Physiological and behavioral response of sows fed with different levels of dietary fiber during gestation

Oelke, Carlos Alexandre; Bernardi, Mari Lourdes; Nunes, Paula Raymundo; Weber, Nelson Cristiano; Veit, Fernando Cézar; Ribeiro, Andréa Machado Leal

doi:10.1016/j.jveb.2018.08.006

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…• Referring to killer whale offspring as children (p. 7) invokes a humanbased association instead of remaining objective. This contrasts with previous JVB publications, in which production swine are housed in "individual crates" (Oelke et al, 2018), Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in "transport systems" for aquaculture (King, 2009), and working therapy dogs studied in outpatient hospital settings (Clark et al, 2019). Similarly, nondomestic animals kept as pets or for exhibition were housed in cages (pet gray parrots, Psittacus erithacus; Greenwell & Montrose, 2017), cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) and tigers (Panthera tigris) were kept in enclosures (Phillips et al, 2017), snakes in enclosures or viveria (Warwick et al, 2019), gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) in indoor habitats (Fuller & Allard, 2018), and dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) housed in open and closed facilities (Ugaz et al, 2013).…”

Section: Type Of Misrepresentationcontrasting

confidence: 60%

Distinguishing personal belief from scientific knowledge for the betterment of killer whale welfare – a commentary

Kathleen¹,

Heather²,

Zaccaroni³

et al. 2020

IJCP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We contest publication of Marino et al. regarding captive killer whale (Orcinus orca) welfare because of misrepresentations of available data and the use of citations that do not support assertions. Marino et al. misrepresent stress response concepts and erroneously cite studies, which appear to support Marino et al.’s philosophical beliefs regarding the cetacean hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis. To be clear, these misrepresentations are not differences of scientific opinion, as the authors’ conclusions lack any scientific basis. More extensive review of Marino et al.’s citations reveal a dearth of empirical evidence to support their assertions. Further, Marino et al.’s approach to animal welfare is not consistent with conventional veterinary approaches to animal welfare, including their apparent opposition to use of preventative and therapeutic veterinary interventions. While Marino et al. argue that killer whales’ cognitive and spatial needs preclude management of this species under human care, misrepresentation of the citations used to support this opinion invalidates their arguments. Misleading interpretations of data relative to killer whales’ cognitive and emotional needs and specious and unsubstantiated comparisons with states experienced by humans with posttraumatic stress disorder and other conditions, represent a number of strategies used to misrepresent knowledge regarding killer whale welfare. These misrepresentations and fallacies are inconsistent with scientific ethical standards for credible, peer-reviewed journals (ICMJE, 2018), and are barriers to rigorous discourse and identification of strategies for optimizing killer whale welfare. Assertions in the paper amount to nothing more than a compilation of conclusory, philosophical statements. We would also like to mention that manuscripts such as Marino et al.’s do great damage to the fields of comparative psychology and to behavioral science as a whole.

show abstract

Section: Type Of Misrepresentationcontrasting

confidence: 60%

Distinguishing personal belief from scientific knowledge for the betterment of killer whale welfare – a commentary

Kathleen¹,

Heather²,

Zaccaroni³

et al. 2020

IJCP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In appetite regulation, fiber can regulate the feed intake mainly by the fullness of the stomach (crop in poultry) [ 117 ]. Because of its water-holding capability, soluble fiber swells in the digestive tract, and increases the viscosity of chyme [ 117 , 118 ]. As the chyme increases with the passing of time, animals decrease their feed intake [ 117 , 118 ].…”

Section: Effect Of Rearing Pattern On Appetite and Metabolism Regumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because of its water-holding capability, soluble fiber swells in the digestive tract, and increases the viscosity of chyme [ 117 , 118 ]. As the chyme increases with the passing of time, animals decrease their feed intake [ 117 , 118 ]. On the other hand, fermentable fiber also adjusts the feed intake by shifting animal microbiota and thereby regulating the metabolomics and animal endocrine [ 10 , 11 , 119 ].…”

Section: Effect Of Rearing Pattern On Appetite and Metabolism Regumentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the Relationship between Adipose Metabolism Patterns and Secretion of Appetite-Related Endocrines on Chicken

Chuang

Hsieh

Chen

et al. 2020

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In addition to the influence of genes, the quality of poultry products is mainly controlled by the rearing environment or feed composition during rearing, and has to meet human use and economical needs. As the only source of energy for poultry, feed considerably affects the metabolic pattern of poultry and further affects the regulation of appetite-related endocrine secretion in poultry. Under normal circumstances, the accumulation of lipid in adipose reduces feed intake in poultry and increases the rate of adipose metabolism. When the adipose content in cells decreases, endocrines that promote food intake are secreted and increase nutrient concentrations in serum and cells. By regulating the balance between appetite and adipose metabolism, the poultry’s growth and posture can maintain a balanced state. In addition, increasing fiber composition in feed can effectively increase poultry welfare, body weight, lean composition and antioxidant levels in poultry. According to this, the concept that proper fiber content should be added to feed should be considered for better economic benefits, poultry welfare and meat productivity.

show abstract

“…Dietary fiber (DF) plays an indispensable role in the nutrition of sows due to its potential value in improving performance and intestinal health. Studies have shown that the addition of fiber to the gestational diets of sows can improve satiety [ 1 ], decrease stereotypical behaviors [ 2 ], reduce the occurrence of prolonged constipation [ 3 ], increase the survival rate for embryos in the early gestation stage [ 4 , 5 ], and improve litter performance, including the litter size and weight at birth and weaning [ 6 , 7 ]. Additionally, a high consumption of dietary fiber during gestation might increase food intake during lactation [ 8 , 9 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of the Inclusion of Fermented Mulberry Leaves and Branches in the Gestational Diet on the Performance and Gut Microbiota of Sows and Their Offspring

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fermented feed mulberry (FFM), being rich in dietary fiber, has not been fully evaluated to be used in sow’s diet. In this study, we investigated the effects of 25.5% FFM supplemented gestation diets on the performance and gut microbiota of sows and their offspring. Results showed that the serum concentration of glucose, progesterone, and estradiol were not affected by the dietary treatment, while the level of serum insulin and fecal short chain fatty acid were both reduced in FFM group on gestation day 60 (G60, p < 0.05). Additionally, FFM increased both voluntary feed intake and weaning litter weight (p < 0.05), while decreased the losses of both Backfat thickness and bodyweight throughout lactation (p < 0.05). 16S rRNA sequencing showed FFM supplementation significantly increased the diversity and relative abundance of sows’ fecal microbiota on G60 (p < 0.05). The differential microbiota for sows from FFM group was that Bacteroidetes was increased on G60 while Firmicutes were decreased on L7 (p < 0.05), and which for the FFM piglets was that both unclassified_f_Lachnospiraceae on G60 and norank_f_Ruminococcaceae were both increased (p < 0.05). In short, FFM can be recognized as a potential feed ingredient used in sow’s diet.

show abstract

Physiological and behavioral response of sows fed with different levels of dietary fiber during gestation

Cited by 7 publications

References 9 publications

Distinguishing personal belief from scientific knowledge for the betterment of killer whale welfare – a commentary

Distinguishing personal belief from scientific knowledge for the betterment of killer whale welfare – a commentary

Evaluation of the Relationship between Adipose Metabolism Patterns and Secretion of Appetite-Related Endocrines on Chicken

Effects of the Inclusion of Fermented Mulberry Leaves and Branches in the Gestational Diet on the Performance and Gut Microbiota of Sows and Their Offspring

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About