Effects of particle size and adaptation duration on the digestible and metabolizable energy contents and digestibility of various chemical constituents in wheat for finishing pigs determined by the direct or indirect method

  • Fan, Yuanfang (State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, China Agricultural University) ;
  • Guo, Panpan (State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, China Agricultural University) ;
  • Yang, Yuyuan (State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, China Agricultural University) ;
  • Xia, Tian (State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, China Agricultural University) ;
  • Liu, Ling (State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, China Agricultural University) ;
  • Ma, Yongxi (State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, China Agricultural University)
  • Received : 2016.04.25
  • Accepted : 2016.08.14
  • Published : 2017.04.01


Objective: This experiment was conducted as a $3{\times}2{\times}2$ factorial design to examine the effects of particle size (mean particle size of 331, 640, or $862{\mu}m$), evaluation method (direct vs indirect method) and adaptation duration (7 or 26 days) on the energy content and the apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of various chemical components in wheat when fed to finishing pigs. Methods: Forty-two barrows ($Duroc{\times}Landrace{\times}Yorkshire$) with an initial body weight of $63.0{\pm}0.8kg$ were individually placed in metabolic cages and randomly allotted to 1 of 7 diets with 6 pigs fed each diet. For the indirect method, the pigs were fed either a corn-soybean meal based basal diet or diets in which 38.94% of the basal diet was substituted by wheat of the different particle sizes. In the direct method, the diets contained 97.34% wheat with the different particle sizes. For both the direct and indirect methods, the pigs were adapted to their diets for either 7 or 26 days. Results: A reduction in particle size linearly increased the digestible energy (DE) and metabolizable energy (ME) contents as well as the ATTD of gross energy, crude protein, organic matter, ether extract (EE) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) (p<0.05), and had a trend to increase the ATTD of dry matter of wheat (p = 0.084). The DE, ME contents, and ATTD of gross energy, crude protein, dry matter and organic matter were higher (p<0.05) when determined by the direct method, but the ATTD of ADF, EE, and neutral detergent fiber were higher when determined by the indirect method (p<0.05). Prolongation of the adaption duration decreased the ATTD of neutral detergent fiber (p<0.05) and had a trend to increase the ATTD of EE (p = 0.061). There were no interactions between particle size and the duration of the adaptation duration. The ATTD of EE in wheat was influenced by a trend of interaction between method and adaptation duration (p = 0.074). The ATTD of ADF and EE in wheat was influenced by an interaction between evaluation method and wheat particle size such that there were linear equations (p<0.01) about ATTD of ADF and EE when determined by the direct method but quadratic equations (p = 0.073 and p = 0.088, respectively) about ATTD of ADF and EE when determined by the indirect method. Conclusion: Decreasing particle size can improve the DE and ME contents of wheat; both of the direct and indirect methods of evaluation are suitable for evaluating the DE and ME contents of wheat with different particle sizes; and an adaptation duration of 7 d is sufficient to evaluate DE and ME contents of wheat in finishing pigs.


  1. Noblet J, Henry Y. Energy evaluation systems for pig diets - a review. Livest Prod Sci 1993;36:121-41.
  2. Adeola O. Digestion and balance techniques in pigs. In: Lewis AJ, Southern LL, editors. Swine nutrition. Washington, DC: CRC Press; 2001. pp. 903-16.
  3. Schurch AF, Crampton EW, Haskell SR, Lloyd LE. The use of chromic oxide in digestibility studies with pigs fed ad libitum in the barn. J Anim Sci 1952;11:261-5.
  4. Kavanagh S, Lynch PB, O'Mara F, Caffrey PJ. A comparison of total collection and marker technique for the measurement of apparent digestibility of diets for growing pigs. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2001;89:49-58.
  5. Wiseman J. Correlation between physical measurements and dietary energy values of wheat for poultry and pigs. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2000;84:1-11.
  6. Hetland H, Choct M, Svihus B. Role of insoluble non-starch polysaccharides in poultry nutrition. Worlds Poult Sci J 2004;60:415-22.
  7. Potkins ZV, Lawrence TLJ, Thomlinson JR. Effects of structural and nonstructural polysaccharides in the diet of the growing pig on gastric-emptying rate and rate of passage of digesta to the terminal ileum and through the total gastrointestinal-tract. Br J Nutr 1991;65:391-413.
  8. Mavromichalis I, Hancock JD, Senne BW, et al. Enzyme supplementation and particle size of wheat in diets for nursery and finishing pigs. J Anim Sci 2000;78:3086-95.
  9. Sappok MA, Gutierrez OP, Smidt H, et al. Adaptation of faecal microbiota in sows after diet changes and consequences for in vitro fermentation capacity. Animal 2015;9:1453-64.
  10. NRC. Nutrient requirements of swine. 10th rev ed. Washington DC: National Academy Press; 2012.
  11. Li P, Li DF, Zhang HY, et al. Determination and prediction of energy values in corn distillers dried grains with solubles sources with varying oil content for growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2014;93:3458-70.
  12. AOAC. Official methods of analysis. 18th ed. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Arlington, VA: AOAC International; 2007.
  13. Thiex NJ, Anderson S, Gildemeister B. Crude fat, diethyl ether extraction, in feed, cereal grain, and forage (Randall/Soxtec/submersion method): Collaborative study. J AOAC Int 2003:86:888-98.
  14. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and non-starch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci 1991;74:3583-97.
  15. Widmer MR, McGinnis LM, Stein HH. Energy, phosphorus, and amino acid digestibility of high-protein distillers dried grans and corn germ fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 2007;85:2994-3003.
  16. Kong C, Adeola O. Invited review: Evaluation of amino acid and energy utilization in feedstuff for swine and poultry diets. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2014;27:917-25.
  17. Healy BJ, Hancock JD, Kennedy GA, et al. Optimum particle size of corn and hard and soft sorghum for nursery pigs. J Anim Sci 1994;72:22-7.
  18. Wondra KJ, Hancock JD, Behnke KC, Hines RH, Stark CR. Effects of particle size and pelleting on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and stomach morphology in finishing pigs. J Anim Sci 1995;73:757-63.
  19. Sao Z, Li Y, Zhang J, et al. Effect of particle size of wheat on nutrient digestibility, growth performance, and gut microbiota in growing pigs. Livest Sci 2015;183:33-9.
  20. DeJong JA, DeRouchey JM, Tokach MD, et al. Manhattan, KS: Effects of hard red winter wheat particle size in meal diets on finishing pig growth performance, diet digestibility, and caloric efficiency. Kansas State University Swine Day 2014. Report of progress 1110, 269-275.
  21. Choct M, Dersjant-Li Y, McLeish J, Peisker M. Soy oligosaccharides and soluble non-starch polysaccharides: a review of digestion, nutritive and anti-nutritive effects in pigs and poultry. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2010;23:1386-98.
  22. Englyst HN, Kingman SM, Cummings JH. Classification and measurements of nutritionally important starch fractions. Eur J Clin Nutr 1992;46:S33-S50.
  23. Kim JC, Mullan BP, Pluske JR. A comparison of waxy versus non-waxy wheats in diets for weaner pigs: Effects of particle size, enzyme supplementation, and collection day on total tract apparent digestibility and pig performance. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2005;120:51-65.
  24. Li W, Angel R, Kim SW, et al. Age and adaptation to Ca and P deficiencies: 2. Impacts on amino acid digestibility and phytase efficacy in broilers. Poult Sci 2015;94:2917-31.
  25. Cunningham HM, Friend DW, Nicholson JWG. The effect of age, body weight, feed intake and adaptability of pigs on the digestibility and nutritive value of cellulose. Can J Anim Sci 1962;42:167-75.
  26. Bakker GCM. Interaction between carbohydrates and fat in pigs [Ph.D. dissertation]. Wageningen The Netherlands: Wageningen Agricultural University; 1996.
  27. Wiseman J, Cole DJA. Energy evaluation of cereals for pig diets. In: Cole DJA, Haresign W editors. Recent developments in pig nutrition. Butterworth, London: Recent Developments in Pig Nutrition; 1985. pp. 246-62.
  28. Villamide MJ. Methods of energy evaluation of feed ingredients for rabbits and their accuracy. Anim Feed Sci Technol 1996;57:211-23.
  29. Villamide MJ, Garcia J, Cervera C, et al. Comparison among methods of nutritional evaluation of dietary ingredients for rabbits. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2003;109:195-207.
  30. Bolarinwa OA, Adeola O. Direct and regression methods do not give different estimates of digestible and metabolizable energy of wheat for pigs. J Anim Sci 2012;90:390-2.
  31. Liu DW, Liu L, Li DF, Wang FL. Determination and prediction of the net energy content of seven feed ingredients fed to growing pigs based on chemical composition. Anim Prod Sci 2015; 55: 1152-63.
  32. Fan MZ, Sauer WC. Determination of apparent ileal amino-acid digestibility in barley and canola-meal for pigs with the direct, difference, and regression methods. J Anim Sci 1995;73:2364-74.
  33. Zebrowska T, Kowalczyk J. Endogenous nitrogen losses in monogastrics and ruminants as affected by nutritional factors. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2000;13:210-8.

Cited by

  1. Effect of inclusion level and adaptation duration on digestible energy and nutrient digestibility in palm kernel meal fed to growing-finishing pigs vol.31, pp.3, 2018,