Enzyme Complex Supplementation on the Performance of Swine in Growth and Finishing Phases

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of an enzyme complex-α-amylase, ß-glucanase, phytase, cellulase, xylanase and protease-in the feed of swine in growing and finishing phases, by assessing their performance (daily weight gain, daily feed intake, and feed conversion), dry matter, crude protein, and crude energy apparent digestibility, and the feed costs. Eighty pigs-castrated males, and females-of approximately 63 days of age and initial weight of 20.18±1.98 kg were distributed in a 5×2 factorial arrangement (diet × sex), in a randomized block design, with eight replications. The treatments used were: positive control diet consisted of 3,300 kcal/kg in the growth-I phase, and 3,250 kcal/kg in the growth-II and finishing phases; negative control diet with energy reduction of 85 kcal/kg of metabolizable energy (ME) (NC85); NC85 diet with addition of enzyme complex (EC85); negative control diet with energy reduction of 100 kcal/kg ME (NC100); NC100 diet with addition of enzyme complex (EC100). The addition of the enzyme complex to the diet with energy reduction of 100 kcal/kg ME increased the digestible protein content of the diet for the swine in the growth-II phase. The addition of the enzyme complex to the diet with energy reduction of 85 and 100 kcal/kg ME increased the digestible energy content of the diets for the swine in the finishing phase. The use of enzyme complex in diets with reduction of 85 kcal/kg ME for male swine in growing and finishing phases is recommended for improving feed conversion and economic efficiency during the growth-I phase. The use of enzyme complex is not justified for female swine.

How can nutritional strategies and feed technologies in pig production affect the logistical costs of manure distribution?

“…Thus, if in one hand, the use of nutritional techniques and technologies can bring a benefit in terms of reducing the costs of animal feed (Boyd et al, 2018;Sitanaka et al, 2018), on the other hand, they can interfere in the chemical composition of the manure (Caniatto, 2011;Cowieson et al, 2016), and consequently, in the manure logistical and distribution costs.…”