Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 11.9.
Comparison between Actual vs Predicted treatment performance results for the Whole Test
Period (
31-
118 kg) and carcass results at 122 kg. (Control represents the existing feeding programme while
Optimum and Average represent the optimum amino acid levels for each phase that provided the highest
MOFC and the average amino acid levels for all optimum solutions that met the minimum improvement in
MOFC, respectively.) (From Nutreco Canada, 2010, unpublished data.)
Control
Optimum
Average
Actual
Watson
Actual
Watson
Actual
Watson
ADFI, kg/day
2.52
2.46
2.54
2.48
2.49
2.44
ADG, kg/day
0.946
0.917
0.946
0.921
0.931
0.914
Feed:gain
2.67
2.68
2.73
2.70
2.70
2.67
Feed cost, $
65.0
65.3
63.8
63.2
62.8
62.3
Cost/kg, $/kg
0.73
0.74
0.73
0.73
0.73
0.73
Slaughter weight, kg
123
123
121
122
121
121
Hot carcass weight, kg
99.1
99.0
97.6
97.7
97.1
97.3
Backfat, mm
19.7
20.3
19.3
20.1
19.7
19.8
Lean yield, %
60.4
60.0
60.6
60.1
60.4
60.2
MOFC difference, $
a
+0.69
+0.74
+0.49
+0.41
MOFC improvement
+1.3%
+1.4%
+0.9%
+0.8%
a
Standardized to 99 kg HCW, including additional feed costs based on (
99
- HCW)/Dressing% × FG × Cost/MT.
ADG = average daily gain; ADFI = average daily feed intake; HCW = hot carcass weight; MOFC = margin over feed costs.
the design and development stages; (ii) fos-
tering a modelling culture within the or-
ganization; (iii) a biological framework
that is sufficiently robust to allow for easy
and rapid changes and inclusion of new
technologies; and (iv) the strategic utiliza-
tion of the models to drive the decision
making process through all levels of pro-
duction, but particularly when it comes to
profit optimization.
References
Anil, L., Anil, S.S. and Deen, J. (2007) Effects of allometric space allowance and weight group compos-
ition on grower-finisher pigs.
Canadian Journal of Animal Science
87,
139-151.
Birkett, S. and de Lange, C.F.M. (2001) A computational framework for a nutrient flow representation
of energy utilization by growing monogastric animals.
British Journal of Nutrition
86,
661-674.
Black, J.L., Campbell, R.G., Williams, I.H., James, K.J. and Davies, G.T. (1986) Simulation of energy and
amino acid utilisation in the pig.
Research and Development in Agriculture
3,
121-145.
Botermans, J.A.M. (1999) Feeding environment for growing-finishing pigs. Effects of competition for
feeding frequency on performance, behavior, injuries, plasma cortisol and exocrine pancreatic
secretion.
Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Sueciae - Agraria
192,
1-45.
Brossard, L., Dourmad, J.-Y., Rivest, J. and van Milgen, J. (2009) Modelling the variation in perform-
ance of a population of growing pigs as affected by lysine supply and feeding strategy.
Animal
3,
1114-1123.
Clapperton, M., Diack, A.B., Matika, O., Glass, E.J., and Gladney, C.D. (2009) Traits associated with
innate and adaptive immunity in pigs: heritability and associations with preference under differ-
ent health status conditions.
Genetic Selection Evolution
41,
54-61.
D'Eath, R.B. (2002) Individual aggressiveness measured in a resident-intruder test predicts the persist-
ence of aggressive behavior and weight gains of young pigs after mixing.
Applied Animal Behaviour
Science
77,
267-283.
De Lange, C.F.M, Levesque, C.L. and Kerr, B.J. (2012) Amino acid nutrition and feed efficiency. In:
Patience, J. (ed.)
Feed Efficiency in Swine
. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The
Netherlands. pp.
81-100.
