Influence of source and micronization of soya bean meal on growth performance, nutrient digestibility and ileal mucosal morphology of Iberian piglets

The effects of inclusion in the diet of different sources of soya bean meal (SBM) on growth performance, total tract apparent digestibility (TTAD) and apparent ileal digestibility (AID) of major dietary components and mucosal ileum morphology were studied in Iberian pigs weaned at 30 days of age. From 30 to 51 days of age (phase I), there was a control diet based on regular soya bean meal (R-SBM; 44% CP) of Argentina (ARG) origin and five extra diets in which a high-protein soya bean meal (HP-SBM; 49% CP) of the USA or ARG origin, either ground (990 μm) or micronized (60 μm), or a soya protein concentrate (SPC; 65% CP) substituted the R-SBM. From 51 to 61 days of age (phase II), all pigs were fed a common commercial diet in mash form. The following pre-planned orthogonal contrasts were conducted: (1) R-SBM v. all the other diets, (2) SPC v. all the HP-SBM diets, (3) micronized HP-SBM v. ground HP-SBM, (4) HP-SBM of ARG origin v. HP-SBM of US origin and (5) interaction between source and the degree of grinding of the HP-SBM. Dietary treatment did not affect growth performance of the pigs at any age but from 30 to 51 days of age, post weaning diarrhoea (PWD) was higher (P<0.001) and the TTAD and AID of all nutrients were lower for pigs fed the R-SBM diet than for pigs fed the HP-SBM or the SPC diets. However, no differences between the HP-SBM and the SPC containing diets were detected for any trait. The TTAD of organic matter (P=0.07) and gross energy (GE) (P=0.05) tended to be higher for the micronized HP-SBM than for the ground HP-SBM and that of GE was higher (P<0.05) for US meal than for the ARG meal. Pigs fed R-SBM had lower villus height (P<0.01) than pigs fed HP-SBM or SPC but no differences in ileal mucosal morphology were detected between SPC and HP-SBM containing diets. It is concluded that feeding the HP-SBM or SPC-reduced PWD and improved nutrient digestibility and ileal morphology as compared with feeding the R-SBM, but had no effect on pig performance. T