Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40244229›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2025

Restricted vs. ad libitum feeding during sow gestation affects piglet performance, behavior, and fecal microbiota composition.

Marinus F W Te Pas, Marion Kluivers-Poodt, Johan W van Riel, Dirkjan Schokker, Johanna M J Rebel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Marinus F W Te PasAnimal Breeding and Genetics, Wageningen Livestock Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8849-3011
Marion Kluivers-PoodtAnimal Ecology, Wageningen Environmental Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Johan W van RielAnimal Breeding and Genetics, Wageningen Livestock Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Dirkjan SchokkerEpidemiology, Bioinformatic, Animal models, and Vaccine Development, Wageningen Bioveterinary Research, Lelystad, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6082-7227
Johanna M J RebelEpidemiology, Bioinformatic, Animal models, and Vaccine Development, Wageningen Bioveterinary Research, Lelystad, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4765-4215

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study investigated how the nutrition of gestating sows affects piglet performance, behavior, and fecal microbiota. Twenty-four sows were divided into 2 feeding groups: those on a restricted diet (once a day) and those fed ad libitum (as much as they wanted), with all receiving the same diet during lactation. The piglets were categorized based on their feeding groups; RG-RL: Piglets born and nursed by restricted-fed sows with restricted feeding, AG-AL: Piglets born and nursed by ad lib-fed sows, RG-AL: Piglets born by restricted-fed sows and nursed by ad lib-fed sows, and AG-RL: Piglets born by ad lib-fed sows and nursed by restricted-fed sows. Performance traits were analyzed using the model including treatment, switching piglets, and room effects. Piglet behavior was evaluated with a generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) using binomial distribution, testing interactions of treatment, switching, gender, and other factors while accounting for random effects related to room, pen, and sow. Results showed that ad lib-fed sows had higher feed intake (P < 0.001), weight gain (P = 0.04), and backfat gain (P = 0.01) compared to restricted-fed sows. They also had lower cortisol levels during gestation (P = 0.02) and lactation (P = 0.04). Restricted-fed sows displayed more air-chewing behavior (P = 0.002), while ad lib-fed sows were more active (P = 0.03) and engaged in eating (P < 0.001). Birth weights and the number of piglets were similar across groups. During lactation, backfat loss varied among piglet groups, with the highest loss in AG-RL (P < 0.01). Piglets from ad lib-fed sows performed better overall, regardless of nursing source. At weaning, piglet weights (P = 0.01) were highest in AG-AL, followed by RG-AL, RG-RL, and AG-RL (interaction effect P = 0.006). Switching piglets initially reduced their playtime but later increased it (P = 0.04). The novel object test indicated that gilts became more active, resembling boars. Additionally, gut microbiota composition varied among sow groups during gestation (P = 0.04) and lactation (P = 0.02), suggesting that maternal diet influences piglet gut health. Overall, these findings highlight the potential role of epigenetic mechanisms in shaping these traits.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalFecesFood DeprivationGastrointestinal MicrobiomeSus scrofaAnimal FeedAnimal Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaAnimalsAnimals, NewbornDietFemaleLactationMalePregnancySwineepigenetic effectsgestationlactationpig (Sus scrofa)sow feeding

Identifiers

PMID40244229
PMCPMC12124256

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.