University of Nebraska researcher Dr. Michael
C. Brumm echoes the Kansas researchers’ concern about
feed waste. "If I am going to spend an average of $.06 a pound
on feed, I want it to detour through the pig – not take
the direct route into the pit," quips Brumm.
Brumm says producers should choose a feeder
design with a wide, deep pan. He notes University of Illinois
research that showed that pigs should have enough room to
allow the pig to use his natural eating posture. "If you restrict
the pig’s natural eating movement, feed waste will increase,"
emphasizes Brumm.
He also shares the KSU researchers' opinions
that new, state-of-the-art feeders will pay for themselves
quickly because of feed savings. Bottom line? "Feed efficiency
can only get as good as your feeder will allow," he says.
"And many people should consider replacing their feeders in
their drive to improve feed efficiency."
Farmweld feeders routinely contribute
to outstanding feed conversions. Here is an example
from a 1997 University of Nebraska drinker selection
study.
Drinker
Type
Water
Disappearance
(Gallons/Pig/Day)
Average
Daily
Gain (Lbs)
Feed:Gain
Swinging
Nipple Waterer w/ Farmweld Jumbo Feeder
1.33
1.83
2.55
Farmweld DRIK-O-MAT
Water Cup w/Farmweld Jumbo Feeder
1.00
1.81
2.49
p values
.060
>.10
.095
According to researcher Dr. Micheal C. Brumm, p
values >.10 are not significant for these types of
trials. Diets contained five percent added fat.
Return
