Dry Feeder Research Articles

Effect of lactation feeder design on sow and litter performance, feeder cleaning criteria, and economic return.

A total of 557 mixed parity sows (PIC 1050) were used to evaluate the effect of lactation feeder design on sow farrowing performance, litter growth performance, feeder cleaning criteria, and economics. The experiment was conducted during the summer of 2023 at a commercial sow farm located in northwest Texas. The study used two sequential farrowing groups with approximately 279 sows per group. On approximately days 112 to 114 of gestation, sows were moved to the farrowing house and randomly allotted to one of three feeder types based on parity and caliper score. Feeder types consisted of 1) a dry feeder with a nipple drinker located next to the feeder, 2) a wet-dry feeder with a divider to separate feed and water, or 3) a wet-dry feeder without a divider. The three feeder types were used in one of every three stalls with the same sequence from the front to the end of all rooms to balance for environmental effects. Sows were weighed before entering the farrowing house and at weaning. Sows were provided approximately 1.81kg per day of a common lactation diet prefarrowing, and after farrowing, sows were provided ad libitum access to lactation feed. There was no evidence of a difference in sow weight at entry or weaning, overall BW change, caliper score at entry or weaning, total litter weight or individual pig weight at birth, total pigs born, or percentage of pigs born alive. However, sows fed with the dry lactation feeder had decreased (P < 0.05) total daily feed disappearance and average daily feed disappearance compared to either wet-dry feeder design. There was no evidence of difference for litter or pig weaning weight, or litter average daily gain. As a result, litter feed efficiency was improved (P < 0.05) for sows fed via the dry feeder compared to either wet-dry feeder. For feeder cleaning criteria, dry feeders had increased (P < 0.05) washing time and washing cost compared to either wet-dry feeder design. In addition, sows fed via the dry feeder had decreased (P < 0.05) total lactation feed cost and feed cost per piglet weaned compared to either wet-dry feeder design. In summary, using the wet-dry feeder design in this study with or without a divider separating the feed from the water increased feed disappearance with no effects on sow and litter performance compared to dry feeders, thus worsening litter feed efficiency and increasing feed cost per sow and litter.

270 Effects of Different Watering Options on Standardized Ileal Digestibility of Amino Acids and net Energy in Diets fed to Growing Pigs

Abstract Two experiments were conducted to test the hypothesis that different watering options affect the standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of amino acids (AA), apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of dry matter (DM) and gross energy (GE), and concentration of net energy (NE) by growing pigs. A corn-soybean meal-based diet was used in both experiments. There were 3 treatments: 1) dry feeder plus a water nipple located outside the feeder, 2) wet-dry feeder with the water nipple inside the feeder, and 3) combined system with a water nipple both inside the feeder and also an outside nipple. In Exp. 1, pigs (n = 6; initial weight = 27.53 kg) that were equipped with a T-cannula in the distal ileum were allotted to the 3 treatments using a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design with 6 pigs and three 7-d periods. All pigs were fed an N-free diet for an additional period to determine basal endogenous losses of AA. Chromic oxide was added to all diets and ileal digesta were collected according to standard procedures. In Exp. 2, 24 pigs (initial weight = 50.23 kg) were allotted to the 3 treatments using a replicated 3 × 3 Latin square design with 6 chambers (i.e., 4 pigs per chamber) and three 15-d periods. Oxygen consumption and CO2 and CH4 productions were measured during fed and fasting states and fecal and urine samples were collected. In both experiments, pigs were allowed ad libitum access to feed and water. Results indicated that there were no differences among watering options for SID of AA, feed intake, total and fasting heat production, ATTD of DM and GE, or NE in diet. In conclusion, different watering options did not affect the digestibility of AA, DM, and GE and concentration of NE in a corn-soybean meal diet fed to growing pigs.

309 Achieving Heavier Market Weights, with Similar Feed Efficiency, in Gilts Administered Improves

Abstract Previous reports indicate that gilts administered Improvest will have an increased ADFI, ADG, and heavier market weights. Feeder type may influence growth performance and feed efficiency. Prior to the initiation of this study, pigs were placed into pens with two different feeder types at weaning (wet/dry shelf feeders and 4-hole dry feeders). Our objective was to determine grow-finish production parameters within a feeder type. Our null hypothesis was that Improvest would not impact ADFI, ADG, or feed efficiency. Pigs (63 days of age; d0 of the study) were weighed, and pens were randomized to treatment within a feeder type (20 pens/treatment; 27 gilts/pen). The first Improvest dose was administered on d7 and the second dose administered on d67. Weights were obtained at each dietary phase change, and prior to each marketing. The heaviest 8 gilts/pen were marketed 22 days post second dose (PSD), heaviest 8 gilts/pen at 37 days PSD, and all remaining gilts marketed at 50 days PSD. The phenotypes were similar between the 2 feeder types. Prior to the 2nd dose of Improvest, ADFI, ADG, and weights were similar between Improvest-treated and control gilts. After the 2nd dose, ADFI, ADG, and live weights were increased in Improvest gilts. Feed efficiency (G:F) was similar at all times between treatment groups. There was an increased (P ≤ 0.05) market weight and carcass weight for Improvest-treated gilts; however, this was driven by gilts marketed at 37- and 50-days PSD, as weights were similar for Improvest and control gilts 22 days PSD. Feed efficiency was similar with Improvest administration in gilts. To optimize the impacts of Improvest, marketing times should be considered when planning the Improvest administration schedule, as the weight advantages were not realized until after the first marketing cut.

106 Evaluation of a Novel Wet/Dry Feeder in Finishing Pigs

Abstract Approximately 1,200 pigs (DNA 241×600, Columbus, NE) at approximately 20 kg were randomly allocated into sixty pens (20 pigs/pen) within 3 treatments to evaluate different feeder styles (conventional dry feeder (Dry), PigEasy (PE) wet/dry (PigEasy, Templeton, IA), or Crystal Springs(CS) wet/dry (Crystal Springs, Brandt, SD). Diets for the study were standard, commercial, mash diets that met the growth requirements for the pigs (NRC, 2012). Pigs were allowed 1 week of acclimation to the respective feeder style before the initiation of the study. Pigs were weighed at the beginning of the trial and at each phase change (approximately every 3 to 4 weeks) until market. Feed disappearance was recorded for each phase for the calculation of average daily gain (ADG), average daily feed intake (ADFI), and feed conversion (G:F). Carcass information was collected by treatment to assess carcass metrics. Data were analyzed by pen, with the fixed effect of feeder type, and using repeated measures (SAS, Cary, NC) for the evaluation of ADG, ADFI, GF. The use of either wet/dry feeder compared with a dry feeder resulted in improved ADFI and body weight and a reduced G:F over time (P &amp;lt; 0.02). At the time of market, pigs on wet/dry feeders were approximately 9 kg heavier compared with a standard dry feeder (121.05, 130.64 and 129.28 kg, respectively; P &amp;lt; 0.01). From d0 until time of first market, both wet/dry feeders had significant differences in ADG, ADFI, and GF compared with the dry feeder (Table 1). The use of a wet/dry feeder resulted in significantly higher backfat (1.54, 1.78 and 1.77 cm, respectively; P &amp;lt; 0.01) compared with the dry feeder. The use of a wet/dry feeder compared with a dry feeder resulted in improved average daily feed intake and daily gain, but reduced G:F and carcass merit compared with the dry feeder. There were no significant differences in performance between the 2 different wet/dry feeders.

355 Effect of shelf setting of a wet/dry feeder on growth performance of finishing pigs

Abstract Recent advancements in wet/dry shelf feeders have caused them to become more popular in swine finishing barns. Pigs consume feed faster from wet/dry feeders compared with dry feeders, so manufacturers recommend higher stocking density than dry feeders. However, there are little data published indicating optimal feeder shelf settings for wet/dry feeders. The objective of this study was to evaluate two shelf settings for wet/dry feeders in a commercial setting. Pigs (n = 1200) were blocked by initial BW and pens were assigned within block to one of two shelf settings: 60% or 85% open. Openings for each feeder were determined by caliper measurement. Each pen (n = 20/treatment) was stocked with 30 pigs, providing 2.54 cm of linear feeder space (15 pigs per 38.1 cm feeder hole) and 0.637 m2 of floor space per pig. Mash feed (primarily corn-soybean meal-DDGS) delivery was recorded daily using Big Dutchmen Feed Exact Pro, and pigs were weighed biweekly throughout the 84 d trial. Data were analyzed using PROC MIXED of SAS with pen considered the experimental unit. Initial pig BW was similar (17.5 vs 17.4 kg; SE=0.1) for 85% and 60% treatments, respectively. Feeder shelves that were 85% open allowed pigs to have greater (P &lt; 0.01) ADG (1.06 vs. 1.02 kg/d; SE=0.01), ADFI (2.63 vs. 2.48; SE=0.01) and were heavier at d 84 (107.1 vs 103.3 kg; SE=0.4) compared with feeder shelf openings of 60%. However, feeders that were 60% open supported better G:F (0.412 vs 0.404; P &lt; 0.01; SE=0.001) compared with the 85% openings, respectively. No behavioral vices were observed in this study. These data suggest shelf settings for wet/dry feeders that are 85% open support faster but less efficient growth than shelf settings of 60%.

Effects of space allocation on finishing pig growth performance and carcass characteristics.

A total of 405 pigs (PIC 327 × 1,050) were used in 2 experiments (Exp. 1, initially 66.1 ± 1.8 kg BW, Exp. 2 initially 60.8 ± 2.5 kg BW) to examine the effects of space allocation on finishing pig growth performance and carcass characteristics. Pigs were randomly allotted to pens on entry into the finishing facility. Pens of pigs were balanced by initial BW and randomly allotted to 1 of 3 treatments with either 7 or 8 replications per treatment (Exp.1 and 2, respectively). There were 9 pigs per pen and gates were adjusted to provide 0.84, 0.74, or 0.65 m2 per pig. Each pen was equipped with a dry single-sided feeder with two 35.6 cm × 11.4 cm (length × width) feeder spaces and a cup waterer. In both experiments, as space allocation decreased, overall ADG and ADFI decreased (linear, P < 0.019) with no evidence for differences in G:F. In Exp. 2, there was marginal evidence for a linear improvement (P = 0.061) in G:F as space allocation decreased from d 42 to 56. Final BW was 3.8 and 5.3 kg greater (linear, P ≤ 0.005) in Exp. 1 and 2, respectively, when comparing the 0.65 to the 0.84 m2 per pig space allocation treatments. Using a predicted k-value of 0.0336, ADFI and, subsequently, ADG should have begun to decrease when pigs reached 121.2, 101.7, and 83.3 kg at 0.84, 0.74, or 0.65 m2 per pig, respectively. In Exp. 1, we found marginal evidence for a reduction in ADFI as space allocation decreased starting at a mean BW of 80.3 kg (d 14; linear, P = 0.072). In Exp. 2, ADFI and consequently ADG decreased linearly (P < 0.029) starting at a mean BW of 74 kg, as space allocation decreased, before pigs reached the k-value that should have influenced performance. It is unknown if growth performance was impacted for the 0.84 m2 treatment group as this was the greatest space allocation treatment. Overall, these studies indicate that decreasing space allocation resulted in poorer ADG driven by a reduction in ADFI. The data suggests that the accepted k-value of 0.0336 might underestimate the impact of space restriction on finishing pig ADG and ADFI.

Does group size have an impact on welfare indicators in fattening pigs?

Production systems for fattening pigs have been characterized over the last 2 decades by rising farm sizes coupled with increasing group sizes. These developments resulted in a serious public discussion regarding animal welfare and health in these intensive production systems. Even though large farm and group sizes came under severe criticism, it is still unknown whether these factors indeed negatively affect animal welfare. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the effect of group size (<15 v. 15 to 30 v. >30 pigs/pen) on various animal-based measures of the Welfare Quality® protocol for growing pigs under conventional fattening conditions. A total of 60 conventional pig fattening farms with different group sizes in Germany were included. Moderate bursitis (35%) was found as the most prevalent indicator of welfare-related problems, while its prevalence increased with age during the fattening period. However, differences between group sizes were not detected (P>0.05). The prevalence of moderately soiled bodies increased from 9.7% at the start to 14.2% at the end of the fattening period, whereas large pens showed a higher prevalence (15.8%) than small pens (10.4%; P<0.05). With increasing group size, the incidence of moderate wounds with 8.5% and 11.3% in small- and medium-sized pens, respectively, was lower (P<0.05) than in large-sized ones (16.3%). Contrary to bursitis and dirtiness, its prevalence decreased during the fattening period. Moderate manure was less often found in pigs fed by a dry feeder than in those fed by a liquid feeding system (P<0.05). The human–animal relationship was improved in large in comparison to small groups. On the contrary, negative social behaviour was found more often in large groups. Exploration of enrichment material decreased with increasing live weight. Given that all animals were tail-docked, tail biting was observed at a very low rate of 1.9%. In conclusion, the results indicate that BW and feeding system are determining factors for the welfare status, while group size was not proved to affect the welfare level under the studied conditions of pig fattening.

The effects of feeder design and dietary dried distillers' grains with solubles on the performance and carcass characteristics of finishing pigs1,2

Three experiments were conducted to compare the effects of a conventional dry (five 30.5-cm spaces 152.4 cm wide; Staco Inc., Schaefferstown, PA) vs. a wet-dry (double sided; each side = 38.1-cm space; Crystal Spring; GroMaster Inc., Omaha, NE) finishing feeder (Exp. 1 and 2) and to evaluate the effects of feeder design and dietary level of dried distillers' grains with solubles (DDGS; >10% oil; Exp. 3) on performance and carcass characteristics of finishing pigs. In Exp. 1, 1,186 pigs (32.1 kg BW) were used in a 69-d experiment. There were 26 to 28 pigs per pen and 22 pens per feeder design, and all pigs received the same diets in 4 phases. In Exp. 2, 1,236 pigs (28.7 kg BW) were used in a 104-d experiment, with 25 to 28 pigs per pen and 23 pens per feeder design, and all pigs received the same diets in 5 phases. Carcass measurements were obtained from 11 pens of each feeder design after harvest. In Exp. 3, 1,080 pigs (35.1 kg BW) were used in a 99-d 2 × 2 factorial with main effects of feeder design (dry vs. wet-dry feeders) and DDGS (20 vs. 60%) with 10 pens of 27 pigs per treatment and all diets fed in 4 phases. Jowl fat samples were collected from 2 pigs per pen for fatty acid analysis and iodine value (IV) determination. In all experiments, pigs fed with the wet-dry feeder had greater (P < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, and final BW. In Exp. 2 and 3, HCW and backfat depth were increased (P < 0.05) for pigs fed with a wet-dry feeder, but G:F and fat-free lean index (FFLI) were reduced. Jowl IV was also reduced (P < 0.05) with a wet-dry feeder in Exp. 3. Pigs fed 60% DDGS in Exp. 3 had decreased (P < 0.05) ADG, G:F, final BW, HCW, and backfat but increased jowl IV and a tendency (P < 0.07) toward greater FFLI regardless of feeder type. In conclusion, pigs fed with this specific type of wet-dry feeder had improved ADG and ADFI, poorer G:F, and increased backfat depth compared to pigs fed with a conventional dry feeder. The poorer growth performance and increased jowl IV of pigs fed diets with 60% DDGS was similarly exhibited for pigs fed on both feeders.

Variance components of aggressive behavior in genetically highly connected Pietrain populations kept under two different housing conditions1

Mixing of unfamiliar pigs is a standard management procedure in commercial pig production and is often associated with a period of intense and physically damaging aggression. Aggression is considered a problem for animal welfare and production. The objective of the present paper was to investigate the genetic background of aggressive behavior traits at mixing of unfamiliar gilts under 2 different housing conditions. Therefore, a total of 543 purebred Pietrain gilts, from 2 nucleus farms (farm A: n = 302; farm B: n = 241) of 1 breeding company, were tested at an average age of 214 d (SD 12.2 d) for aggressive behavior by 1 observer. Observations included the frequencies of aggressive attack and reciprocal fighting during mixing with unfamiliar gilts. On farm A 41% of the gilts were purebred Pietrains, whereas 59% were purebred Landrace or Duroc gilts. On the farm B 42% of the gilts were purebred Pietrains, and 58% purebred Large White gilts. The average size of the newly mixed groups of gilts was 28 animals on farm A and 18 animals on farm B. The Pietrain gilts from the 2 herds were genetically closely linked. They were the offspring of 96 sires, with 64% of these sires having tested progeny in both farms. There were clear differences in the housing of the animals between the 2 farms. The test pen on farm A had a solid concrete floor littered with wooden shavings and was equipped with a dry feeder. On farm B there was a partly slatted floor, and the gilts were fed by an electronic sow feeder. Mean space allowance was 2.6 m(2)/gilt on farm A and 3.9 m(2)/gilt on farm B. Although large interindividual differences existed, gilts from farm B performed numerically more aggressive attack (mean 1.12, SD 1.42 vs. mean 0.71, SD 1.20) and reciprocal fighting (mean 0.78, SD 0.98 vs. mean 0.44, SD 0.82) when compared with gilts from farm A. The heritabilities and additive genetic variances for behavioral traits were estimated with a linear animal model and were on a low level in farm A (h(2) = 0.11, SE = 0.07, and σ(2)a = 0.12 for aggressive attack and h(2) = 0.04, SE = 0.07, and σ(2)a = 0.02 for reciprocal fighting) and on a moderate level in farm B (h(2) = 0.29, SE = 0.13, and σ(2)a = 0.44 for aggressive attack and h(2) = 0.33, SE = 0.12, and σ(2)a = 0.27 for reciprocal fighting). For both aggressive attack and reciprocal fighting, genetic correlation of the same trait between farm A and farm B was 1.0. Therefore, aggressive behavior does not seem to be influenced by genotype × environment interactions. Under these circumstances aggressions in group housing can be reduced by genetic selection against aggressive behavior. Therewith, the welfare and health of sows will ultimately increase.

The effects of diet form and feeder design on the growth performance of finishing pigs1,2

Two studies were conducted to determine the effects of diet form (meal vs. pellet) and feeder design (conventional dry vs. wet/dry) on finisher pig performance. Experiments were arranged as 2 × 2 factorials with 11 replications per treatment and 26 to 29 pigs per pen. In Exp. 1, pigs (n = 1,290; initial BW 46.8 kg) were used in a 91-d study. Pelleted diets averaged approximately 35% fines throughout the study. Overall, pigs fed pelleted diets or via wet/dry feeders had greater (P < 0.07 and 0.001, respectively) ADG than pigs fed meal diets or fed with a dry feeder. Diet form × feeder interactions (P < 0.02) were observed for G:F. Pigs fed either meal or pelleted diets via a wet/dry feeder had similar G:F, but pigs fed pelleted diets in dry feeders had poorer G:F than pigs with meal diets in dry feeders. In Exp. 2, pigs (n = 1,146; initial BW 38.2 kg) were used in a 104-d study. From d 0 to 28, a diet form × feeder design interaction (P < 0.01) was observed for ADG, which was due to decreased ADG in pigs fed pelleted diets from a conventional dry feeder compared with pigs fed meal diets from the same feeder type whereas there was no difference in wet/dry feeders based on diet form. Pigs fed pelleted diets had poorer (P < 0.01) G:F than pigs fed meal diets. This result appeared to be due to poor pellet quality (39.6% fines). From d 42 to 86, pellet quality improved (4.4% fines) and a diet form × feeder interaction was observed for ADG in which pigs fed meal diets in a dry feeder had decreased (P < 0.05) ADG than pigs fed pelleted diets in dry feeders or pigs presented either diet in wet/dry feeders. Pigs fed pelleted diets had improved (P < 0.001) G:F. Pigs fed via wet/dry feeders had increased (P < 0.03) ADFI and G:F compared with pigs fed via dry feeders. Overall, pigs fed with wet/dry feeders had increased (P < 0.02) ADG and ADFI and poorer G:F than pigs with dry feeders whereas pigs given pelleted diets had improved (P = 0.05) G:F compared with pigs presented meal diets. These studies found that pigs fed from wet/dry feeders had increased ADG and ADFI compared with pigs fed via dry feeders regardless of diet form. Additionally, pellet quality appeared to influence responses because pigs fed high-quality pellets via dry feeders had better growth performance than pigs fed meal diets. Conversely, if pellet quality was poor, the feed efficiency benefits associated with pelleting were lost.

Descriptive study of production factors affecting performance traits in growing-finishing pigs in Spain

The objective of this study was to build up a data set including productive performance and production factors data of growing-finishing (GF) pigs in Spain in order to perform a representative and reliable description of the traits of Spanish growing-finishing pig industry. Data from 764 batches from 452 farms belonging to nine companies (1,157,212 pigs) were collected between 2008 and 2010 through a survey including five parts: general, facilities, feeding, health status and performance. Most studied farms had only GF pigs on their facilities (94.7%), produced ‘industrial’ pigs (86.7%), had entire male and female (59.5%) and Pietrain-sired pigs (70.0%), housed between 13-20 pigs per pen (87.2%), had  50% of slatted floor (70%), single-space dry feeder (54.0%), nipple drinker (88.7%) and automatic ventilation systems (71.2%). A 75.0% of the farms used three feeding phases using mainly pelleted diets (91.0%), 61.3% performed three or more antibiotic treatments and 36.5% obtained water from the public supply. Continuous variables studied had the following average values: number of pigs placed per batch, 1,515 pigs; initial and final body weight, 19.0 and 108 kg; length of GF period, 136 days; culling rate, 1.4%; barn occupation, 99.7%; feed intake per pig and fattening cycle, 244 kg; daily gain, 0.657 kg; feed conversion ratio, 2.77 kg kg-1 and mortality rate, 4.3%. Data reflecting the practical situation of the Spanish growing and finishing pig production and it may contribute to develop new strategies in order to improve the productive and economic efficiency of GF pig units.

Effects of feeder design and changing source of water to a location separate from the wet-dry feeder at 4 or 8 weeks before harvest on growth, feeding behavior, and carcass characteristics of finishing pigs1,2

Our objectives were to compare a conventional dry (5-space, 152.4-cm-wide) and a wet-dry (double-sided, each side = 38.1-cm-wide single space) feeder and to determine if changing the source of water to a location separate from a wet-dry feeder would result in improved G:F and carcass characteristics. Water supply to the wet-dry feeder was shut off and the cup waterer was turned on in 8 pens at 8 (d 69) or 4 (d 97) wk prior to harvest. For the remaining 8 wet-dry feeder pens, the feeder provided the sole water source for the entire experiment. A total of 1,296 pigs (PIC, 337 × 1050; initially 19.4 kg BW) were used, with 27 pigs/pen (14 barrows and 13 gilts) and 24 pens/feeder design. From d 0 to 69, pigs fed with the wet-dry feeder had increased (P < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, G:F, and d 69 BW compared with those using the conventional dry feeder. Overall (d 0 to 124), pigs using fed with the water source in the wet-dry feeder the entire time had greater (P < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, final BW, and HCW the other treatments. The overall G:F was not different (P > 0.05) among pigs fed with the different feeder treatments. Pigs fed with the wet-dry feeder where water source was changed at 4 wk before harvest had greater (P < 0.05) ADG than pigs that used a conventional dry feeder. Pigs where the water source was changed at 4 wk had greater (P < 0.05) ADFI than those were the water source was changed 8 wk prior to harvest, and for pigs fed with the conventional dry feeder ADFI was intermediate. Back fat depth of pigs where the water source was changed at 8 wk before harvest was reduced (P < 0.05) compared with all other treatments and LM depth was greater (P < 0.05) than that of pigs using a conventional dry feeder and where the water source was changed at 4 week before harvest. Pigs fed using the wet-dry feeder visited the feeder less frequently (P < 0.05) and spent less total time at the feeder (P < 0.05) than those fed with the conventional dry feeder. The differences in feeding patterns remained even after the access to water was removed from the wet-dry feeder, with no change in the amount of aggressive behavior observed at the feeder. Pigs fed with a wet-dry feeder had an increased growth rate compared with those fed with a conventional dry feeder. Although measures of carcass leanness were improved by changing the location of the water, removing the water from the feeder also eliminated any net improvement in BW from using a wet-dry feeder.

Meta-analysis comparing growth performance, carcass characteristics, and water usage of growing-finishing pigs fed using conventional dry and wet-dry feeders (2012)

Fifteen trials were used for meta-analyses comparing the effects of conventional dry (CD) and wet-dry (WD) feeders on growth performance, carcass traits, and water usage of growing-finishing pigs. The meta-analysis indicated that pigs fed with WD feeders consistently had greater (P 0.14) among feeder types. Water usage for pigs fed with WD feeders was 0.4 gal/pig/d less (P = 0.02) than for pigs using CD feeders. Growing-finishing pigs fed with WD feeders had increased growth rate, feed intake, final BW, and HCW, but deposited more fat as indicated by greater backfat and lower percentage lean.

Effects of feeder design (conventional dry vs. wet-dry) on growth performance of 45- to 246-lb pigs (2012)

A total of 1,253 pigs (PIC 1050 × 337; initially 45 lb) were used in a 104-d study to evaluate the effects of using a wet-dry (WD) or conventional dry (CD) feeder on growth performance of growing-finishing pigs. At the start of the trial, pens of pigs were weighed and randomly allotted to 1 of the 2 feeder types. The CD feeder was a single-sided, 56-in.-wide, stainless steel feeder (Thorp Equipment, Inc., Thorp, WI) with 4 14-in. feeding spaces and a 4.25-in.-deep trough. A cup waterer in pens using CD feeders ensured ad libitum access to water as well as feed. The WD feeder was double-sided (15-in.-wide feeder opening on each side) with a single nipple waterer (Crystal Springs, GroMaster, Inc., Omaha, NE), and the feeder was the only source of water. All pigs were fed the same corn-soybean meal diets containing 30% bakery by-product and 10 to 45% dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) during 5 dietary phases. For the overall period, pigs fed with the WD feeder had greater ADG (P < 0.01) and ADFI (P = 0.01) with no differences in F/G (P = 0.50) compared with pigs fed using the CD feeder. This study confirms previous results where pigs fed using a WD feeder have greater ADG and ADFI than those fed with a CD feeder.; Swine Day, Manhattan, KS, November 15, 2012

The effects of diet form and feeder design on the growth performance of finishing pigs (2011)

A total of 1,146 growing pigs (PIC 1050 × 337, initially 85.8 lb) were used in a 104-d study to evaluate the effects of diet form (meal vs. pellet) and feeder design (conventional dry vs. wet-dry) on finisher pig performance. The treatments were arranged in a 2 × 2 factorial with 11 replications per treatment and 25 to 27 pigs per pen. Half of the pens were equipped with a 5-hole conventional dry feeder and the other half had a double-sided wet-dry feeder. All pigs were fed a corn-soybean meal-based diet containing 20% dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) during the first 4 dietary phases and 10% DDGS in phase 5. The only difference in diet among treatments was diet form (meal vs. pellet). Pen weights and feed disappearance were measured on d 0, 14, 28, 42, 56, 70, 86, and 104. Pictures of feeder pans were taken once during each phase and evaluated by a panel of 4 individuals for percentage pan coverage. From d 0 to 28, no diet form × feeder design interaction was observed for ADG or F/G. Pigs fed pelleted diets had poorer (P < 0.001) F/G compared with those fed meal diets, which appeared to be due to poor pellet quality (39.6% fines). From d 42 to 86, pellet quality improved (4.4% fines), and a diet form × feeder interaction (P < 0.02) was observed for ADG, whereas pigs presented meal diets in a dry feeder had decreased ADG compared with pigs presented pelleted diets in dry feeders or pigs presented feed via wet-dry feeders regardless of diet form. Pigs presented pelleted diets had improved (P < 0.001) F/G compared with those fed meal diets. Pigs fed via wet-dry feeders had increased (P < 0.03) ADFI and poorer F/G compared with pigs with dry feeders. Overall, pigs fed with wet-dry feeders had increased (P < 0.02) ADG and ADFI, and poorer F/G compared with those with dry feeders, whereas pigs presented pelleted diets had a tendency for improved (P < 0.06) F/G compared with those presented meal diets. In conclusion, regardless of diet form, pigs fed from wet-dry feeders had increased ADG and ADFI compared with pigs fed via dry feeders. Additionally, pellet quality appeared to influence responses because pigs provided higher-quality pellets via dry feeders had increased growth performance compared with pigs fed meal diets. Conversely, if pellet quality was poor, feed efficiency

The effects of feeder design (conventional dry vs. wet-dry) in the nursery and in the finisher on growth performance of finishing pigs (2011)

A total of 1,296 pigs (PIC 1050 × 337; initially 36 lb) were used in a 102-d study to determine the effects of feeder type (conventional dry vs. wet-dry) on nursery and finishing pig growth performance for pigs reared under commercial conditions. In the nursery, pigs were housed in rooms with either conventional dry or wet-dry feeders. At movement to the finisher, 312 barrows and 336 gilts from a room with conventional dry feeders and an equal number of pigs from a room with wet-dry feeders were randomly selected and distributed to have a similar number of barrows and gilts in each finisher pen. At the start of the trial, pens of pigs were weighed and randomly allotted to the 2 feeder types in finishing barn to arrange the treatments as a 2 × 2 factorial with main effects of feeder type in nursery and feeder type in finisher. All pigs were fed the same corn-soybean meal diets containing 20 to 40% dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS) during 6 dietary phases. For the finisher period (d 0 to 102), pigs fed with the conventional dry feeder during the nursery phase and wet-dry feeder during the finisher phase tended to have greater ADG (P < 0.01) compared with pigs fed with the other feeder regimens. An interaction (P = 0.03) occurred between nursery and finisher feeder type for F/G. Within pigs provided feed with the conventional dry feeder in the nursery phase, pigs provided feed with the conventional dry feeder in the finisher phase had poorer (P < 0.01) F/G compared with those fed with the wet-dry feeder. In contrast, for pigs provided feed with the wet-dry feeder in the nursery phase, F/G during the finisher phase was the same regardless of feeder type in the finisher phase. Pigs previously fed using a conventional dry feeder in the nursery had greater ADG and ADFI (P = 0.03, P = 0.02) compared with those on wet-dry feeder in the nursery phase regardless of the effect of feeder types in finishing period. Pigs fed with wet-dry feeders in the finisher phase had greater (P < 0.01) finisher ADG and improved (P = 0.02) F/G compared with those fed with conventional dry feeders in the finishing period. Also, the final BW of finishing pigs previously fed using conventional dry feeders in the nursery was greater (P < 0.01) than those previously fed on wet-dry feeders; however, pigs fed using wet-dry feeders in finisher phase had greater (P < 0.01) final BW compared with those fed with conventional dry feeders. These results indicated that using dry feeder in nursery and wet-dry feeder in finisher gave the most benefit in terms of growth performance.; Swine Day, Manhattan, KS, November 17, 2011

The production of ‘aerodynamically equivalent’ drug and excipient inhalable powders using a novel fractionation technique

Inhalation particles can be produced by various techniques such as milling, controlled crystallisation and spray-drying, but current methods cannot, to-date, precisely control the aerodynamic size distribution of produced powders. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a novel preparative technique whereby the efficient and reproducible aerodynamic fractionation of drug and excipient powders could be achieved. Salmeterol xinafoate (SX), fluticasone propionate (FP) and fine α-lactose monohydrate (FL) were chosen as model compounds. Powders were aerosolised using a dry powder feeder into a Next Generation Impactor operated at 60Lmin−1. Powders deposited on NGI stages were then collected and analysed. The fractionation process was successful for all powders producing significant linear correlations between the pre-set aerodynamic cut-off limits and geometric size measurements. For each of SX, FP and FL, sufficient powder quantities were recovered from NGI stages 1–6 producing six fractions with sequential aerodynamic and geometric particle size distributions. The fractionation technique was efficient and reproducible for all powders studied. The method can be equally applied to various drugs and excipients regardless of their previous production/processing history. Therefore, the aerodynamic fractionation technique may be used to compare and contrast samples produced by different processes.

The effects of diet form and feeder design on the growth performance and carcass characteristics of growing-finishing pigs (2010)

A total of 1,290 growing pigs (PIC 1050 x 337, initially 103.1 lb) were used in a 91-d study to evaluate the effects of diet form (meal vs. pellet) and feeder design (conventional dry vs wet-dry) on finisher pig performance. The treatments were arranged in a 2 x 2 factorial with 11 replications per treatment and 25 to 27 pigs per pen. Half of the pens were equipped with a 5-hole conventional dry feeder while the other half had a double-sided wet-dry feeder. All pigs were fed a corn-soybean meal-based diet containing 45 to 65% by-products in 4 phases. The only difference among treatments was diet form (meal vs. pellet). Pen weights and feed disappearance were measured on d 0, 16, 21, 43, 57, 71, and 91. Pictures of feeder pans were taken during Phase 4 and then evaluated by a panel of 4 for percentage of pan coverage. From d 0 to 91, no diet form x feeder design interactions were observed for ADG. Pigs fed pelleted diets had a tendency for improved (P < 0.07) ADG compared to those given meal diets. In addition, pigs fed with wet-dry feeders had improved (P < 0.01) ADG compared to those with conventional dry feeders. A diet form x feeder design interaction was observed (P < 0.04) for ADFI. When using a wet-dry feeder, pigs given meal diets had similar ADFI as those fed pelleted diets. However, when using dry feeders, pigs given pelleted diets had a much greater ADFI than pigs fed meal diets. In addition, a diet form x feeder design interaction was observed for F/G. Pigs fed both meal and pelleted diets via wet-dry feeders had similar F/G, but pigs fed pelleted diets in a conventional dry feeder had poorer F/G compared to pigs given meal diets in a conventional dry feeder. The pellets used during this experiment had average percentage fines of 35.1 ± 19% and an average pellet durability index (PDI) of 75.8 ± 8.4. We attribute the interactions to the poor pellet quality, leading to more feed wastage from the dry feeders. These results suggest that pellet quality is important to decrease feed wastage and sorting by the pigs and to optimize growth performance.; Swine Day, Manhattan, KS, November 18, 2010

The effects of feeder design and changing the availability of water from a wet-dry feeder at 4 and 8 weeks prior to marketing on growth performance and carcass characteristics of growing-finishing pigs (2010)

A total of 1,296 pigs (PIC, 337 × 1050) were used to evaluate the effects on growth performance and carcass characteristics of feeder design (conventional dry feeder vs. wet-dry feeder) and changing availability of water from a wet-dry feeder at 4 and 8 wk prior to marketing. There were 27 pigs per pen (14 barrows and 13 gilts) and 24 pens per feeder-type. Pigs were fed identical corn-soybean meal diets with 15% dried distillers’ grains with solubles (DDGS). Pens with a wet-dry feeder had a separate cup waterer, but the feeder provided the sole water source until d 69. The water supply to the wet-dry feeder was shut off in 8 pens on d 69 (WD8) and another 8 pens on d 97 (WD4), and the cup waterer was turned on. For the remaining 8 pens, the wet-dry feeder provided the sole water source for the entire experiment (WD0). From d 0 to 69, pigs using the wet-dry feeder had improved (P < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, F/G, and d 69 BW. Overall (d 0 to 124), pigs using WD0 had greater (P < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, final BW, and HCW than all other treatments. Pigs using WD4 had greater (P < 0.05) ADG than pigs that used a conventional dry feeder, and WD8 was intermediate. Pigs using WD4 had greater (P < 0.05) ADFI than WD8, and conventional dry was intermediate. Pigs using WD0 had poorer (P < 0.05) F/G than WD8 and conventional dry, and pigs using WD4 were intermediate. Backfat depth of pigs using WD8 was reduced (P < 0.05) compared to all other treatments, and loin depth was greater (P < 0.05) than that of pigs using a conventional dry feeder and WD4. Loin depth of pigs using WD0 was also greater (P < 0.05) than that of pigs with the conventional dry feeder. The percentage fat-free lean of pigs using WD8 was greater (P < 0.05) than WD4, and WD0, and pigs that used the conventional dry feeder were intermediate. Incomeover-feed cost was numerically greatest for pigs using WD8. In conclusion, pigs using WD0 had better growth rates than pigs using the conventional dry feeder, WD4, or WD8. Although measures of carcass leanness were improved with WD8, the reduction in growth rate observed for this treatment during the last 8 wk eliminated any net improvement in the overall growth rate from using a wet-dry feeder.

Effects of feeder design and feeder adjustment on the growth performance of growing-finishing pigs (2010)

Two experiments were performed to evaluate the effects of feeder design (conventional dry feeder vs. wet-dry feeder) and adjustment on growing-finishing pig performance. In both experiments, all pigs (PIC 337 × 1050) were fed the same corn-soybean meal diets with 15% dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS). In Exp. 1, 1,296 pigs (initially 43 lb) were used in a 69-d study. From d 0 to 27, 3 feeder settings were evaluated for each feeder type. Numbered settings (located in each feeder) were 6, 8, and 10 for the conventional dry feeder and 6, 10, and 14 for the wet-dry feeder. An increased setting number corresponded to a greater opening. From d 27 to 69, all feeders were adjusted to an opening of approximately 1 in. (conventional dry feeder setting 8; wet-dry feeder setting 14). From d 0 to 27, pigs using a wet-dry feeder had lower (P < 0.02) ADFI and better F/G than pigs using a conventional dry feeder. Increasing the feeder setting improved (linear, P < 0.01) ADG, ADFI, and d-27 BW of pigs using a wet-dry feeder and increased (linear, P < 0.01) ADFI of pigs using a conventional dry feeder. From d 27 to 69, ADG and ADFI of pigs using a wet-dry feeder were greater (P < 0.01) than those of pigs using a conventional dry feeder, and increasing the feeder setting from d 0 to 27 resulted in greater (linear, P < 0.01) ADFI and poorer F/G for pigs using a wet-dry feeder. Overall (d 0 to 69), pigs using a wet-dry feeder had greater (P < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, final BW, and better F/G than pigs that used a conventional dry feeder. Increasing the feeder setting of a wet-dry feeder from d 0 to 27 resulted in greater (linear, P < 0.01) ADG and ADFI, poorer (linear, P < 0.03) F/G, and heavier (linear, P < 0.01) final BW. Feeder setting of a conventional dry feeder from d 0 to 27 did not affect overall performance. In Exp. 2, 1,248 pigs (initially 73 lb) were used in a 93-d study. Three feeder settings were evaluated throughout the study for each feeder type (conventional dry feeder set at 6, 8, and 10; wet-dry feeder set at 10, 14, and 18). Overall, pigs using a wet-dry feeder had greater (P < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, final BW, HCW, backfat depth, and feed cost but reduced (P < 0.04) fat-free lean index (FFLI) compared with pigs using a conventional dry feeder. Increasing the feeder setting of a wet-dry feeder resulted in greater (linear, P < 0.05) ADG, ADFI, final BW, HCW, backfat depth, and feed cost. When HCW was used as a covariate, FFLI of pigs using a wet-dry feeder decreased (linear, P < 0.02) with increased feeder opening. Increasing the feeder setting of a conventional dry feeder had no effect on growth performance and carcass characteristics. In conclusion, the growth rate of pigs improved with a wet-dry feeder compared with a conventional dry feeder; however, the growth of pigs using a wet-dry feeder was more sensitive to differences in feeder adjustment.