Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 14 No. 1 (2017)

PAPERS

Influence of two additives on the productive and sanitary response of growth-fattening pigs.

https://doi.org/10.19053/01228420.v14.n1.2017.6089

Published 2017-05-07

  • Luis Gerardo Flores-Mancheno
    • ,
  • Yaneisy García-Hernández
    • ,
  • William Orlando Caicedo-Quinche
    • ,
  • Julio Enrique Usca-Méndez

Luis Gerardo Flores-Mancheno
Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo (Riobamba, Ecuador)

Yaneisy García-Hernández
Instituto de Ciencia Animal (Mayabeque, Cuba).

William Orlando Caicedo-Quinche
Universidad Estatal Amazónica (Pastaza, Ecuador).

Julio Enrique Usca-Méndez
Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo (Riobamba, Ecuador)

Abstract

This work aimed to study the influence of two additives (microbial preparation and antibiotic growth promoter) on the productive and sanitary response of pigs in growth-feed. 120 castrated pigs of 71 days and 28.62 kg were used; they were distributed in three groups according to a completely randomized design with four replications each. The treatments (T) were: T1, without additive; T2, concentrated plus 1.0 and 0.5 kg of 2% virginiamycin per ton of feed for growing and fattening pigs, respectively; T3, concentrated plus 15 mL of the microbial preparation per kg of body weight (BW) of the animal.

The preparation contained 4x106 CFU / ml of lactic acid bacteria and 1.5x105 CFU / mL of yeast. The animals treated with T3 had the highest final weight (98.41 kg, P <0.0001) and the best gain of total weight (69.84 kg; P <0.0001) and daily gain (712.50 g / d, P <0.0001). The most efficient conversion of dry matter (3.04 kykg BW), crude protein (551.63 g/kg BW) and metabolizable energy (41.80 MJ/kg BW) was found in the same group. The incidence of diarrhea was lower in the groups treated with the additives, with no difference between them. It is concluded that the additives improve the productive and sanitary performance of pigs in growth-feed stage, and this effect was greater with the microbial preparation.

Keywords

antibiotic growth promoter, growth-feed, lactic acid bacteria, porcine productivity.

PDF (Español)

References

  • FAO/WHO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization). Guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food. Report of a joint FAO/WHO working group on drafting guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food 2002; April 30 and May 1. London Ontario, Canadá. Disponible en: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/fs_management/en/probiotic_guidelines.pdf. Consultado, enero 2017.
  • FAO/WHO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization). Health and nutritional properties of probiotics in food including powder milk with live lactic acid bacteria. Report of a joint FAO/WHO expert consultation on evaluation of health and nutritional properties of probiotics in food including powder milk with live lactic acid bacteria in food. October 1-4 2001. Córdoba, Argentina. Consultado: Abril/2015. Disponible en: http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/fs_management/en/probiotics.pdf.
  • Gutiérrez L, Montoya O, Vélez J. Probióticos: Una alternativa de producción limpia y de reemplazo a los antibióticos promotores de crecimiento en la alimentación animal. Producción + limpia. 2013; 8: 135.
  • Maron D, Smith T, Nachman K. Restrictions on antimicrobial use in food animal production: an international regulatory and economic survey. Globalization and Health 2013; 9: 1-11. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1186/1744-8603-9-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1744-8603-9-48
  • Regulation EC No 1831/2003 of the European Parliament and Council of 22 September 2003 on additives for use in animal nutrition. Official J. Eur. Commun. 2003; L268: 29-43.
  • Jurado H, Pazmiño S, Benavidez V. Evaluación del efecto probiótico de Lactobacillus plantarum en la alimentación de lechones en fase de pre ceba como una alternativa del uso de antibióticos. Rev Investigación Pecuaria. 2013; 2: 55.
  • Quemac M. Evaluación de tres dosis de probiótico (Rhodopseudomonas spp, Lactobacillus spp., Saccharomyces spp.) en la alimentación para el engorde de cerdos. Tesis de Ingeniería, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad Estatal Politécnica del Carchi, Tulcán, Ecuador. 2014.
  • Díaz B, Elías A, Valiño E. Consorcios microbianos con actividad acido-láctica promisoria aislados desde inoculantes bacterianos nativos para ensilajes. Rev Cien Agri. 2014; 11: 17-25. DOI: http://doi.org/10.19053/01228420.3484. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19053/01228420.3484
  • Flores-Mancheno LG, García-Hernández Y, Usca-Méndez J, Caicedo-Quinche WO. Estudio comparativo de tres aditivos zootécnicos en el comportamiento productivo y sanitario de cerdos en el período post-destete. Rev Cien Agri. 2016; 13(2):95-105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19053/01228420.v13.n2.2016.5557
  • Canibe N. Alimentación de lechones. Sistema de alimentación y aditivos en piensos de iniciación. En: XXIII Curso de especialización FEDNA. 2007; p. 179-212.
  • Close W. Chapter 6. Producing Pigs without Antibiotic Growth Promoters. En: Advances in Pork Production. 2000; 11: 47-56.
  • Nutrient Requirement of Domestic Animals. Nutrient Requirements of Swine. National Academic Press.Washington, District of Columbia. 2012.
  • Ecuaquímica. Pecutrin® saborizado. Minerales + Vitaminas A, D3, E. Suplemento mineral más vitaminas ADE. Registro: 1AB-630-AGROCALIDAD 2000; Disponible en: http://www.ecuaquimica.com/pdf_ganaderia/Pecutrin.pdf. Consultado febrero 2015.
  • Neogen. Salmonella Shigella Agar (7152) 2011; Acumedia. Disponible en: http://www.neogen.com/Acumedia/pdf/ProdInfo/7152_PI.pdf. Consulado Enero 2017.
  • Petrifilm 3M. Placas para recuento de E. coli/Coliform 2010; Disponible en http://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/701951O/product-instructions-3m-petrifilm-e-coli-co liform-count-plate.pdf. Consultado junio 2015.
  • InfoStat. Di Rienzo J, Casanoves F, Balzarini M, Gonzalez L, Tablada M, Robledo C. Grupo InfoStat, FCA, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina. Versión 1.0 para Windows 2012.
  • Duncan D. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics. 1955; 11: 1. DOI: http://doi.org/10.2307/3001478. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3001478
  • ComparPro versión 1. Font H, Noda A, Torres V, Herrera M, Lizazo D, Sarduy L, Rodríguez L. Instituto de Ciencia Animal, Departamento de Biomatemática. 2007.
  • Gaines AM, Allee GL, Ratliff BW, Srichana P, Nimmo RD, Gramm BR. Determination of energy value of Stafac® (virginiamycin) in finishing pigs. In: Proc. Allen D. Leman Swine Conf., St. Paul, MN. 2005; p. 35.
  • Stewart L, Kim B, Gramm, B, Nimmo R, Stein, H. Effects of virginiamycim on the apparent ileal digestibility of amino acids by growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science. 2010; 88: 1718-1724. DOI: http://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-2063. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-2063
  • Chen Y, Min B, Cho H, Kwon O, Son K, Kim H, Kim I. Effects of dietary Bacillus-based probiotic on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, blood characteristics and fecal noxious gas content in finishing pigs. Asian-australas. Journal of Animal Science. 2006; 19: 587-592. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2006.587. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2006.587
  • Choi J, Kim J, Ingale L, Kim K, Shinde L, Kwon K, Chae B. Effect of potential multimicrobe probiotic product processed by high drying temperature and antibiotic on performance of weanling pigs. Journal
  • of Animal Science. 2011; 89: 1795-1904. DOI: http://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-2794. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-2794
  • Giang H, Viet T, Ogle B, Lindberg J. Effects of Supplementation of Probiotics on the Performance, Nutrient Digestibility and Fecal Microflora in Growing-finishing Pigs. Asian-Aust. Journal of Animal Science. 2011; 24: 655-661. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2011.10238
  • Harto L, Sijtsma, R. Estrategias nutricionales para reducir la contaminación ambiental en la producción de cerdos. En: XXIII Curso de especialización FEDNA. 2007.
  • Budino F, Thomaz, M, Kronka N, Nakaghi L, Tucci F, Fraga A, Scandolera A. Huaynate R. Effect of probiotic and prebiotic inclusion in weaned piglet diets on structure and ultra-structure of small intestine. Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology. 2005; 6: 921-929. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-89132005000800008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-89132005000800008
  • Ihara Y, Hyodo H, Sukegawa S, Murakami H, Morimatsu F. Isolation, characterization, and effect of administration in vivo, a novel probiotic strain from pig feces. Journal of Animal Science. 2013; 84: 434-441. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/asj.12020
  • Awad W, Ghareeb K, Abdel-Raheem S, Böhm, J. Effects of dietary inclusion of probiotic and symbiotic on growth performance, organ weights, and intestinal histomorphology of broiler chickens. Poultry Science. 2009; 88:49-56. DOI: http://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2008-00244. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2008-00244
  • Recio I, López-Fandiño R. Ingredientes y productos lácteos funcionales: bases científicas de sus efectos en la salud. En: Alimentos Funcionales. Edición de la Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología (FECYT). Madrid, España, 2005.
  • Casey P, Garduner G, Casey G, Bradshaw B, Lawrol P, Lynch, P, Leonard F, Stanton C, Ross R, Fitzgerald GHC. 5-strain probiotic combination reduces pathogen shedding and alleviates disease signs in pigs challenged with Salmonella enterica Serovar Typhimurium. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2007; 73: 1858-1863. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01840-06. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01840-06
  • Wang D, Piao X, Zeng Z, Lu T, Zhang Q, Li P, Xue L, Kim W. Effects of Keratinase on Performance, Nutrient Utilization, Intestinal Morphology, Intestinal Ecology and Inflammatory Response of Weaned Piglets Fed Diets with Different Levels of Crude Protein. Asian-Aust Journal of Animal Science. 2011; 24: 1718-1728. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2011.11132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2011.11132

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Most read articles by the same author(s)