In Focus: Research Article

Effect of breed type, housing and feeding system on performance of growing pigs managed under organic conditions

  1. Hilary RC Kelly1,
  2. Helen M Browning2,
  3. Jon EL Day3,
  4. Anne Martins3,
  5. Gareth P Pearce4,†,
  6. Christopher Stopes5,
  7. Sandra A Edwards1,*

Article first published online: 17 SEP 2007

DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.3060

Issue

Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture

Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture

Volume 87, Issue 15, pages 2794–2800, December 2007

Additional Information

How to Cite

Kelly, H. R., Browning, H. M., Day, J. E., Martins, A., Pearce, G. P., Stopes, C. and Edwards, S. A. (2007), Effect of breed type, housing and feeding system on performance of growing pigs managed under organic conditions. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 87: 2794–2800. doi: 10.1002/jsfa.3060

Author Information

  1. 1

    School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE1 7RU, UK

  2. 2

    Eastbrook Farm, Bishopstone, Swindon SN6 8PW, UK

  3. 3

    ADAS, Woodthorne, Wergs Road, Wolverhampton WV6 8TQ, UK

  4. 4

    Department of Agriculture, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB24 5UA, UK

  5. 5

    EcoS Consultancy, Wood End, Garden Close Lane, Newbury RG14 6PP, UK

  1. †

    Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0ES, UK

*School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE1 7RU, UK.

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 9 NOV 2007
  2. Article first published online: 17 SEP 2007
  3. Manuscript Accepted: 6 JUL 2007
  4. Manuscript Revised: 26 JUN 2007
  5. Manuscript Received: 19 OCT 2006

Funded by

  • DEFRA. Grant Number: OF0169
  • PIC
  • Tesco

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (130K)

Keywords:

  • pig;
  • organic;
  • breed;
  • housing;
  • feeding

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is a need for information on the performance and carcass quality of pigs under different organic management systems. This study compared Duroc-sired progeny from three maternal breed types when kept either at pasture or in housing with an outdoor run and offered ad libitum concentrate either alone or with fodder beet or grass/clover silage as additional forage.

RESULTS: Liveweight gain, feed intake and the proportion of forages consumed did not differ between genotypes. Carcass fatness of progeny was lowest for a ‘modern’ genotype (Camborough 12) and highest for a ‘traditional’ purebred genotype (Saddleback), with a ‘crossbred traditional’ genotype (Saddleback × Duroc) being intermediate (11.4, 14.3 and 13.4 mm P2 respectively, standard error of mean (SEM) 0.27, P < 0.001). With a cereal-based concentrate available ad libitum, intake of forages was low (<2% of dry matter intake). Although growth rate did not differ between housing systems, daily feed intake was greater at pasture (2.47 vs 2.22 kg meal equivalent, SEM 0.05, P < 0.001), giving poorer feed efficiency (P < 0.01). Pastured animals consumed less additional forage and had a higher killing-out % but similar carcass fatness.

CONCLUSION: For organic pig production to be financially sustainable, disadvantages arising from the genotype and/or rearing system chosen need to be offset by a market premium for the pigs produced. Copyright © 2007 Society of Chemical Industry

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (130K)