Effect of spineless cactus intake (Opuntia ficus-indica) on blood glucose levels in lactating sows and its impact on feed intake, body weight loss, and weaning-estrus interval

14Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The effect of spineless cactus intake (Opuntia ficus-indica) on blood glucose (BG) levels in lactating sows and its impact on daily and total feed intake (dFI−1 and TFI, respectively), body weight loss (BWL), and weaning-estrus interval length (WEI) were evaluated. Thirty-four hybrid (Yorkshire × Landrace × Pietrain) sows in lactation phase were used. Sows were divided into two groups: G1 (n = 17) where they received commercial feed and G2 (n = 17) provided with commercial feed plus an average of 2.0 ± 0.5 kg spineless cactus, based on a sow’s body weight. The variables evaluated were BG, dFI−1, TFI, BWL, and WEI. Statistical analysis was performed by using a fixed and mixed model methodology, under a repeated measurements experiment. Group effects were found on all analyzed variables (P < 0.05). The BG was lower in G2 (55.2 and 64.5 mg/dL pre- and post-prandial, respectively), compared to that in G1 (70.9 and 80.1 mg/dL pre- and post-prandial, respectively) (P < 0.05). G2 showed better performance than G1 for dFI−1, BWL, and WEI (P < 0.05) whose averages were 5.5 ± 1.8 kg, 7.4 ± 4.5%, and 5.3 ± 1.2 days, respectively. Averages for these variables in G1 were 4.7 ± 1.5 kg, 16.8 ± 4.6%, and 6.1 ± 1.6 days, respectively. Intake of spineless cactus reduced BG levels in lactating sows, generating greater dFI−1, lower BWL at the end of lactation, and a lower WEI.

Author supplied keywords

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ordaz-Ochoa, G., Juárez-Caratachea, A., Pérez-Sánchez, R. E., Román-Bravo, R. M., & Ortiz-Rodríguez, R. (2017). Effect of spineless cactus intake (Opuntia ficus-indica) on blood glucose levels in lactating sows and its impact on feed intake, body weight loss, and weaning-estrus interval. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 49(5), 1025–1033. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-017-1295-7

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free