University of Nebraska researcher
Dr. Michael C. Brumm echoes the Kansas researchers concern
about feed waste. "If I am going to spend an average of $.06 a pound
on feed, I want it to detour through the pig not take the
direct route into the pit," quips Brumm.
Brumm says producers should
choose a feeder design with a wide, deep pan. He notes University
of Illinois research that showed that pigs should have enough room
to allow the pig to use his natural eating posture. "If you restrict
the pigs natural eating movement, feed waste will increase,"
emphasizes Brumm.
He also shares the KSU researchers' opinions that
new, state-of-the-art feeders will pay for themselves quickly because
of feed savings. Bottom line? "Feed efficiency can only get as good
as your feeder will allow," he says. "And many people should consider
replacing their feeders in their drive to improve feed efficiency."
Farmweld feeders routinely contribute
to outstanding feed conversions. Here is an example from a
1997 University of Nebraska drinker selection study.
Drinker
Type
Water
Disappearance (Gallons/Pig/Day)
Average
Daily Gain (Lbs)
Feed:Gain
Swinging Nipple Waterer
w/ Farmweld Jumbo Feeder
1.33
1.83
2.55
Farmweld DRIK-O-MAT Water Cup w/Farmweld
Jumbo Feeder
1.00
1.81
2.49
p values
.060
>.10
.095
According to researcher Dr. Micheal C. Brumm, p values
>.10 are not significant for these types of trials. Diets
contained five percent added fat.