. 2024 Feb 9;22(2):e8579. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8579

TABLE 2.

Effects of Xygest™ HT on the performance and energy utilisation of sows.

Trial	Groups	Daily feed intake lactation	Body weight loss ¹	Backfat loss ¹	Weaning‐to‐oestrus interval	ATTD GE ²
Trial	Groups	Daily feed intake lactation	Body weight loss ¹	Backfat loss ¹	Weaning‐to‐oestrus interval	Gestation	Lactation
	(U/kg feed)	(kg)	(kg)	(mm)	(days)	%	%
1	0 45,000 90,000 13,500,000	2.6 ³ 2.6 2.6 2.6	39.0 46.4 42.2 38.6	3.6 3.8 2.6 3.7	n/a	80.5 80.1 80.6 80.9	83.8 84.2 84.4 84.4
2	0 45,000 90,000	5.1 5.7 4.6	22.6 10.7 25.1	2.8 1.9 3.3	n/a	n/a	77.5^b 80.9^a 82.3^a
3	0 45,000	6.7^b 7.2^a	52.5^a 38.7^b	6.0^a 4.5^b	7.9 6.9	n/a	n/a
4	0 45,000	5.2 5.2	1.8 4.7	3.1 3.4	4.3 4.5	75.6 75.4	83.9^b 84.8^a

^{^a,b,c}

Mean values between the respective control and treatment within a column with a different superscript are significantly different p < 0.05.

^¹

Body weight loss for all trials, values calculated for the lactation period (from farrow to weaning); Backfat loss – trial 1 and 2, values are calculated for the lactation period; for trial 3 and 4, values calculated for the whole period (−1 to 4 weeks post‐farrowing and −3 to 3 post‐farrowing).

^²

Apparent total tract digestibility of gross energy.

^³

Feed amounts provided to the sows were restricted during gestation and lactation.