Comparative digestion studies in wild suids at Rotterdam Zoo

Abstract

Among the artiodactyla, the suids are a group whose digestive physiology has hardly been investigated. The apparent digestibilities (aD) of macronutrients were measured in captive specimens of warthog (Phacochoerus africanus), red river hog (Potamochoerus porcus), and Visayan warty pigs (Sus cebifrons), and compared with those reported for babirusa (Babyrousa babyrussa) from the same facility on a similar diet. The animals were fed mixed diets of pelleted feed, grains, fruits, and vegetables; dietary neutral detergent fiber (NDF) ranged from 17 to 26% dry matter. aD of organic matter and protein ranged from 72 to 89 and 70 to 82%, respectively. Although red river hogs and warty pigs achieved aD of NDF of 41-54%, this value was higher both in warthogs (63-66%) and babirusa (61-63%). aD of acid detergent fiber was comparatively low in red river hogs (4%), warty pigs (22%), and babirusa (13-25%) but high in warthog (59-62%). Comparison with additional literature data (including peccaries) indicates that in spite of differences in digestive anatomy, suids and peccaries are similar, and resemble other herbivores in fundamental characteristics, such as the negative influence of fiber on overall digestibility, or the positive influence of dietary protein on protein digestion. Although the existing data are equivocal as to a superior fiber digestion in peccaries as compared with other wild suids, the results suggest that warthogs are more efficient than other wild suids or peccaries in terms of fiber digestion. Zoo Biol 27:305-319, 2008. (c) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Suidae and Tayassuidae (Wild Pigs, Peccaries)

“…Hylochoerus, Potomachoerus sp., Sus scrofa, Sus barbatus, and possibly the warty pigs have been considered more frugivorous. 8 No difference in protein digestibility was observed between the species, including peccaries when comparing with prior literature. 24 In general, diets fed to wild suids and peccaries in captivity consist of a complete pelleted herbivore ration, with varying amounts of fruits, vegetables, browse, and hay.…”

“…14,49 The natural biology of the various species also reveals the opportunistic nature of pig foraging based on seasonal availability. 8,24 Warthogs have been classified as grazers and forest hogs as browsers. 8,24 Warthogs have been classified as grazers and forest hogs as browsers.…”

“…24 Some authors have considered wild suids more herbivorous, with species occupying nutritional niches. 8,24 The exact nutritional requirements of wild suids are not well-defined. Hylochoerus, Potomachoerus sp., Sus scrofa, Sus barbatus, and possibly the warty pigs have been considered more frugivorous.…”

The case of the grass‐eating suids in the Plio‐Pleistocene Turkana Basin: 3D dental topography in relation to diet in extant and fossil pigs

“…The results of stable carbon isotopic analysis of their enamel indicate that C 4 -sources are their main food source (Harris & Cerling, 2002). In addition, warthogs can digest fiber more efficiently than other wild suids (Clauss et al, 2008). Their third molars are hypsodont and horizodont, and frequently have over 10 columnar cusps (Ewer, 1957;Owen, 1850).…”

Temporal dynamics of seed excretion by wild ungulates: implications for plant dispersal

“…We tested differences in retention times among three vectors: roe deer ( Capreolus capreolus : a small browser ruminant), red deer ( Cervus elaphus : a large intermediate mixed-feeder ruminant), and wild boar ( Sus scrofa : an omnivore–frugivore nonruminant) (Hofmann 1989; Clauss et al. 2008). These three vectors are assumed to differ in their retention times because of their differences in digestion modes, feeding preferences, and body masses.…”