Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-06T19:42:07.140Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Digestion in the pig between 7 and 35 d of age

4. The digestion of amino acids in pigs given milk and soya-bean proteins

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

R. H. Wilson  and
Jane Leibholz
R. H. Wilson
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney, Camden, New South Wales 2570, Australia.
Jane Leibholz
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney, Camden, New South Wales 2570, Australia.
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.

1. In two experiments, forty-four pigs weaned at 4–5 d of age were given diets containing milk or soya-bean proteins until slaughtered at 14, 28 or 35 d of age.

2. Additions of methionine and methionine plus lysine to the diets did not increase the proportions of these amino acids in ileal digesta.

3. In the pigs given a nitrogen-free diet, ileal digesta contained more threonine, proline and glycine than in pigs given diets containing protein.

4. The apparent and true digestibility of amino acids were greater when milk protein was fed than when soya-bean proteins were fed.

5. The apparent digestion of amino acids to the ileum of pigs given isolated soya-bean protein (ISP; Supro 610) increased with increasing age of pigs from a mean of 0.82 at 14 d of age to 0.87 at 35 d of age.

6. When milk protein was fed apparent digestibilities of methionine and lysine to the ileum were 0.912 and 0.905. The apparent digestibility of threonine to the ileum was 0.800, 0.774 and 0.504 for pigs given the milk-, ISP and soya-bean-meal (SBM)-protein diets respectively.

7. Apparent digestibilities of total essential and non-essential amino acids were 0.79 and 0.69 respectively, and true digestibilities of both were 0.82.

Type
Papers on General Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 45 , Issue 2 , March 1981 , pp. 347 - 357
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1981

References

REFERENCES

Corring, T. & Jung, J. (1972). Nutr. Rep. int. 6, 187.Google Scholar
Corring, T. & Saucier, R. (1972). Annls Biol. anim. Biochim. Biophys. 13,233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downes, A. M. & McDonald, I. W. (1964). Br. J. Nutr. 18, 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gitler, C. (1964). In Mammalian Protein Metabolism Vol. 1, p. 35 [Allison, J. B., editor]. London & New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hays, V. W., Speer, V. C., Hartman, P. A. & Catron, D. V. (1959). J. Nutr. 69, 179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, J. H. G., Bayley, H. S., Leadbeater, P. A. & Horney, F. D. (1974). Br. J. Nutr. 32, 479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, M. I. (1967). In Handbook of Physiology Section 6, Alimentary Canal. [Code, C. F., editor]. Washington, D.C.: American Physiology Society.Google Scholar
Horszczaruk, F., Buraczewska, L. & Buraczewski, S. (1974). Roczn. Nauk roln. Ser. B95, 69.Google Scholar
Ivan, M. & Bowland, J. P. (1976). Can. J. Anim. Sci. 56, 451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Low, A. G. (1979). Br. J. Nutr. 41, 147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maner, J. H., Pond, W. G. & Loosli, J. K. (1961). J. Anim. Sci. 20, 614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakamura, Y., Yasumoto, K. & Mitsuda, H. (1972). J. Nufr. 102, 359.Google Scholar
Purser, D. B. (1976). In From Plant to Animal Protein. Reviews in Rural Science 11, p. 39. [Sutherland, T. M., McWilliams, J. R. & Leng, R. A., editors]. Armidale: University of New England Publishing Unit.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D. & Torrie, I. H. (1960). Principles of statistics New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.Google Scholar
Tan, T. N., Weston, R. H. & Hogan, J. P. (1971). Int. J. appl. Radiat. Isot. 22, 301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wapnir, R. A., Hawkins, R. L. & Lifshitz, F. (1972). Am. J. Physiol. 223, 788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wapnir, R. A. & Lifshitz, F. (1974). J. Nutr. 104, 843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R. H. & Leibholz, J. (1981 a). Br. J. Nutr. 45, 301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R. H. & Leibholz, I. (1981 b). Br. J. Nurr. 45, 321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R. H. & Leibholz, J. (1981 c). Br. J. Nutr. 45, 337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zebrowska, T. (1973). Roczn. Nauk roln. Ser. B 95, 115.Google Scholar
Zebrowska, T. & Buranewska, L. (1972). Roczn. Nauk roln. Ser. B94, 97.Google Scholar
Zebrowska, T., Buraczewska, L. & Buranewski, S. (1978). Roczn. Nauk roln. Ser. 99, 87.Google Scholar
Zebrowska, T. & Buraczewski, S. (1977). Proc. 2nd int. Symp. on Protein Metabolism and Nutrition, The Netherlands, p. 82.Google Scholar
Zebrowska, T., Simon, O., Munchmayer, R. & Bergrer, H. (1976). Arch Tierernähr. 26, 69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar