Table 3.
The effect of GSM diet on performance of DSS-treated piglets.
| Experimental group* | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | DSS | GSM | DSS+GSM | p-value | p-value | p-value | |
| (DSS effect) | (GSM effect) | (DSS × GSM effect) | |||||
| ADG (g) | 494.1 ± 53.4 | 435.7 ± 91.0 | 432.1 ± 23.3 | 457.1 ± 52 | 0.693 | 0.765 | 0.362 |
| ADFI (g/day/pig) | 0.825 ± 0.04 | 0.925 ± 0.05 | 0.820 ± 0.04 | 0.856 ± 0.05 | 0.358 | 0.160 | 0.100 |
| Initial BW (kg) | 9.08 ± 0.20 | 9.00 ± 0.30 | 9.08 ± 0.30 | 9.00 ± 0.30 | 0.943 | 0.830 | 0.830 |
| Final BW (kg) | 22.92 ± 1.50 | 21.20 ± 2.40 | 21.10 ± 0.80 | 21.80 ± 1.6 | 0.261 | 0.922 | 0.122 |
| FE (feed:gain) | 1.797 | 2.120 | 1.898 | 1.873 | 0.466 | 0.992 | 0.889 |
*
Pigs were fed for 30 days with a control diet or a diet including 8% GSM and challenged or not with DSS. Values are represented as the mean ± SEM (Control group, n = 6; DSS group, n = 5; GSM group, n = 6; DSS + GSM group, n = 5); DSS, dextran sulfate; GSM, grape seed meal; ADFI, average daily feed intake; ADG, average daily gain; FE, feed conversion ratio.