Water intake patterns in the weanling pig: effect of water quality, antibiotics and probiotics

Abstract

Abstractad libitum water intake patterns in newly weaned pigs were investigated, with particular emphasis on the impact of water quality, the presence or absence of food antibiotics and the use of water soluble probiotic. Pigs were given water containing low (217 mg/l), medium (2350 mg/l) or high (4390 mg/l) levels of total dissolved solids (TDS), either with or without a water additive containing probiotic, and a medicated (experiment 1 and 3) or unmedicated (experiment 2) starter diet for 20 (experiments 1 and 2) or 5 (experiment 3) days immediately post weaning. Water intake, food intake, growth and faecal scores were recorded, and blood was sampled to determine ionic composition. There appeared to be two phases of water consumption: intake in the first 5 days post weaning did not appear to be related to apparent physiological need, whilst later, water consumption increased in parallel with food intake and body-weight gain. In the earlier period, behaviour may have been a primary influence; water intake was not related to faecal scores and water quality had no effect on consumption. In the later phase, intake increased at higher TDS concentrations. Water quality had no effect on performance when pigs were given medicated food; however, pigs receiving unmedicated food exhibited reduced gain (P > 0·05) and food efficiency (P < 0·05), and increased incidence of diarrhoea, when consuming water with elevated mineral levels. The probiotic did not improve performance or decrease scouring (P > 0·05). Blood composition was not affected by treatment (P > 0·05). Although physiological need may be fundamental in establishing water requirements, it appears that other factors such as water quality and the process of weaning influence consumption patterns. These data provide further encouragement for research to define true requirements for water, which by necessity would require identification of all mediating factors.

Effect of water sweetener on the performance of newly weaned pigs offered medicated and unmedicated feed

“…73: 669-672 (Sept. 1993) In this study water intake was lowest in the period from days 4 to 6 after weaning, which coincides with the onset of increased scouring. Similar water intake and scouring patterns in newly weaned pigs have been described in other recent work (Mcleese et al 1992 (Houpt et al 1986;Houpt 1991).…”

“…Impaired growth rates and feed intake during the immediate post-weaning period often coincides with a high incidence and severity of scouring (Mcleese et al 1992) and an increased susceptibility to watery diarrhea induced by enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (Mezoff et al l99l). …”

“…Recently, Mcleese et al (1992) examined the pattern of daily water intake during the first 10 d after weaning at 4 wk of age. They observed that water intake was high immediately after weaning and declined until about the 4th day post-weaning; interestingly, intake was lowest during the period of peak scouring.…”

Voluntary feed intake in growing-finishing pigs: A review of the main determining factors and potential approaches for accurate predictions

“…However, the impact of water quality on VFI in pigs remains unclear and existing data suggest that water quality may not have an effect on VFI of pigs (Patience et al 1995;Nyachoti and Patience 2003). For example, in a study with young pigs, feed intake was 0.55 kg d -1 for water containing 217 ppm and 0.57 kg d -1 for water containing 4390 ppm of total dissolved solids (McLeese et al 1992). As water quality is affected by many different factors whose individual and collective effects on VFI of pigs have not be clearly characterized, it is prudent to argue that provision of good quality water is important for supporting acceptable pig performance (Nyachoti and Patience 2003).…”

Water nipples or water bowls for weaned piglets: Effect on water intake, performance, and plasma osmolality

“…Bruininx et al, 2002) as well as the eating activity (Dybkjaer et al, 2006). Logically, the low feed intake involves a reduced daily gain (McLeese et al, 1992;Russell et al, 1996) and even weight loss and diarrhea problems (e.g. Pluske et al, 1995).…”