Table 3.
Effects of dietary algal protein supplementation and ETEC infection on erythrogram parameters in weanling pigs1
| Uninfected | ETEC-infected | Model P-value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Item | NC | PC | OA | SEM | DPI × TRT |
| DPI 0 | |||||
| RBC, ×106 cells/µL | 6.41 | 6.65 | 6.56 | 0.124 | 0.375 |
| HGB, g/dL | 12.5 | 12.5 | 12.5 | 0.248 | 0.989 |
| HCT, % | 39.1 | 39.1 | 38.9 | 0.741 | 0.955 |
| MCV, fl | 61.0 | 58.8 | 59.3 | 0.735 | 0.089 |
| MCH, pg | 19.5 | 18.7 | 19.0 | 0.249 | 0.093 |
| MCHC, g/dL | 32.0 | 31.8 | 32.1 | 0.161 | 0.511 |
| DPI 7 | |||||
| RBC, ×106 cells/µL | 5.95b | 6.32a | 5.90b | 0.143 | 0.049 |
| HGB, g/dL | 11.4 | 11.5 | 10.8 | 0.287 | 0.180 |
| HCT, % | 36.2 | 35.3 | 33.8 | 0.855 | 0.125 |
| MCV, fl | 60.9a | 56.0b | 57.4b | 0.848 | <0.001 |
| MCH, pg | 19.1a | 18.2b | 18.3b | 0.288 | 0.034 |
| MCHC, g/dL | 31.4c | 32.5a | 32.0b | 0.186 | <0.001 |
| DPI 10 | |||||
| RBC, ×106 cells/µL | 5.57 | 5.93 | 5.56 | 0.157 | 0.134 |
| HGB, g/dL | 10.6 | 10.3 | 9.99 | 0.314 | 0.390 |
| HCT, % | 34.3 | 32.4 | 32.1 | 0.937 | 0.137 |
| MCV, fl | 59.3a | 55.7b | 57.7b | 0.929 | <0.001 |
| MCH, pg | 18.9a | 17.7b | 18.0b | 0.315 | 0.005 |
| MCHC, g/dL | 30.8b | 31.8a | 31.1b | 0.203 | 0.002 |
1Values represent least square means of 4 to 8 pigs per treatment. All pigs were started on their assigned dietary treatment starting at –10 DPI. Experimental treatments: NC, sham-inoculated pigs receiving 1.0% wild-type algal protein; PC, ETEC-inoculated pigs receiving 1.0% wild-type algal protein; OA, ETEC-inoculated pigs receiving 1.0% OPN-enriched algal protein. Abbreviations: ETEC, enterotoxigenic E. coli; DPI = days postinoculation; TRT, treatment; RBC, red blood cell; HGB, hemoglobin; HCT, hematocrit; MCV, mean cell volume; MCH, mean corpuscular hemoglobin; MCHC, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration.
a–cMeans without a common superscript letter within a single time-point differ (P < 0.05).