Table 3.

Apparent digestibility of nutrients of weaned pigs treated with KR-32 after challenged with or without enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) K88

Item	Exp. 1				Exp. 2
	Treatment group1		SEM	P-value	Treatment group2			SEM	P-value
	CON-1	APK			CON-2	K88	K88+APK
OM, %	77.11	76.48	0.56	0.637	75.66	69.31	74.23	1.37	0.129
CP, %	70.33	71.33	0.68	0.539	69.66a	54.06b	63.50c	2.39	<0.01
Crude fat, %	69.23	70.54	1.27	0.662	71.03a	51.62b	67.01a	3.50	0.024
Ca, %	53.10	50.13	1.75	0.459	56.92	40.24	43.58	0.04	0.141
P, %	47.10	46.61	1.31	0.874	45.33	32.33	37.67	3.04	0.228

^a–cMeans within a row with different superscripts differ (P < 0.05).

¹CON-1 = piglets with an intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection of an equivalent volume (1 mL) of PBS; APK = piglets with an i.p. injection of antimicrobial peptide KR-32. n = 6 for the CON-1 group and n = 6 for the APK group.

²CON-2 = piglets with an oral administration of fresh Luria–Bertani broth (50 mL) followed by an i.p. injection of an equivalent volume of PBS; K88 = piglets orally challenged with 1 × 10¹⁰ cfu ETEC K88 on day 1 followed by an i.p. injection of an equivalent volume (1 mL) of PBS; K88 + APK = piglets orally challenged with 1 × 10¹⁰ cfu ETEC K88 on day 1 followed by an i.p. injection of 0.6 mg/kg KR-32. n = 6 for the CON-2 group, n = 5 for the K88 group, and n = 5 for the K88 + APK group.