Swine

An Enzyme BlendImprovedGrowth Performance in Nursery Pigs

---

Abstract

The objective of this experiment was to evaluate the effects of dietary xylanase and an enzyme blend (EB:cellulase, ß-glucanase, and xylanase) on nutrient digestibilityand growth performance inweaned pigletsfed a low energy diet. A total of 460 pigsweighing about 6.43 kg were randomly blocked by weight and assigned to 4 treatments, in a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement.There were 12 blocks and 48 pens with 9 or 10 pigs/pen. The diets were based on corn, soybean meal, corn DDGS, andwheat middlings(5 and 10% each fiber ingredientfor wk 1-2 and 3-4, respectively)with or without enzyme supplementation(Huvepharma Inc., St. Louis, MO),with 0.40% titanium dioxide as an indigestible marker. Body weight and feed intake were recorded weekly. Performance data wereanalyzedas repeated measurementsusing the PROC MIXED procedure of SAS (9.4) with pen as the experimental unit. Xylanase (0 or 0.01%), EB(0 or 0.01%), andtheir interactionswereconsidered fixed effects.The EB addition (12.45 vs. 12.08kg; P= 0.044), but not xylanase (12.27 vs. 12.26 kg; P> 0.05), increased body weight. Neither enzymetreatmenthad an impact on ADFI or G:F ratio (P> 0.05). The EB treatmentimproved ADG (482 vs. 466 g; P= 0.024) from wk1-4. There was noenzymeimpact on ATTDof DM, GE, and CP(P> 0.05). Xylanase supplementation tended to reduceATTD of EE (61.05 vs. 62.82%; P= 0.073)and reducedthe ATTD of NDF(46.10 vs. 48.95%), ADF(27.30 vs. 31.71%), and hemicellulose(52.77 vs. 55.23%; P< 0.01). Supplementation of EB improved ATTD of ADF by 22% (32.45 vs. 26.57%; P= 0.001). In conclusion, EB but not xylanaseimproved growth rate in nursery pigsfed a low energy diet, which may not be completelydue tothe improvement in ADF digestibility.

How to Cite:

Li, Q. & Patience, J. F., (2017) “An Enzyme BlendImprovedGrowth Performance in Nursery Pigs”, Iowa State University Animal Industry Report 14(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.31274/ans_air-180814-286