Feedipedia
Animal feed resources information system
Feedipedia
Feedipedia

Speedy et al., 1991. Livest. Res. Rural Dev., 3 (1): 65

Document reference 
Speedy, A. W. ; Seward, L. ; Langton, N. ; Du Plessis, J. ; Dlamini, B., 1991. A comparison of sugarcane juice and maize as energy sources in diets for growing pigs with equal supply of essential amino acids. Livest. Res. Rural Dev., 3 (1): 65
Abstract 

Two experiments were performed with growing pigs, given diets based on maize or sugar cane juice, balanced for 8 essential amino acids, fibre, oil, calcium, phosphate and sodium. The experimental diets were formulated by Multiple Objective Programming (MOP) using conventional supplements. In the first experiment, live weight gains were 634 ± 12.7 g/day for maize and 732 ± 12.6 g/day for sugar cane juice; respective backfats (P2) were 13.5 ± 0.32 and 14.7 ± 0.36 mm. The gains in the second experiment (when the relative amounts of maize and sugar cane juice were adjusted) were 760 ± 16.1 and 616 ± 9.4 g/day respectively; corresponding backfats were 13.2 ± 0.51 and 11.1 ± 0.48 mm. There were only small differences in carcass weight, killing-out percentage and backfat thickness which can be explained by differences in live weight gains resulting from actual feed consumption. The results do not support previous conclusions that there are differences in lean and fat growth between sugar cane juice and maize diets. The importance of correct balance of nutrients and the value of the MOP technique in this experiment is stressed.

Citation key 
Speedy et al., 1991
Datasheets