Effects of Conditioners (Standard, Long-Term and Expander) on Pellet Quality and Growth Performance in Nursery and Finishing Pigs

Johnston, S. L.; Hines, R. H.; Hancock, J. D.; Behnke, K. C.; Traylor, S. L.; Chae, B. J.; Han, In K.

doi:1999.12.4.558

Article

Swine Nutrition and Feed Technology

Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 1999;12(4): 558-564.
https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.1999.558 Published online June 1, 1999.

Effects of Conditioners (Standard, Long-Term and Expander) on Pellet Quality and Growth Performance in Nursery and Finishing Pigs

S. L. Johnston, R. H. Hines, J. D. Hancock, K. C. Behnke, S. L. Traylor, B. J. Chae, In K. Han

Abstract

A series of experiments were conducted to determine the effects of standard (ST), long-term (LT) conditioners on nutritional value of phase-three nursery and finishing swine diets. In Exp. 1, 180 pigs(average initial BW of 11.7 kg ) were fed corn-soybean meal based diets (1.3% lysine) during a 28 d growth assay. Gain/feed was improved (p<0.004) with pelleting and pellet durability index (PDI) increased with degree of conditioning (LT>ST). However, there was no advantage for LT vs ST conditioning in rate or efficiency of gain (p>0.5). In Exp. 2, 180 pigs (average initial BW of 10.4 kg) were fed con-soybean meal based diets (0.9% lysine) during a28 d growth assay. Pelleted diets tended to support greater ADG (p<0.08) and gain/feed (p<0.002) with no marked advantage from EX vs ST conditioning. In Exp. 3, a total of 70 barrows (average initial BW of 54 kg) was used in a growth assay to determine the effects of feeding a corn-soybean meal based diet processed with a standard (ST) steam conditioner, a long-term (LT) steam conditioner, and an expander (EX) conditioner. The conditioned diets were fed as mash (M) or pellets (P) to give a 2횞3 factorial plus a meal control. PDI increased with degree of conditioning (EX>LT>ST). There was a trend (p<0.07) for greater ADG in pigs fed diets that had been thermally conditioned. Also, there was a general advantage in gain/feed with pelleting (p<0.04), but this advantage was pronounced only with standard conditioning. Indeed, the greatest gain/feed was observed for pigs fed the expander treatments (p<0.03) and the expander mash was used as efficiently as the expander pellets. There was no difference in backfat thickness among pigs fed the treatments (p>0.3), but the more extreme the processing technique, the greater the incidence and severity of stomach lesions (p<0.04). These results suggest maximum rate and efficiency of growth with pelleting after standard steam conditioning or simply feeding an expanded mash.

Keywords: Nursery Pigs; Finishing Pigs; Conditioners; Expander; Pellet Quality; Growth Performance