Table 7.

Impact of diet energy and nutrient levels on carcass-based grow-finish growth performance, experiment 2¹

	Treatment2						P value
Item	PC	NC	1,000 FTU phytase/kg	1,750 FTU phytase/kg	2,500 FTU phytase/kg	SEM	PC vs. NC3	NC vs. SD4
HCW, kg5	92.96	89.01	90.03	89.81	89.90	0.652	<0.001	0.043
Dressing percent, %6,7	74.54	74.03	74.22	74.00	73.76	0.172	0.032	0.832
ADG, kg7	0.738	0.695	0.708	0.702	0.704	0.005	<0.001	0.067
G:F8	0.270	0.256	0.257	0.260	0.258	0.001	<0.001	0.040
Full value pig, %7,9	96.35	97.40	97.74	96.60	96.35	0.869	0.379	0.605
Energy efficiency, kg gain/Mcal ME or NE10
ME8	0.076	0.072	0.073	0.074	0.073	0.0004	<0.001	0.033
NE8	0.099	0.095	0.096	0.097	0.096	0.0005	<0.001	0.033

¹Data are least square means; n = 20 pens per treatment with 19 to 24 pigs per pen, split by sex with 50 pens of gilts and 50 pens of barrows; 98-d trial.

²The NC was formulated to contain 12% less SID lysine with relative lowering of all other AA, plus 0.75 percentage points less added fat. Both PC and NC contained 250 FTU phytase/kg.

³Linear contrast of PC vs. NC.

⁴Comparison of NC vs. mean of three super-dosing treatments.

⁵Data not shown: sex × treatment, P < 0.10.

⁶Dressing percentage: (HCW / live weight) × 100.

⁷Data not shown: sex × treatment, P > 0.10.

⁸Data not shown: sex × treatment, P < 0.05.

⁹Full value pig: ([number of pigs put on trial − total dead or removed] / number of pigs put on trial) × 100.

¹⁰Energy efficiency calculated as: ADG / (ME or NE of diet × ADFI).