JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Performance, Digestibility and Carcass Characteristics of Growing/Finishing Pigs Fed Barley-Based Diets Supplemented with an Extruded or Unextruded Blend of Peas and Canola Seed or Meal
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Performance, Digestibility and Carcass Characteristics of Growing/Finishing Pigs Fed Barley-Based Diets Supplemented with an Extruded or Unextruded Blend of Peas and Canola Seed or Meal
Thacker, P.A.; Qiao, Shiyan;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
Seventy-two crossbred pigs weighing an average of 41.5 kg were assigned on the basis of sex, weight and litter to one of four dietary treatments in a factorial (4 treatments2 sexes) arrangement. The control diet was based on barley and soybean meal while the experimental treatments consisted of diets in which a portion of the dietary protein was supplied by 20% of a 50:50 blend of extruded ( for 20 to 25 sec) peas and full-fat canola seed, 20% of a 50:50 blend of unextruded peas and full-fat canola seed or a diet containing 10% peas, 6% canola meal and 4% canola oil (to equal the level of canola oil provided by 10% whole canola seed). Digestibility coefficients for dry matter, crude protein and gross energy were significantly higher (p<0.05) for the control diet than for the other three diets. Extrusion produced no beneficial effects (p>0.05) on nutrient digestibility and there were no differences in digestibility between the diet based on intact canola seed compared with the diet containing canola meal and oil. Choice of protein supplement had no significant effects on gain, feed intake or feed conversion during the grower or finisher phases and over the entire experimental period. Extrusion of the pea-canola blend produced no beneficial effects on pig performance as the performance of pigs fed either the extruded or unextruded blend of peas and canola seed was similar. In addition, the performance of pigs fed diets containing intact canola seed was similar to that of pigs fed canola meal and oil. Castrates gained faster and consumed more feed than gilts (p<0.05). However, their feed conversion was poorer than that of the gilts during the finisher period. There were no significant differences in carcass traits between pigs fed the control and any of the experimental treatments. Extrusion had no effect on carcass traits and the carcasses of pigs fed canola meal and oil did not differ from those of pigs fed whole canola seed. Castrates had a significantly lower dressing percentage, lower estimated lean yield but greater loin fat depth than gilts (p<0.05). The results of this experiment indicate that peas in combination with canola seed or canola meal are an acceptable alternative to soybean meal as a protein supplement for use in growing-finishing swine diets. Extrusion did not appear to have any beneficial effects on the nutritional value of the canola seed-pea blend as nutrient digestibility, growth performance and carcass traits were similar for pigs fed the unextruded blend of peas and canola seed compared with the extruded product. Since the process adds to the cost of the raw products, its use is unlikely to be economical.
 Keywords
Peas;Canola Seed;Extrusion;Swine;Digestibility;Growth;
 Language
English
 Cited by
 References
1.
Aherne, F. X. and J. M. Bell. 1990. Canola seed: Full-fat. In: Non-Traditional Feed Sources for Use in Swine Production (Ed. P. A. Thacker and R. N. Kirkwood). Butterworth Publishers, Stoneham, Massachusetts, pp. 79-90. Association of Analytical Chemists. 1980. Official Methods of Analysis, 13th ed, AOAC, Washington, DC.

2.
Bell, J. M. and A. G. Wilson. 1970. An evaluation of field peas as a protein and energy source for swine rations. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 50:15-23.

3.
Bell, J. M. 1993. Factors affecting the nutritional value of canola meal: A review. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 73:679-697.

4.
Bengala Freiere, J., A. Aumaitre, J. Peiniau and Y. Lebreton. 1991. Apparent ileal digestibility of starch and $\alpha$-galactosides from peas by early weaned pigs: Effect of extrusion. In:Digestive Physiology in Pigs (Ed. M. W. A. Verstegen, J. Huisman and L. A. den Hartog). Pudoc, Wageningen, The Netherlands, pp. 395-399.

5.
Campbell, L. D. and F. Schone. 1998. Effects of antinutritional factors in rapeseed. In: Recent Advances of Research in Antinutritional Factors in Legume Seeds and Rapeseed (Ed. A. J. M. Jansman, G. D. Hill, J. Huisman and A. F. B. van der Poel). Wageningen Pers, Wageningen, The Netherlands, pp. 185-198.

6.
Castell, A. G. 1990. Field peas. In: Nontraditional Feed Sources for Use in Swine Production (Ed. P. A. Thacker and R. N. Kirkwood). Butterworths, Stoneham, Massachusetts, pp. 185-196.

7.
Castell, A. G. and L. Falk. 1980. Effects of dietary canola seed on pig performance and backfat composition. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 60:795-797.

8.
Castell, A. G., L. R. Neden and K. Mount. 1988. Potential of field pea (Pisium sativum) screenings as feed for market pigs. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 68:577-579.

9.
Davies, R. L. 1984a. Field peas as a feed for growing and finishing pigs. I. Nutrient levels in commercial crops. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Husb. 24:350-353. crossref(new window)

10.
Davies, R. L. 1984b. Field peas as a feed for growing and finishing pigs. 2. Effects of substituting peas for meat meal or fish meal in conventional diets. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. Anim. Husb. 24:507-511. crossref(new window)

11.
Fenton, T. W. and M. Fenton. 1979. An improved procedure for the determination of chromic oxide in feed and faeces. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 59:631-634.

12.
Froseth, J. A. and D. M. Peters. 1981. Feeding rapeseed meal and raw or extruded whole rapeseed to growing-finishing pigs. Washington State University, Pullman Swine Day Producer Report No. 11.

13.
Grosjean, F. and F. Gatel. 1986. Peas for pigs. Pigs News Inform. 7:443-448.

14.
NRC. 1998. Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals. No. 2. Nutrient Requirements of Swine. 10th ed. NAS-NRC, Washington, DC.

15.
O'Doherty, J. V. and U. Keady. 2000. The nutritive value of extruded and raw peas for growing an finishing pigs. Anim. Sci. 70:265-274.

16.
O'Doherty, J. V. and U. Keady. 2001. The effect of expander processing and extusion on the nutritive value of peas for pigs. Anim. Sci. 72:43-53.

17.
Orue, E., J. Butron, F. Ibanez, R. Alonso and F. Marzo. 1998. The effect of germination and extrusion on the nutritional quality of peas (Pisum sativum L. cv. Ballet). In: Recent Advances of Research in Antinutritional Factors in Legume Seeds and Rapeseed (Ed. A. J. M. Jansman, G. D. Hill, J. Huisman and A. F. B. van der Poel). Wageningen Pers, Wageningen, The Netherlands, pp. 417-420.

18.
Salo, M. L. 1980. Nutritive value of full fat rapeseeds for growing pigs. J. Sci. Agric. Soc. Finland 52:1-6.

19.
Saskatchewan Pork Producers Marketing Board. 1997. Export Hog Settlement Grid. Saskatoon, Sask. p. 2.

20.
Savage, G. P. and S. Deo. 1989. The nutritional value of peas: A literature review. Nutr. Abstr. Rev. Series A:65-87.

21.
SAS. 1990. SAS Users Guide, Version 8, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.

22.
Swick, R. A. 1994. Soybean meal quality. American Soybean Association Technical Bulletin PO11-1994.

23.
Thacker, P. A. 1998. Effect of micronization of full-fat canola seed on performance and carcass characteristics of growingfinishing pigs. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 71:89-97. crossref(new window)