Effects of hydrolyzed vegetable protein or hydrolyzed vegetable and meat protein blend on nursery pig performance from 15 to 40 lb

dc.citation.epage65en_US
dc.citation.spage59en_US
dc.contributor.authorGoncalves, Marcio Antonio Dornelles
dc.contributor.authorDeRouchey, Joel M.
dc.contributor.authorDritz, Steven S.
dc.contributor.authorTokach, Michael D.
dc.contributor.authorGoodband, Robert D.
dc.contributor.authorWoodworth, Jason C.
dc.contributor.authoreidjderouchen_US
dc.contributor.authoreiddritzen_US
dc.contributor.authoreidmtokachen_US
dc.contributor.authoreidgoodbanden_US
dc.contributor.authoreidjwoodworthen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-04-21T18:23:40Z
dc.date.available2014-04-21T18:23:40Z
dc.date.issued2014-04-21
dc.date.published2013en_US
dc.description.abstractA total of 280 pigs (PIC 327 × 1050, initially 16.7 lb BW) were used in a 28-d trial to evaluate the effects of hydrolyzed vegetable protein or a blend of hydrolyzed vegetable and meat protein for nursery pigs. Three days after weaning, pigs were allotted to 1 of 4 dietary treatments in a completely randomized design, balancing for initial BW and gender. There were 10 pens per treatment with 7 pigs per pen. The 4 treatment diets were: (1) no added specialty protein source (negative control); (2) 6% select menhaden fish meal; (3) 5% hydrolyzed vegetable protein (Hydr SF 52, International Ingredient Corporation, St. Louis, MO), or (4) 6.5% hydrolyzed vegetable and meat protein blend (HDSF Protein; International Ingredient Corporation). Diets were fed in 2 phases, with Phase 1 from d 0 to 17 (treatment diets) and Phase 2 from d 17 to 28 (common diet). From d 0 to 17, pigs fed the negative control diet had improved (P ≤ 0.05) F/G compared with pigs fed diets with Hydr SF 52 or HDSF Protein. No differences in ADG and ADFI were detected among treatments. From d 17 to 28 (common period), no difference was observed in growth performance between pigs previously fed any of the treatment diets. Overall (d 0 to 28), no differences were observed in ADG, ADFI, or F/G among pigs fed any of the treatment diets. Because performance did not differ from pigs fed the negative control diet, definitive conclusions regarding these specialty protein sources cannot be made.en_US
dc.description.conferenceSwine Day, Manhattan, KS, November 21, 2013en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2097/17346
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherKansas State University. Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Serviceen_US
dc.relation.isPartOfSwine day, 2013en_US
dc.relation.isPartOfKansas Agricultural Experiment Station contribution; no. 14-044-Sen_US
dc.relation.isPartOfReport of progress (Kansas State University. Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service); 1092en_US
dc.subjectHydrolyzed vegetable proteinen_US
dc.subjectMeat proteinen_US
dc.subjectProtein sourcesen_US
dc.subjectNursery pigen_US
dc.titleEffects of hydrolyzed vegetable protein or hydrolyzed vegetable and meat protein blend on nursery pig performance from 15 to 40 lben_US
dc.typeConference paperen_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
swine13pg59-65.pdf
Size:
109.65 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.62 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:

Collections