but not lean tissue deposition. Br J Nutr. 2003; 89(6):795-801. DOI: 10.1079/BJN2003843. View

5.
Koong L, Nienaber J, Mersmann H . Effects of plane of nutrition on organ size and fasting heat production in genetically obese and lean pigs. J Nutr. 1983; 113(8):1626-31. DOI: 10.1093/jn/113.8.1626. View