Contribution of L-Arginine supplementation during gestation on sow productive performance and on sow microbial faecal profile

Figures & data

Table 1. Ingredients and composition of the sows’ gestating control diet expressed on as fed^a.

Item	Units	Content
Ingredients
Corn	%	24.4
Wheat bran	%	20.0
Barley	%	14.0
Wheat	%	8.0
Dried brewers’ grains	%	8.0
Sorghum	%	7.0
Dried beet pulp	%	6.5
Soybean meal, 50 % crude protein	%	3.0
Linseed	%	2.5
Sunflower meal, 36 % crude protein	%	2.0
Calcium carbonate	%	1.5
Vitamin-mineral premix	%	1.0
Animal fat	%	1.0
Salt	%	0.4
Dicalcium phosphate	%	0.3
L-Lysine monohydrochloride	%	0.26
Threonine	%	0.09
Choline chlorydrate (at 75%)	%	0.05
Calculated Metabolisable energy	Kcal/kg	2950
Analysed composition
Crude Protein	%	14.7
Crude Fat	%	5.1
Crude Fibre	%	5.4
Ash	%	5.1
Lysine	%	0.66
Arginine	%	0.72
Cystine	%	0.28
Methionine	%	0.22
Threonine	%	0.56
Tryptophan	%	0.123
Valine	%	0.60
Isoleucine	%	0.46
Leucine	%	1.06
Tyrosine	%	0.44
Phenylalanine	%	0.62
Histidine	%	0.41
Aspartic acid	%	0.92
Glutamic acid	%	2.83
Alanine	%	0.69
Glycine	%	0.81
Proline	%	0.89
Serine	%	0.62
Free L_Arginine^b	%	Not detected
Free L-Lysine	%	0.219

^a The supplemented diet was obtained with the addition of 0.25% L-arginine.

^b Analyzed content in the supplemented diet: 0.251%.

Table 2. Influence of Agr supplementation to gestation sow on litter characteristics and survival.

Item	Mean		SEM	p-Value
	CON	ARG		Diet	Parity class	Batch
Total born alive, n	12.58	13.40	0.03	0.086	–	–
Stillborn, n	0.76	0.96	0.11	0.117	–	–
Total born, n	13.39	14.43	0.03	0.043	.107	–
Mummified, n	1.37	1.56	0.09	0.244	<.0001	–
Dead piglets d0–d3, n	1.07	0.84	0.11	0.088	.001	0.107
Dead piglets d0–d27, n	1.64	1.53	0.08	0.543	.007	0.004
Weaned, n	10.97	11.45	0.03	0.316	–	–
Stillborn/total born, %	5.73	6.75	0.12	0.260	–	–
Mummified/mummified and total born, %	9.35	9.82	0.09	0.656	<.0001	–
Dead piglets d0–d3/total post-adoption^a, %	8.32	6.84	0.11	0.172	.010	0.135
Dead piglets d0–d27/total post-adoption^a, %	13.05	12.41	0.09	0.640	.003	0.002

^a Parameters were significantly affected by the number of piglets per litter post-adoption (p < .05).

ARG: L-arginine; CON: control group.

Figure 1. Influence of Arginine supplementation to sow on percentage of IUGR piglets. IUGR: intrauterine growth retardation; ARG: L-arginine; CON: control group.

Table 3. Influence of Arginine supplementation to gestation sow on piglet and litter performance.

Item^a	Mean		SEM	p-Value
	CON	ARG		Diet	Parity Class	Batch	Litter sizepost-adoption
Piglet weight, kg	1.39	1.36	0.02	0.620	<.0001	.193	–
Piglet weight, CV^b %	22.9	22.3	0.03	0.516	<.0001	.038	–
Litter weight, kg	17.81	18.19	0.48	0.574	.007	.916	–
Piglet weight post-adoption, kg	17.18	17.59	0.36	0.420	<.0001	.643	–
Piglets weight at weaning, kg	6.29	6.31	0.08	0.880	.004	.837	.027
Litter weight at weaning, kg	68.90	69.08	1.54	0.933	<.0001	.170	<.0001
Litter ADG, kg	2.23	2.27	0.06	0.681	<.0001	.110	.0007

^a Data are referred to the subgroups of sows constituted by 62 for CON and 63 sow for ARG.

^b Coefficient of variability = standard deviation/mean of piglets within each litter × 100.

ARG: L-arginine; CON: control group.

Table 4. Influence ofArginine supplementation to sow and sow parity on piglet and litter performance.

Item^a	Diet				Parity class							Batch, p	Number of alivepiglets at birth
	CON	ARG	SEM	p	1	2	3	4	5	SE	p
Placenta weight, g	2748	2763	96.3	.904	2165	2827	3127	2917	2742	147.8	.0001	<.0001	<.0001
Gestation period, days	115.8	115.9	0.07	.213	116	115.7	115.7	116	115.9	0.12	.352	.026	<.0001

^aData are referred to total number of included sows constituted by 102 for CON and 103 sow for ARG.

ARG: L-arginine; CON: control group.

Table 5. Influence of Arginine supplementation to sow and sow parity on sow salivary Igs.

Item^a	Diet				Parity class							Batch, p	Number of alivepiglets at birth, p
	CON	ARG	SEM	p	1	2	3	4	5	SE	p
IgA, µg/mL	361	343	37	.738	275	388	419	391	285	60	.332	.223	.157
IgG, µg/mL	48.9	43	8.1	.607	36.7	61.6	41.7	42.4	47.3	12.8	.703	.578	.367

^a Data are referred to the subgroups of sows constituted by 36 for CON and 36 sow for ARG.

ARG: L-arginine; CON: control group.

Figure 2. Rarefaction curve of samples resulted by sequencing of V3–V4 regions with MiSeq platform (Illumina Inc., San Diego, Ca, USA). Diet: ARG: arginine supplementation (0.25%) to sows during gestation period (36 sows); CON: control group, fed the standard diet (36 sows).

Figure 3. Box plot of Shannon index values. Diet: ARG: arginine supplementation (0.25%) to sows during gestation period (36 sows); CON: control group, fed the standard diet (36 sows).

Figure 4. Non-metric multi-dimensional scaling (NMDS) on Bray-Curtis distances at ASVs level. Diet: ARG: arginine supplementation (0.25%) to sows during gestation period (36 sows); CON: control group, fed the standard diet (36 sows).

Table 6. Influence of Arginine supplementation to sow during gestation on sow faecal taxa abundancy.

Taxa	Name	log2FC^a	lfcSE^b	p Value	FDR
Class	Negativicutes	−0.670	0.173	<.0001	0.003
Order	Selenomonadales	−0.659	0.175	<.0001	0.005
	Aeromonadales	−1.395	0.382	<.0001	0.005
Family	Bacteroidaceae	1.779	0.366	<.0001	<0.0001
	Succinivibrionaceae	−1.395	0.374	<.0001	0.006
	Acidaminococcaceae	−0.454	0.153	.003	0.047
	Veillonellaceae	−1.848	0.622	.003	0.047
Genera	Bacteroides	1.798	0.368	<.0001	<0.0001
	Succinivibrio	−1.377	0.372	<.0001	0.019
ASV	ASV_690 Spirochaetaceae, Treponema_2	24.233	2.093	<.0001	<0.0001
	ASV_215 Prevotellaceae, Prevotella_9	−23.532	2.410	<.0001	<0.0001
	ASV_294 Ruminococcaceae, Ruminococcaceae_UCG-014	−25.107	2.829	<.0001	<0.0001

^a log2FC: log2 fold change is the effect size estimate.

^b lfcSE, standard error estimate for the log2 fold change estimate.