Growth and development in the pig, with special reference to carcass quality characters: Part II. The influence of the plane of nutrition on growth and development

Abstract

No attempt will be made to give a detailed summary of all the findings of the present experiment. It is rather our purpose to draw attention to the main principles emerging.1. The influence of extremes of high and low planes of nutrition during the first 16 weeks of post-natal life upon the growth in body proportions and in anatomical composition has been studied experimentally in six pairs of closely inbred pigs. Quantitative differences in nutrition operative from birth have resulted in an average live weight at 16 weeks of 113 lb. in the High-Plane and 37 lb. in the Low-Plane animals.2. In body proportions, the head, ears, neck, legs, and body length are penalized relatively less by inadequate nutrition than are body depth, loin, and hindquarters. Conversely, good nutrition favours most the latter characters. These effects upon body form are similarly evident i n the gross weight of the different anatomical regions involved. Low-Plane animals to a large extent retain the proportions of the juvenile and High-Plane approach the conformation of the adult

The effect of amino acid restriction during the grower phase on compensatory growth, carcass composition and nitrogen utilisation in grower–finisher pigs

“…McMeekan (1940) discovered the phenomenon known as compensatory growth, where animals subjected to earlier feed restriction can have abnormally high growth rates on refeeding. Van Lunen and Cole (2001) found that in the growing pig, under conditions of dietary protein deficiency, pigs respond to the increase in protein intake in terms of lean tissue growth and similarly, under conditions of energy deficiency, pigs respond to the increase in energy intake in terms of lean tissue growth.…”

Effect of Feeding-Fasting Interval on Finishing Pigs: Weight Gain, Feed Utilization and Physical and Chemical Carcass Measurements

“…Pigs on treatment 2 were active and obstreperous on the days of fasting. McMeekan (1940a) noted that pigs on a low plane of nutrition were extremely active and vociferous compared to pigs fed ad libitum.…”

“…The severe feed restriction imposed and the long fasting-feeding interval in treatments 3 and 4 appears to have produced a result different from that reported by most other workers in which feed restriction has been imposed by a limitation in the daily amount rather than by a fasting-feeding sequence. Feed restriction by limitation of the daily amount has been generally reported to result in a higher proportion of unsaturated fatty acids in the backfat as compared to that of ad libitum-fed controls (Ellis and Zeller, 1934;Mansfield, Trehane and Peacock, 1937;McMeekan, 1940a;Sharrock, 1940;Braude et al, 1958;Babatunde et al, 1967). It would appear that the pattern of fatty acid metabolism and deposition in the depot fat is different under conditions of continuous restriction of the diet than under conditions of a fasting-ad libitum sequence of restricted feeding.…”

In VivoEstimation of Carcass Composition in Young Boars

“…A serious restriction here is that some of the intermuscular fat and of course all the intramuscular fat are found in the dissectible meat. McMeecan (1940) found rather large differences in relative amount of dissectible fat in the different joints of pig carcasses between pigs fed at two different levels of feeding. Of course extreme differences in level of nutrition lead to a greater range in fatness than when the pigs are fed ad libitiiiiz as here.…”