Dietary self-selection for organic acids by the piglet.

TitleDietary self-selection for organic acids by the piglet.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2004
AuthorsEttle, T., Mentschel K., & Roth F. X.
JournalArchives of animal nutrition
Volume58
Issue5
Pagination379-88
Date Published2004 Oct
KeywordsAnimal Feed, Animal Nutritional Physiological Phenomena, Animals, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Eating, Female, Food Preferences, Formates, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Male, Random Allocation, Sorbic Acid, Swine, Weight Gain
Abstract

Two feeding trials using 48 weaned crossbred piglets each were carried out to determine the effect of acidifying diets with potassium diformate (K-diformate), formic or sorbic acid on dietary preferences in piglets. In Exp. 1 two reference groups were fed either an unacidified diet or a diet containing 2.4% of K-diformate with no choice for selection. Furthermore, piglets in choice group 1 and 2 had the choice between an unacidified diet and a diet supplemented with 1.2 and 2.4% K-diformate, respectively. In Exp. 2, animals of three reference groups received exclusively an unacidified diet or diets supplemented with 1.2% formic acid or 1.2% sorbic acid, respectively. The animals of the choice groups had the choice between an unacidified diet and diets with 1.2% formic acid or 1.2% sorbic acid, respectively. In Exp. 1 average daily feed intake, daily gain and feed conversion ratio were 751 g, 458 g and 1.64 kg/kg, respectively, with no significant differences between treatments. In both choice feeding groups animals chose the diets on offer at random (each around 50%). In Exp. 2 growth and feed intake were not affected by the treatment, but feed conversion ratio was enhanced due to the 1.2% formic acid supplementation. Animals of both organic acid choice groups showed a significant preference for the unacidified diets in each experimental week. The formic acid and sorbic acid diets represented on average only 13.5% and 23.5% of the total feed intake. The present results demonstrate that the inclusion of 1.2% sorbic or formic acid or 2.4% of K-diformate in piglet diets has no negative impact on feed intake, but in a situation of choice feeding, piglets will refuse diets acidified with 1.2% formic or sorbic acid, presumably because of negative taste cues. Acidifying the diets with varying amounts of a K-diformate had no effect on dietary preferences of piglets.

Alternate JournalArch Anim Nutr