Table 4.

Effect fish oil inclusion in low protein quality diets on rectal temperature of pigs that received LPS or saline on day 21 after weaning

	Dietary treatment1						LPS challenge2			P-values3
Item	High	Low0	Low1.25	Low2.5	Low5	SEM4	+	−	SEM5	Diet	LPS	Linear	Quadratic
Hour after challenge
0 h	103.0ab	102.6ab	103.1b	102.9ab	102.5a	0.2	102.9	103.0	0.1	0.027	0.034	0.240	0.010
1 h	104.3	104.1	104.2	103.8	103.9	0.2	104.9	103.2	0.1	0.365	<0.001	0.278	0.763
2 h	104.5b	104.3ab	104.1ab	103.9ab	103.8a	0.2	105.4	102.9	0.1	0.048	<0.001	0.036	0.356
3 h	104.2	104.0	104.2	103.7	103.8	0.2	105.3	102.7	0.1	0.262	<0.001	0.315	0.706

¹Dietary treatments: [1] positive control (High; contained multiple sources of proteins, including animal proteins and 5% corn oil), [2] negative control (Low0; contained soybean meal as the main protein source and 5% corn oil), or 1 of 3 Low diets supplemented with increasing levels of fish oil to replace corn oil: [3] 1.25% fish oil (Low1.25), [4] 2.5% fish oil (Low2.5), [5] 5% fish oil (Low5) fed in 2 phases (7 and 14 d, respectively). All pigs received common phase III diets thereafter for 3 wk. Each mean represents observations on 24 pigs for dietary treatment and 60 pigs for LPS challenge (+/−).

²LSmeans for the main effect of LPS challenge.

³ P-values for the main effects of dietary treatment and LPS challenge, and for the linear and quadratic contrasts of supplementing Low diets with increasing levels of fish oil. The interactions between dietary treatment and LPS challenge, or dietary treatment and time after LPS challenge were not significant, therefore are not presented.

⁴Maximum value of standard error of the means for dietary treatment.

⁵Maximum value of standard error of the means for LPS challenge.

^a,bValues with different letters within the same row differ (P < 0.05).