Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40423547›Full record

ReviewJournal of animal science2025

Technologies and practices to improve feed and nutrient utilization by pigs.

Ron Aldwin S Navales, Mike D Tokach, Joel M DeRouchey, Katelyn N Gaffield, Jason C Woodworth, Robert D Goodband, Jordan T Gebhardt, Russell M Euken, Jack C M Dekkers

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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. Review
  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

9 authors.

Ron Aldwin S NavalesDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-0201, USA.
Mike D TokachDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-0201, USA.
Joel M DeRoucheyDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-0201, USA.
Katelyn N GaffieldDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-0201, USA.
Jason C WoodworthDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-0201, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7268-4278
Robert D GoodbandDepartment of Animal Sciences and Industry, College of Agriculture, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-0201, USA.
Jordan T GebhardtDepartment of Diagnostic Medicine/Pathobiology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-0201, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6144-6714
Russell M EukenDepartment of Animal Science, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-3150, USA.
Jack C M DekkersDepartment of Animal Science, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-3150, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1557-7577

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review aims to summarize the current practices producers can use to improve feed and nutrient utilization with a focus on providing critical information for use within future life cycle assessments of the swine industry. Nutrient utilization by pigs can be improved by closely meeting the nutrient requirements for maintenance, growth, and reproduction, which reduces nutrient excretion. For example, N excretion can be reduced by 8% and 3.7% for every percentage unit reduction in crude protein for growing pigs and lactating sows, respectively. Similarly, reducing excess trace minerals or replacing inorganic Cu, Zn, and Mn with lower additions of organic sources can reduce excretion by 28% to 42%, 38% to 53%, and 12% to 20%, respectively. Adoption of precision feeding strategies can lower N and P excretion by at least 11%. Ingredient selection and use of feed additives that enhance nutrient digestibility are also an important component in improving feed efficiency and nutrient utilization. The use of exogenous carbohydrase and protease can improve feed efficiency by 1.8%, while phytase can enhance P digestibility by 30% to 50%. At the feed mill, feed efficiency can be improved by 1% for every 100-µm reduction in particle size and by 8% with pelleting. At the farm, management practices such as reducing overfeeding of developing gilts and sows, increasing meal frequency, and minimizing feed wastage can also improve feed utilization. For example, feed wastage is estimated to represent 5% to 6% of total feed disappearance, and feeder type can reduce this by 1% to 10%. Lastly, non-nutritional strategies to improve feed efficiency should be considered, including genetic selection, managing thermal environment, and improving herd health. Current genetic selection results in a reduction in greenhouse gas production by 0.5% to 1.5% per year. Likewise, compared to healthy pigs, disease-challenged pigs have 6.3%, 7.9%, 7.4%, 5.8%, and 5.8% greater climate change potential, soil and water acidification potential, eutrophication potential, cumulative energy demand, and land application requirements, respectively. Currently, the swine industry primarily focuses on feed and management practices that optimize growth and minimize production costs. The challenge to future swine production will be to find emerging technologies that further reduce environmental impacts while still optimizing performance and production costs.

Indexed as

Animal FeedAnimal HusbandryDietNutrientsAnimal Nutritional Physiological PhenomenaAnimalsSwineNutrientsfeed and nutrient utilizationlife cycle analysispork ecosystem

Identifiers

PMID40423547
PMCPMC12107700

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.