INTRODUCTION

The effectiveness in piglets breeding from 6 to 20 kbw,  will be determined by the evaluation of parameters such as:

• Feed consumption
• Weight gain
• Conversion rate

The digestibility of feed can be altered by:

• Loss of appetite for feed
• Insufficient enzyme production
• Immature digestive tract
• Incorrect absorption
• Limitations of each species

To improve the above parameters, we add to the formulations:

–          Enzymes: fungal or bacterial origin, supply the endogenous enzymes deficiencies.

–          Pronutrients substances of vegetable origin that improve physiologicall regeneration of the gastrointestinal mucosa and its functionality.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effect of the addition of enzymes and pronutrients in the production parameters in the breeding of 16 males piglets from crossing LDxLW of 6-20 kbw,  weaned at 21 – 24 days

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Place of trial: Porcine Installations Transition Centre of Catalonia (PSC)

Date: February 2013, Rooms: 2 , Distribution of rooms: 8 pens for 4 animals each one

Features corral: Slatted floor, 4 openings pan, point of water in heel.

Temperature: Initial 29ÂşC, decreasing 1ÂşC per week. Diet : Commercial Starter feed with the following characteristics:

Energy: 2500 Kcal, Brute protein: 18.5, Lysine: 1.3, Composition: Barley 16 %,  wheat 21 %, bread flour 13%, soybean 15 %, corn 12 %. As meal.

To this standard diet, the additives to study are incorporated on CEP.

Batches:

C: Truffle flavouring 0.4 kg/ ton

F: Control

Individual variables:

Weight and weight gain

Pen variables: feed consumption per animal per day, feed conversion and efficiency index

RESULTS

Weight gain (kg) and average weight (kg) per weeks and batches

Average phenotypic values ​​of the average daily gain (ADG g / animal and day) per week  batch, as well as minimum estimate quadratic effect (LSM) and standard error (es)

Average feed consumption ( g/ animal and day) per week per each batch

Average conversion index (CI= kg feed/ kg weight gain) per week per batch, as well as estimating of minimum quadratic effect (LSM) and standard error (es)

Average efficiency index (EI=[(weight gain x % survivors)/ (trial days x CI) ]x 10) per week per batch, as well as efficiency index on total transition period ( total EI)

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with better results in all the variables analyzed was the E ( pronutrients + enzymes) with:

• Increased weight: 2.7 kg more than F and 1.17kg more than the group with D
• Average daily gain: 89.6 g higher than 38.75 g F than group D
• Consumption: 99.17g more than F and 62.63 g more than the group D
• Conversion index: better than 5.78% F and 1.14% worse than the group D
• Efficiency Ratio: A 30.81% higher than F. A 21.45% higher than group D

Enzyme addition improved all parameters relating to the control group.

Adding enzymes and pronutrients improve on the addition of enzymes all parameters except the conversion rate. However, due to higher growth thanks to the greater intestinal efficiency, finally the efficiency index is better with the use of pronutrients and enzymes.