Hostname: page-component-669899f699-8p65j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-04T00:32:36.294Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Consequences of genetic change in farm animals on food intake and feeding behaviour

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2007

Gerry Emmans  and
Ilias Kyriazakis
Gerry Emmans*
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition and Health Department, Animal Biology Division, SAC, King's Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
Ilias Kyriazakis
Affiliation:
Animal Nutrition and Health Department, Animal Biology Division, SAC, King's Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
*
*Corresponding author: Dr Gerry Emmans, fax +44 131 5353121, email g.emmans@ed.sac.ac.uk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Selection in commercial populations on aspects of output, such as for growth rate in poultry, against fatness and for growth rate in pigs, and for milk yield in cows, has had very large effects on such outputs over the past 50 years. Partly because of the cost of recording intake, there has been little or no selection for food intake or feeding behaviour. In order to predict the effects of such past, and future, selection on intake it is necessary to have some suitable theoretical framework. Intake needs to be predicted in order to make rational feeding and environmental decisions. The idea that an animal will eat ‘to meet its requirements’ has proved useful and continues to be fruitful. An important part of the idea is that the animal (genotype) can be described in a way that is sufficient for the accurate prediction of its outputs over time. Such descriptions can be combined with a set of nutritional constants to calculate requirements. There appears to have been no change in the nutritional constants under selection for output. Under such selection it is simplest to assume that changes in intake follow from the changes in output rates, so that intake changes become entirely predictable. It is suggested that other ways that have been proposed for predicting intake cannot be successful in predicting the effects of selection. Feeding behaviour is seen as being the means that the animal uses to attain its intake rather than being the means by which that intake can be predicted. Thus, the organisation of feeding behaviour can be used to predict neither intake nor the effects of selection on it.

Keywords

Feeding behaviourFood intakeGenetic selection
Type
Nutrition and Behaviour Group Symposium on ‘Future Perspectives in Nutrition and Behaviour Research’
Information
Proceedings of the Nutrition Society , Volume 60 , Issue 1 , February 2001 , pp. 115 - 125
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 2001

References

Adolph, EF (1947) Urges to eat and drink in rats. American Journal of Physiology 151, 110–125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Amer, P & Emmans, GC (1998) Predicting changes in food energy requirements due to genetic changes in growth and body composition of growing ruminants. Animal Science 66, 143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berthoud, H-R (2000) An overview of neural pathways and networks involved in the control of food intake and selection. In Neural and Metabolic Control of Macronutrient Intake, pp. 361–387 [Berthoud, H-R and Seeley, RJ, editors]. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Blaxter, KL & Boyne, AW (1978) The estimation of the nutritive value of feeds as energy sources for ruminants and the derivation of feeding systems. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 90, 47–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, KL, Fowler, VR & Gill, JC (1982) A study of the growth of sheep to maturity. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 46, 292–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, RG (1988) Nutritional constraints to lean tissue accretion in farm animals. Nutrition Research Reviews 1, 233–253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Collier, G & Johnson, DF (1990) The time window of feeding. Physiology and Behavior 48, 771–777.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Collier, G & Johnson, DF (1997) Who is in charge? Animal vs. experimenter control. Appetite 29, 159–180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corkum, MJ, Bate, LA, Tennessen, T & Lirette, A (1994) Consequences of reduction of number of feeders on feeding behaviour and stress level of feedlot steers. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 41, 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, J, France, J, Dhanoa, MS, Maas, JA, Hanigan, MD, Rook, AJ & Beever, DE (1997) A model to describe growth patterns of the mammary gland during pregnancy and lactation. Journal of Dairy Science 80, 2340–2354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elizalde, HF (1993) Studies on the effects of chemical and physical characteristics of grass silage and degree of competition per feeding space on the feeding behaviour of lactating dairy cows. PhD Thesis, Queen's University of Belfast.Google Scholar
Elizalde, HF & Mayne, CS (1993) The effect of degree of competition per feed space on the dry matter intake and eating behaviour of dairy cows offered grass silage. In Proceedings of the Third Research Conference of the British Grassland Society, pp. 137–138. Antrim, Co. Antrim: British Grassland Society.Google Scholar
Ellis, WC, Poppi, DP, Matis, JH, Lippke, H, Hill, TM & Rouquette, FM Jr (1999) Dietary-digestive-metabolic interactions determining the nutritive potential of ruminant diets. In Nutritional Ecology of Herbivores, pp. 423–481 [Jung, H-JG and Fahey, GC Jr, editors]. Savoy, IL: American Society of Animal Science.Google Scholar
Emmans, GC (1987) Growth, body composition and feed intake. World Poultry Science Association Journal 43, 208–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmans, GC (1988) Genetic components of potential and actual growth. In Animal Breeding Opportunities. British Society of Animal Production Occasional Publication no. 12, pp. 153–181 [Land, RB, Bulfield, G and Hill, WG, editors]. Edinburgh: British Society of Animal Production.Google Scholar
Emmans, GC (1989) The growth of turkeys. In Recent Advances in Turkey Science. Poultry Science Symposium no. 21, pp. 135–166 [Nixey, C and Grey, TC, editor]. London: Butterworth.Google Scholar
Emmans, GC (1994) Effective energy: a concept of energy utilisation applied across species. British Journal of Nutrition 71, 801–821.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emmans, GC (1997) A method to predict the food intake of domestic animals from birth to maturity as a function of time. Journal of Theoretical Biology 186, 189–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmans, GC & Fisher, C (1986) Problems in Nutritional Theory. In Nutrient Requirements of Poultry and Nutritional Research, pp. 9–39 [Fisher, C and Boorman, KN, editors]. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Emmans, GC & Kyriazakis, I (1995) The idea of optimisation in animals: uses and dangers. Livestock Production Science 44, 189–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmans, GC & Kyriazakis, I (1999) Growth and body composition. In A Quantitative Biology of the Pig, pp. 181–197 [Kyriazakis, I, editor]. Wallingford, Oxon: CAB International.Google Scholar
Emmans, GC & Kyriazakis, I (2000) Issues arising from genetic selection for growth and body composition characteristics in poultry and pigs. In The Challenge of Genetic Change in Animal Production. British Society of Animal Science Occasional Publication no. 27, pp. 39–53 [Hill, WG, Bishop, SC, McGuirk, B, McKay, JC, Simm, G and Webb, AJ, editors]. Edinburgh: British Society of Animal Science.Google Scholar
Emmans, GC & Oldham, JD (1988) Modelling of growth and nutrition in different species. In Modelling of Livestock Production Systems, pp. 13–21 [Korver, S and van Arendonk, JAM, editors]. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Ferguson, NS & Gous, RM (1993 a) Evaluation of pig genotypes. 1. Theoretical aspects of measuring genetic parameters. Animal Science 56, 233–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, NS & Gous, RM (1993 b) Evaluation of pig genotypes. II. Testing experimental procedure. Animal Science 56, 245–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, JM (1985) The importance of meals in the regulation of food intake. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society of Australia 10, 14–24.Google Scholar
Forbes, JM (1996) Integration of regulatory signals controlling forage intake in ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 74, 3029–3035.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friggens, NC, Emmans, GC & Veerkamp, RF (1999) On the use of simple ratios between lactation curve coefficients to describe parity effects on milk production. Livestock Production Science 62, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friggens, NC, Nielsen, BL, Kyriazakis, I, Tolkamp, BJ & Emmans, GC (1998) Effects of food composition and stage of lactation on the short-term feeding behavior of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 81, 3268–3277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gill, M & Romney, D (1994) The relationship between the control of meal size and the control of daily intake in ruminants. Livestock Production Science 39, 13–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonyou, HW & Stricklin, WR (1981) Eating behaviour of beef cattle groups, fed from a single stall or trough. Applied Animal Ethology 7, 123–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gous, RM, Moran, ET, Stilborn, HR, Bradford, GD & Emmans, GC (1999) Evaluation of the parameters needed to describe the overall growth, the chemical growth, and the growth of feathers and breast muscles of broilers. Poultry Science 78, 812–821.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grovum, WL (1987) A new look at what is controlling intake. In Feed Intake by Beef Cattle, pp. 1–40 [Owens, FN, editor]. Stillwater, OK: Oklahoma State University.Google Scholar
Hancock, CE, Bradford, GD, Emmans, GC & Gous, RM (1995) The evaluation of the growth-parameters of 6 strains of commercial broiler-chickens. British Poultry Science 36, 247–264.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harb, MY, Reynolds, VS & Campling, RC (1985) Eating behaviour, social dominance and voluntary intake of silage in group-fed milking cattle. Grass and Forage Science 40, 113–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iason, GR, Mantecon, AR, Sim, DA, Gonzalez, J, Foremen, E, Bermudez, FF & Elston, DA (1999) Can grazing sheep compensate for a daily foraging time constraint? Journal of Animal Ecology 68, 87–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Illius, AW & Gordon, IJ (1999) The physiological ecology of mammalian herbivory. In Nutritional Ecology of Herbivores, pp. 71–96 [Jung, H-JG and Fahey, GC Jr, editors]. Savoy, IL: American Society of Animal Science.Google Scholar
Illius, AW & Jessop, NS (1996) Metabolic constraints on voluntary intake in ruminants. Journal of Animal Science 74, 3052–3062.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knap, PW (2000 a) Time trends of Gompertz growth parameters in 'meat-type' pigs. Animal Science 70, 39–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knap, PW (2000 b) Stochastic simulation of growth in pigs: relations between body composition and maintenance requirements as mediated through protein turnover and thermoregulation. Animal Science 71, 11–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyriazakis, I & Emmans, GC (1999) Voluntary food intake and diet selection. In A Quantitative Biology of the Pig, pp. 229–248 [Kyriazakis, I, editor]. Wallingford, Oxon: CAB International.Google Scholar
Laca, EA, Ungar, ED, Seligman, N & Demment, MW (1992) Effects of sward height and bulk density on bite dimensions of cattle grazing homogeneous swards. Grass and Forage Science 47, 91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, RM, Emmans, GC, Simm, G, Dingwall, WS & FitzSimons, J (1998) A description of the growth of sheep. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science, p. 47. Edinburgh: British Society of Animal Science.Google Scholar
Luiting, P & Urff, EM (1991 a) Residual feed consumption in laying hens. 1. Quantification of phenotypic variation and repeatabilities. Poultry Science 70, 1663–1672.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luiting, P & Urff, EM (1991 b) Residual feed consumption in laying hens. 2. Genetic-variation and correlations. Poultry Science 70, 1655–1662.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mignon-Grasteau, S, Beaumont, C, Le Bihan-Duval, E, Poivey, JP & Ricard, FH (1999) Genetic parameters of growth curve parameters in male and female chickens. British Poultry Science 40, 44–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newman, JA, Penning, PD, Parsons, AJ, Harvey, A & Orr, RJ (1994) Fasting affects intake behaviour and diet preference of grazing sheep. Animal Behaviour 47, 185–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, BL (1995) Feeding behaviour of growing pigs: effects of the social and physical environment. PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Nielsen, BL, Lawrence, AB & Whittemore, CT (1995) Effect of group size on feeding behaviour, social behaviour and performance of growing pigs using single-space feeders. Livestock Production Science 44, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oldham, JD & Emmans, GC (1988) Prediction of responses to protein and energy yielding nutrients. In Nutrition and Lactation in the Dairy Cow, pp. 76–96 [Garnsworthy, PC, editor]. London: Butterworths.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penning, PD, Parsons, AJ, Orr, RJ, Harvey, A & Champion, RA (1995) Intake and behaviour responses by sheep, in different physiological states, when grazing monocultures of grass or white clover. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 45, 63–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pittroff, W & Kothmann, MM (1999) Regulation of intake and diet selection by herbivores. In Nutritional Ecology of Herbivores, pp. 366–422 [Jung, H-JG and Fahey, GC Jr, editors]. Savoy, IL: American Society of Animal Science.Google Scholar
Rook, AJ, France, J & Dhanoa, MS (1993) On the mathematical description of lactation curves. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 121, 97–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russel, AJF & Wright, IA (1983) Factors affecting maintenance requirements of beef cows. Animal Production 37, 329–334.Google Scholar
Taylor St, CS (1980) Genetic size-scaling rules in animal growth. Animal Production 30, 161–165.Google Scholar
Taylor St, CS, Thiessen, RB & Murray, J (1986) Inter-breed relationship of maintenance efficiency to milk yield in cattle. Animal Production 43, 37–61.Google Scholar
Tolkamp, BJ & Ketelaars, JJMH (1992) Toward a new theory of feed intake regulation in ruminants. 2. Costs and benefits of feed consumption: an optimisation approach. Livestock Production Science 30, 297–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolkamp, BJ, Schweitzer, DPN & Kyriazakis, I (2000) The biologically relevant unit for the analysis of short-term feeding behavior of dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 83, 2057–2068.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van der Honing, Y (1975) Intake and Utilisation of Energy of Rations with Pelleted Forages by Dairy Cows. Agricultural Research Reports no. 836. Wageningen. The Netherlands: Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation.Google Scholar
Veerkamp, RF, Emmans, GC, Cromie, AR & Simm, G (1995) Variance-components for residual feed-intake in dairy-cows. Livestock Production Science 41, 111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittemore, CT, Tullis, JB & Emmans, GC (1988) Protein growth in pigs. Animal Production 46, 437–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiegner, G & Ghonheim, A (1930) Uber die Formulierung der Futterwirkung (On the formula for the food effect). Tierernahrung 2, 193–232.Google Scholar
Wright, IA & Russel, AJF (1984) Estimation in vivo of the chemical-composition of the bodies of mature cows. Animal Production 38, 33–44.Google Scholar