Table 1.
Chemical composition of alfalfa and alfalfa silage.
Table 2.
The ingredients and chemical composition of the commercial diet (feed A), alfalfa diet (feed B), and alfalfa silage diet (feed C) formulated for the experiment.
Fig 1.
All DLY pigs had ad libitum access to feed and water throughout the 60-day experimental period. Animals were randomly assigned to one of three dietary treatments (n = 8 per group), with each group comprising 4 barrows and 4 gilts: Group A – commercial feed; Group B – commercial feed with 8% alfalfa meal substitution; Group C – commercial feed with 8% alfalfa silage meal substitution. Daily measurement of weight, feed intake and feeding time was recorded by the station and further use for FCR analysis and feeding behavior analysis.
Table 3.
Summary of fixed effects from linear mixed-effects models assessing the impact of feed treatment on pig weight, feed intake and feed intake/body weight.
Fig 2.
Growth and feed intake trends over time.
During the 60-day fattening period, DLY pigs exhibited a general increase in body weight and daily feed intake. In contrast, feed intake relative to body weight displayed variable patterns over time.
Table 4.
Below table showed how FCR changed across time (every two weeks) for pigs on different diets, based on GAMMs.
Fig 3.
FCR dynamics at biweekly intervals.
FCR generally increased over time in pigs fed commercial feed (Feed A). In contrast, pigs fed alfalfa (Feed B) or alfalfa silage (Feed C) exhibited a temporary decrease in FCR between weeks 4 and 6.
Fig 4.
Change rate of FCR by feed type.
The rate of FCR change remained positive in the commercial feed group (Feed A), whereas negative change rates were observed in both the alfalfa (Feed B) and alfalfa silage (Feed C) groups between weeks 4 and 6.
Fig 5.
Comparative FCR trajectories across feed types.
Average FCR was significantly lower (P < 0.05) in the commercial feed group (Feed A) than in the alfalfa (Feed B) and alfalfa silage (Feed C) groups between weeks 2.8 and 5.2. Conversely, Feed A exhibited significantly higher FCR (P < 0.05) than both alternative diets between weeks 6.6 and 8. Additionally, Feed B showed significantly lower FCR than Feed C between weeks 1.0 and 2.4.
Table 5.
Effects of feed treatment on pig feeding hour: linear mixed model and circular statistics results.
Fig 6.
A line chart showing feeding time shifts by diet.
The feeding time of pigs fed commercial feed (Feed A) and alfalfa feed (Feed B) remained around 1:22 PM. In contrast, pigs fed alfalfa silage (Feed C) began feeding earlier, with their feeding time shifting to approximately 10:15 AM within the first five days of the trial.
Fig 7.
Distribution of feeding hours by feed type.
Circular plots indicated that pigs fed commercial feed (Feed A) and alfalfa feed (Feed B) exhibited clustered feeding around 2 PM, while those fed alfalfa silage (Feed C) showed more dispersed feeding times, reflecting greater variability in feeding behavior.
Fig 8.
Summary of dietary effects on pig performance.
Partial replacement of commercial feed with 8% alfalfa or alfalfa silage did not significantly alter most growth or feeding behavior parameters. Alfalfa-based diets resulted in poorer FCR during mid-fattening but improved FCR in later stages. Alfalfa silage feed advanced the timing of feed intake by approximately three hours, indicating behavioral changes without compromising overall performance.