Opuntia ficus-indica as a supplement for gilts in late gestation and lactation: effects on biochemical parameters and voluntary feed intake

Figures & data

Table 1. Composition of gestation and lactation diets.

Item	Control		O. ficus-indica
Ingredients, g/kg	Gestation	Lactation	Gestation	Lactation
Sorghum	824.0	649.5	824.0	649.5
Soy paste	60.0	100.0	60.0	100.0
Canola paste	61.2	185.2	61.2	185.2
Orthophosphate	11.8	5.3	11.8	5.3
Calcium carbonate	14.0	12.4	14.0	12.4
Soy oil	22.0	38.5	22.0	38.5
Lysine	1.2	2.5	1.2	2.5
Metione-Cysteine	0.9	1.5	0.9	1.5
Salt	3.0	3.0	3.0	3.0
Vitamins and minerals premix^a	2.0	2.5	2.0	2.5
Nutrient levels, %
Metabolizable energy, MJ·kg	13.8	13.8	13.8	13.8
Crude protein	12.5	17.5	12.3	17.4
Crude fat	3.7	4.5	3.6	4.4
Fibre	3.1	4.3	3.3	4.5
Humidity	12.0	12.0	12.9	12.8
Ashes	10.0	10.0	9.9	9.9
Calcium	1.4	1.2	1.5	1.5
Phosphorus	0.64	0.67	0.63	0.66
Lysine	0.52	0.95	0.50	0.94
Methionine + cysteine	0.43	0.59	0.43	0.59
Nutrient levels of O. ficus-indica, %
Metabolizable energy, Mcal·kg			2.2
Crude protein			5.6
Crude fat			0.2
Fibre			28.8
Humidity			88.6
Ashes			24.5
Nitrogen-free elements			40.8
Mucilage g/300 g dry base			2.6

^a Contribution per kg of feed: Cu 30 mg; Fe 160 mg; Zn 160 mg; Mn 55 mg; Se 0.5; Cr 0.2 mg; Vitamin A 14.200 IU; Vitamin D₃ 2800 IU; Vitamin E 125 mg; Vitamin K₃ 5 mg; Vitamin B₁ 2.4 mg; Vitamin B₂ 8.7 mg; Vitamin B₆ 4.5 mg; Vitamin B₁₂ 0.05 mg; Pantothenic acid 35 mg; Acid folic 6 mg.

Figure 1. Plasma concentration of glucose (a), insulin (b), and HOMA-IR index (c) according to the group. Each point or bar represents the mean ± standard error of mean (SEM; n = 16 gilts by group). *Indicates statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) between groups.

Figure 2. Plasma concentration of triglycerides (a), cholesterol (b), HDL (c), and LDL (d) according to the group. Each point represents the mean ± standard error of mean (SEM; n = 16 gilts by group). *Indicates statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) between groups.

Figure 3. Plasma concentration of leptin according to the group. Each point represents the mean ± standard error of mean (SEM; n = 16 gilts by group). * Indicates statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) between groups.

Table 2. Least squares mean for feed intake, energy intake and energy balance of sows according to the group and week of lactation.

Items	N	Week (W)	Group (G)		P-value
			Control	O. ficus-indica	G	W	G*W
	32	1	3.4^a1 ± 0.09	4.5^b1 ± 0.09
Feed intake, kg/day		2	4.1^a2 ± 0.09	5.5^b2 ± 0.09	0.037	<.0001	0.0001
		3	4.6^a3 ± 0.09	6.2^b3 ± 0.09
	32	1	32.4^a1 ± 0.89	44.6^b1 ± 0.89
Intake energy, MJ/day		2	40.2^a2 ± 0.89	54.6^b2 ± 0.89	0.028	<.0001	0.017
		3	45.3^a3 ± 0.89	61.9^b3 ± 0.89
	32	1	−5.2^a1 ± 1.23	−0.5^b1 ± 1.23
Energy balance, MJ/day		2	−6.1^a2 ± 1.23	1.0^b2 ± 1.23	0.012	0.008	0.021
		3	−9.7^a3 ± 1.23	−0.3^b3 ± 1.23

Notes: ^{a, b} Different literals indicate statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) into of row. ^{1, 2, 3} Different numerals indicate the statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) into of column for each indicator, respectively.

Table 3. Least squares mean for the productive performance of the sow and piglets according to the group.

Items	N	Group (G)		P-value
		Control	O. ficus-indica	G
Gilts body weight, kg
Day 85 of gestation	32	179.4^a ± 1.4	183.5^a ± 1.4	0.069
Day 110 of gestation	32	191.5^a ± 1.4	190.5^a ± 1.4	0.483
Post-farrowing^&	32	181.7^a ± 1.4	179.7^a ± 1.4	0.421
Weaning	32	172.9^a ± 1.4	177.6^b ± 1.4	0.012
Body weight loss, kg	32	8.88^b ± 0.31	2.13^b ± 0.31	0.005
Body weight loss, %	32	4.81^a ± 0.27	1.10^b ± 0.27	0.001
Piglets weight, kg
Birth	256	1.4 ± 0.12	1.5 ± 0.13	0.083
Day 7 post-farrowing	250	2.3 ± 0.18	2.4 ± 0.20	0.547
Day 14 post-farrowing	249	4.5 ± 0.23	4.4 ± 0.25	0.661
Weaning day 21 post-farrowing	249	5.9 ± 0.31	6.0 ± 0.33	0.365
Piglets weaned per gilt	249	7.7 ± 0.4	7.8 ± 0.3	0.096

Notes: ^{a, b}Different literals indicate statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) into of row. ^& Estimated according to the prediction equations established by Mallmann et al. (2018).

Mallmann L, da Silva OG, Zacarias RJ, Basquera BF, Pereira FD, Ghiggi FJE, Andretta I, da Rosa UR, Gonçalves MAP, Pandolfo BF. 2018. Proposal of equations for predicting post-farrowing sow weight. Acta Sci Vet. 46:1574. doi:10.22456/1679-9216.83867.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar