1. A review of the literature indicated: (a) A lack of agreement upon whether or not restriction of the plane of feeding from weaning or 100 lb. live weight to bacon weight improves efficiency of food conversion. (b) That a severe restriction of the plane of feeding improves carcass-quality measurements, (c) That a less severe restriction of food intake brings the total growth period within a range more acceptable to the farmer, but only has a small effect in improving carcass quality, (d) That the small benefits to quality from this less severe restriction may be equalled or surpassed by quite small changes in the genetic ‘type’ of pig fed. (e) That there are probably interactions in the response of different ‘types’ of pig to different planes of feeding.2. Two experiments were undertaken. In Exp. 1 both Large White × Swedish Landrace pigs and Large White × Wessex Saddleback pigs were fed from weaning to bacon weight to one of three planes of feeding. Exp. 2 was very similar in design except for some modifications to planes of feeding and the substitution of Essex Saddleback × Large White pigs in place of the Wessex crosses.3. In Exp. 1 the planes of feeding, according to our stated definitions in terms of total digestible nutrients consumed daily at different live weights, were: very high during both growing and finishing periods (VH-VH); very high during the growing period but restricted during the finishing period (VH-R); and very low during both growing and finishing periods (VL-VL). In Exp. 2 the planes of feeding were: VH-VH; VH-R, the restriction being slightly more severe than in Exp. 1; and low during both growing and finishing periods (L-L).4. In Exp. 1 there was no difference in growth rate between breed crosses. Pigs on the VH-R and VL-VL planes were 12 and 88 days older respectively at bacon weight than those fed to the VH-VH plane. In Exp. 2, Landrace crosses grew faster than the Essex crosses on the VH-VH and VH-R planes, but Essex crosses grew faster on the L-L plane. Landrace crosses fed to the VH-R and L-L planes were 11 and 63 days older respectively at bacon weight than others fed to the VH-VH plane. Essex crosses fed to the VH-R and L-L planes were 16 and 53 days older respectively at bacon weight than others fed to the VH-VH plane.5. In Exp. 1 there was no difference in food-conversion efficiency (f.c.e.) between breed crosses. There was no significant difference in f.c.e. between the VH-VH and VH-R planes, but there was a loss of 14% in F.C.E. on the VL-VL plane. In Exp. 2 the Landrace crosses had better F.C.E.'s than the Essex crosses on the VH-VH and VH-R planes, but Essex crosses were the more efficient on the L-L plane. There was no significant difference in F.C.E. between the VH-VH and VH-R planes for either breed cross, but there were losses in efficiency of 4 and 14% on the L-L plane for the Essex and Landrace crosses respectively.6. In Exp. 1 the Landrace crosses had less back fat over the shoulder than had the Wessex crosses. Pigs of both crosses fed to the VH-R plane had smaller fat measurements than those fed to the VH-VH plane, but this improvement was only significant for minimum back fat. Landrace crosses also had less fat over the ‘eye’ muscle when fed to the VH-R plane, but this did not apply with the Wessex crosses. The difference in carcass quality attributable to the restricted plane of feeding after 100 lb. live weight was considered to be equalled by the difference between breed crosses. The improvement in carcass-quality measurements between pigs fed to the VH-VH and VL-VL planes surpassed the difference between breed crosses, but the carcasses tended to be soft. However, no data were available on the iodine numbers of the fats.7. In Exp. 2 the Landrace crosses had less fat over the shoulder and over the eye muscle and smaller minimum back-fat measurements than had the Essex crosses. Pigs of both crosses fed to the VH-R plane had smaller fat measurements than those fed to the VH-VH plane, the difference being significant for shoulder fat and minimum back fat. Again the differences between the effects of these two planes of feeding and between the two breed crosses were considered about equal, and again the difference between breed crosses was surpassed by the difference between the carcass measurements of pigs fed to the VH-VH and L-L planes. In Exp. 2 the effects of planes of feeding upon length of carcass, thickness of streak, percentage fore and percentage middle differed significantly between the two breed crosses.8. When carcass data from both experiments were compared it was apparent that differences between breeds or strains of bacon-type pigs are likely to be of more importance in the production of high-grade bacon than attempts to alter the conformation by varying the plane of feeding—and thus the growth curve—within the limits acceptable in practice.9. Although previous evidence indicates that males grow faster than females, there was in Exp. 1 no significant difference in growth rate between the sexes. In Exp. 2 there was again no overall significant sex effect, but during the finishing period females grew faster than males on the VH-VH and VH-R planes, but males grew the faster on the L-L plane. In Exp. 1 there was no significant difference between sexes in F.C.E., but in Exp. 2 males were less efficient than females on the VH-VH and VH-R planes, but were the more efficient on the L-L plane, this interaction again developing principally during the finishing period.10. In both experiments females had carcasses which were longer, had less fat, larger areas of ‘eye’ muscle and larger hams than males. In both experiments the restricted plane of feeding after 100 lb. live weight reduced the shoulder-fat measurements of females but had no effect on those of males which, being the fatter, had the greatest need of improvement to achieve the highest grade. However, the statistical significance of this interaction was low and it requires confirmation.11. It is not the intention of the authors that these results should be taken to apply in general to the breed crosses used. The breed crosses were chosen solely as pigs which would differ somewhat in genetic type from each other.12. The results from these experiments confirmed the indications from the literature which have been noted in paragraph 1 of this summary. The results and some of their implications have been discussed in the text.
