Table 4.

Effects of feeding program on fecal score in weaning pigs

Items	TRT11)	TRT21)	TRT31)	TRT41)	TRT51)	TRT61)	TRT71)	TRT81)	SEM	p-value2)
	High nutrition density				Low nutrition density					Probiotics	Feed type	Nutrition density	Probiotics × feed type	Feed type × nutrition density	Probiotics × nutrition density	Interaction
	Dry type		Wet type		Dry type		Wet type
	NC	Probiotics	NC	Probiotics	NC	Probiotics	NC	Probiotics
Fecal score3)
0–5 d	2.5	2.9	2.7	2.8	2.9	2.8	2.9	3.0	0.09	0.039	0.229	0.099	0.624	1.000	0.063	0.229
5–15 d	3.1	2.9	2.9	3.0	3.1	3.0	3.0	3.0	0.06	0.476	0.290	0.476	0.720	0.021	0.476	0.290
15–25 d	3.2	3.0	3.0	3.2	3.3	3.0	3.0	3.1	0.08	0.650	0.184	0.650	0.650	0.003	0.880	0.650

SEM, pooled Standard error of means; NC, negative control.

¹⁾TRT1, high nutrition density feed × dry type × none; TRT2, high nutrition density feed × dry type × probiotics; TRT3, high nutrition density feed × wet type × none; TRT4, high nutrition density feed × wet type × probiotics; TRT5, low nutrition density feed × dry type × none; TRT6, low nutrition density feed × dry type × probiotics; TRT7, low nutrition density feed × wet type × none; TRT8, low nutrition density feed × wet type × probiotics.

²⁾p<0.05 was considered statistically significant, whereas p<0.10 was considered a tendency.

³⁾Fecal scores were determined using the following fecal scoring system: 1 hard, dry pellet; 2 firm, formed stool; 3 soft, moist stool that retains shape; 4 soft, unformed stool that assumes shape of container; 5 watery liquid that can be poured.