A total of 882 pigs (PIC TR4 × [Fast LW × PIC L02]; initially 33.2 ± 0.31 kg) were used in a 112-d study to evaluate the effects of different bones and analytical methods on the assessment of bone mineralization response to changes in dietary P, phytase, and vitamin D in growing pigs. Pens of pigs (20 pigs per pen) were randomized to one of five dietary treatments with nine pens per treatment. Dietary treatments were designed to create differences in bone mineralization and included: 1) P at 80% of NRC (2012) standardized total tract digestible (STTD) P requirement, 2) NRC STTD P with no phytase, 3) NRC STTD P with phytase providing an assumed release of 0.14% STTD P from 2,000 FYT/kg, 4) high STTD P (128% of the NRC P) using monocalcium phosphate and phytase, and 5) diet 4 with additional vitamin D3 from 25(OH)D3. On day 112, one pig per pen was euthanized for bone, blood, and urine analysis. Additionally, 11 pigs identified as having poor body condition which indicated a history of low feed intake (unhealthy) were sampled. There were no differences between treatments for final body weight, average daily gain, average daily feed intake, gain to feed, or bone ash measurements (treatment × bone interaction) regardless of bone ash method. The response to treatment for bone density and bone mineral content was dependent upon the bone sampled (density interaction, P = 0.053; mineral interaction, P = 0.078). For 10th rib bone density, pigs fed high levels of P had increased (P < 0.05) bone density compared with pigs fed NRC levels with phytase, with pigs fed deficient P, NRC levels of P with no phytase, and high STTD P with extra 25(OH)D3 intermediate, with no differences for metacarpals, fibulas, or 2nd ribs. Pigs fed extra vitamin D from 25(OH)D3 had increased (P < 0.05) 10th rib bone mineral content compared with pigs fed deficient P and NRC levels of P with phytase, with pigs fed industry P and vitamin D, and NRC P with monocalcium intermediate. Healthy pigs had greater (P < 0.05) serum Ca, P, vitamin D concentrations, and defatted bone ash than those unhealthy, with no difference between the two health statuses for non-defatted bone ash. In summary, differences between bone ash procedures were more apparent than differences between diets. Differences in bone density and mineral content in response to dietary P and vitamin D were most apparent with 10th ribs.
Keywords: bone mineralization; calcium; finishing pigs; growth performance; phosphorus; vitamin D.
Lameness is defined as impaired movement or deviation from normal gait. The evaluation of bone mineralization can be an important component of a diagnostic investigation of lameness. Lameness in growing pigs can cause an increase in morbidity and mortality, which leads to economic losses and animal welfare concerns for producers. Calcium and P are the primary minerals in skeletal tissue and their deficiency is considered to be one of the causes of lameness. To evaluate bone mineralization, it is important to know the differences between methodologies used to determine bone ash and the expected differences between the bones analyzed. Furthermore, there has been limited data comparing bone mineralization and serum Ca and P concentrations between healthy pigs and those exhibiting clinical signs of illness (unhealthy). By removing the lipid in the bone (defatting) before the bone is ashed, variation across bones is decreased compared with not removing lipid before ashing (non-defatted). The reduction in variation across bones allows for more differences to be detected among dietary treatments and health statuses of pigs. The 10th rib is more sensitive to detect dietary differences using bone density than metacarpals, fibulas, and 2nd ribs. When comparing healthy vs. unhealthy pigs exhibiting clinical signs of illness, healthy pigs have increased defatted percentage bone ash and serum Ca, P, and vitamin D.
© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact [email protected] for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact [email protected].