2009 Univ of Nebraska Swine Report- Effect of Corn Dried Distillers Grains
The objective of this experiment was to evaluate the effects of high concentrations of distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS; 30%) on growth performance and carcass characteristics of gilts, during growing-finishing, that were previously fed high concentrations of DDGS during the nursery phase. Overall (week 1 to 16), the following observations are noteworthy: 1) among pigs that were fed DDGS in the nursery, average daily gain (ADG) and final body weight (BW) tended (P < 0.10) to be lower during growing-finishing com- pared to pigs that did not receive DDGS in the nursery; 2) among pigs that received DDGS during growing-finishing, ADG tended (P < 0.10) to be lower compared to pigs that did not receive DDGS during growing-finishing; and 3) among pigs that received DDGS in both the nursery and during growing-finishing, ADG and final BW was decreased (P < 0.04) compared to pigs with no prior exposure to DDGS. With respect to carcass characteristics, 10th-rib back fat was greater (P < 0.05) at the end of finisher 2 among pigs that did not receive DDGS in the nursery and hot carcass weight tended (P < 0.07) to be decreased among pigs that received DDGS in both the nursery and during growing- finishing. This research indicates that the inclusion of high concentrations of DDGS in both the nursery and growing- finishing periods may result in negative effects on growth performance and carcass characteristics.
Introduction
Distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) is the primary coproduct of ethanol production that is used in the pork industry. It has been estimated that approximately 15% of the DDGS that is produced is used in the pork industry, with the majority utilized in growing-fi nishing diets. Previous research with growing-fi nishing pigs has shown that the addition of DDGS up to 10% of the diet results in similar growth performance when compared to typical corn-soybean meal diets (Table 1). However, with the inclusion of DDGS in excess of 10%, growth performance may be compromised if diets are not formulated on a digestible amino acid basis. Less emphasis has been placed on utilization of DDGS during the nursery period and, to our knowledge, no experiments have been conducted to evaluate the growth performance of growingfi nishing pigs that were exposed to high concentrations of DDGS during the nursery phase of production. The objective of this experiment was to evaluate the effects of high concentrations of DDGS (30%) on growth performance and carcass characteristics of gilts, during the growing-fi nishing phase, that were previously fed high concentrations of DDGS (30%) during the nursery phase.
Materials and Methods
Animals
The experimental protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Twenty gilts [(Danbred × NE white line) × Danbred] were sorted by weight and randomly allotted to one of four dietary treatments in a 16-week experiment that was conducted at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Pigs (average initial BW 61.97 ± 1.6 lb) were individually housed in pens (6.3 × 3.4 ft) with wire fl ooring, one nipple waterer, and one stainless steel feeder under constant lighting in a temperature controlled room. Pigs had ad libitum access to feed and water. There were four treatments with one pig/pen and fi ve replicates/ treatment.
Treatments
Pigs utilized in the current experiment either had no previous exposure to DDGS or were previously exposed to 30% DDGS during phase 3 of the nursery period (2008 Nebraska Swine Report). Among pigs that were fed 0% DDGS in the nursery, growingfi nishing diets for the current experiment were formulated to provide either 0% DDGS (Treatment 1) or 30% DDGS (Treatment 2). Among pigs that were fed 30% DDGS in the nursery, growing-fi nishing diets for the current experiment were formulated to provide either 0% (Treatment 3) or 30% DDGS (Treatment 4). All diets were formulated on a total amino acid basis, fed in meal form and formulated to meet or exceed NRC requirements for growth (Table 2).
Data and Sample Collection
Pigs and feeders were weighed at the beginning of the experiment and biweekly thereafter. Feed disappearance was calculated using the difference between feed offered and feed remaining in the feeder at the end of each biweekly period. Body weight (BW) gain was calculated using the pig weight at the beginning and at the end of each biweekly period. Average daily gain (ADG), average daily feed intake (ADFI), and feed effi ciency (G:F) were calculated based on the individual biweekly BW gain and feed disappearance. At the beginning of the experiment and at the end of Grower 1 (week 3), Grower 2 (week 8), Finisher 1 (week 12), and Finisher 2 (week 16), ultrasound was used to measure backfat thickness (BF) and longissimus muscle area (LMA) at the 10th rib. Carcass measurements (hot carcass weight, HCW; dressing percentage, DP; last-rib backfat, LRBF; 10th-rib BF; and LMA) were obtained at slaughter.
Statistical Analyses
Growth data were analyzed as a completely randomized design using the MIXED procedure of SAS. The main effect of the statistical models was dietary treatment. Pen was considered as the experimental unit and was considered as a random effect. In addition, orthogonal contrasts were utilized to evaluate the effect of previous inclusion of DDGS in the nursery (Treatments 1 and 2 vs. 3 and 4), to evaluate the effect of including DDGS during the growing-fi nishing period (Treatments 1 and 3 vs. 2 and 4), and to evaluate the effect of DDGS inclusion in both the nursery and during growing-fi nishing (Treatment 1 vs. 2, 3, and 4) on growth performance and carcass characteristics during the growing-fi nishing period.
Results and Discussion
Pig growth performance and BW results are summarized in Table 3. During Grower 1, growth performance was not affected by dietary treatment. During Grower 2, G:F was not affected by dietary treatment; however, ADG was decreased (P < 0.02) among pigs that received DDGS in the nursery (Treatments 3 and 4) compared to pigs that did not receive DDGS in the nursery (Treatments 1 and 2), and ADG and ADFI were decreased (P < 0.05 and 0.02, respectively for ADG and ADFI) in pigs that received DDGS (Treatments 2, 3, and 4) compared to pigs with no previous exposure to DDGS (Treatment 1).
During Finisher 1, growth performance was not affected by dietary treatment. During Finisher 2, ADG and ADFI were not affected by dietary treatment; however, G:F was greater (P < 0.01) for pigs that did not receive DDGS during growing-fi nishing (Treatments 1 and 3) compared to pigs that did receive DDGS during growing fi nishing (Treatments 2 and 4), and G:F tended (P < 0.06) to be greater for pigs with no prior exposure to DDGS (Treatment 1) compared to pigs that received DDGS during the nursery and growing-fi nishing (Treatments 2, 3, and 4). Overall, the following observations were made: 1) among pigs that were fed DDGS in the nursery, ADG and fi nal BW tended (P < 0.10) to be lower during growingfi nishing compared to pigs that did not receive DDGS in the nursery; 2) among pigs that received DDGS during growing-fi nishing, ADG tended (P < 0.10) to be lower compared to pigs that did not receive DDGS during growing-fi nishing; 3) among pigs that received DDGS in both the nursery and/or during growing-fi nishing, ADG and fi nal BW was decreased (P < 0.04) and ADFI tended (P < 0.08) to be decreased compared to pigs with no prior exposure to DDGS; and 4) among pigs that did not receive DDGS during growing-fi nishing, G:F was greater (P < 0.01) compared to pigs that did receive DDGS during growing-fi nishing. Final BW were 270.2, 250.6, 248.2, and 235.6 lb, respectively, for Treatments 1, 2, 3 and 4.
Carcass characteristics are summarized in Table 4. Carcass measurements taken at slaughter (dressing percentage, last-rib BF, 10th-rib BF, and LMA) were not affected by dietary treatment; however, hot carcass weight tended (P < 0.07) to be decreased among pigs that received DDGS in both the nursery and during growingfi nishing. Similar to fi nal BW, live weight at slaughter tended (P < 0.10) to be decreased for growing-fi nishing pigs that received DDGS during the nursery period (Treatments 3 and 4) compared to pigs with no previous exposure to DDGS (Treatment 1 and 2). In addition, among pigs that received DDGS in both the nursery and/or during growing-fi nishing, live weight at slaughter was decreased (P < 0.04), compared to pigs with no prior exposure to DDGS. Ultrasound measurements taken at the end of Grower 1, Grower 2, Finisher 1, and Finisher 2 were not affected by dietary treatment with the exception of 10th-rib BF. At the end of Finisher 2, 10th-rib back fat was greater (P < 0.05) among pigs that did not receive DDGS in the nursery compared to pigs that received DDGS in the nursery.
Conclusions
This research indicates that feeding high concentrations of DDGS (30%) during the growing-fi nishing phase may not negatively affect growth performance. However, transient negative effects on overall ADG and fi nal BW during the growing-fi nishing period may be observed in pigs that are fed high concentrations of DDGS in both the nursery and during growing-fi nishing.
1 Thomas E. Burkey is an assistant professor , Phillip S. Miller is a professor, and Roman Moreno and Erin E. Carney are graduate students in the Animal Science Department at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln.