{"title":"Precision livestock farming for the global livestock sector","authors":"D. Berckmans, M. Guarino","doi":"10.2527/AF.2017.0101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2527/AF.2017.0101","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48645,"journal":{"name":"Animal Frontiers","volume":"7 1","pages":"4-5"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2527/AF.2017.0101","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68979698","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
has been and is expected to continue to increase. However, land available for food production is not increasing and may, in fact, be reduced in the future due to climatic changes. Furthermore, the impact of animal production on natural resources and the environment must be addressed. Thus, to produce more food for more people on less land with fewer resources, production efficiency must be increased. In other words, the performance of meat production systems must be enhanced through the use of technology. However, the use of technologies and even the need and implementation of particular technologies differ throughout the world based on production system, cultural approaches to meat consumption, and the availability of technologies themselves. Previous editions of Animal Frontiers (January and July 2013) focused on the contributions of animal production to global food security, emphasizing both agriculture in developing countries and the application of technologies in animal production. The current issue expands on those ideas with more detail regarding the use of performance-enhancing technologies in the production of meat from cattle, swine, small ruminants, poultry, and fish. This issue also strives to present the diversity of technologies employed globally. While some might find performance-enhancing technologies synonymous with animal pharmaceuticals, technologies used in animal production also encompass genetic and reproductive technologies, feed processing and additives, and animal management and production practices. The contribution of these other technological advancements in production should not be overlooked and continue to be refined. The critical need for performance-enhancing technologies is detailed in the article by Dunshea et al. (2016). They highlight technologies that reduce the amount of inputs (mainly feed) needed to produce meat, increase the amount of meat obtainable from animals, or both. These improvements directly benefit livestock producers by reducing their costs and increasing their revenues. However, consumers of meat benefit from these technologies as well as meat is less expensive and more plentiful. Less apparent, but no less meaningful, is the direct benefit to the environment of these technologies as more meat is produced with less of an environmental impact.
{"title":"The use of performance-enhancing technologies in global livestock production","authors":"A. Dilger, D. Boler","doi":"10.2527/AF.2016-0037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2527/AF.2016-0037","url":null,"abstract":"has been and is expected to continue to increase. However, land available for food production is not increasing and may, in fact, be reduced in the future due to climatic changes. Furthermore, the impact of animal production on natural resources and the environment must be addressed. Thus, to produce more food for more people on less land with fewer resources, production efficiency must be increased. In other words, the performance of meat production systems must be enhanced through the use of technology. However, the use of technologies and even the need and implementation of particular technologies differ throughout the world based on production system, cultural approaches to meat consumption, and the availability of technologies themselves. Previous editions of Animal Frontiers (January and July 2013) focused on the contributions of animal production to global food security, emphasizing both agriculture in developing countries and the application of technologies in animal production. The current issue expands on those ideas with more detail regarding the use of performance-enhancing technologies in the production of meat from cattle, swine, small ruminants, poultry, and fish. This issue also strives to present the diversity of technologies employed globally. While some might find performance-enhancing technologies synonymous with animal pharmaceuticals, technologies used in animal production also encompass genetic and reproductive technologies, feed processing and additives, and animal management and production practices. The contribution of these other technological advancements in production should not be overlooked and continue to be refined. The critical need for performance-enhancing technologies is detailed in the article by Dunshea et al. (2016). They highlight technologies that reduce the amount of inputs (mainly feed) needed to produce meat, increase the amount of meat obtainable from animals, or both. These improvements directly benefit livestock producers by reducing their costs and increasing their revenues. However, consumers of meat benefit from these technologies as well as meat is less expensive and more plentiful. Less apparent, but no less meaningful, is the direct benefit to the environment of these technologies as more meat is produced with less of an environmental impact.","PeriodicalId":48645,"journal":{"name":"Animal Frontiers","volume":"6 1","pages":"4-5"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2527/AF.2016-0037","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68979533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sheep farming is widespread worldwide. Its characteristics can adapt to areas and resources where other farming sectors could not; therefore, its economic impact should be considered (de Rancourt, 2007). Also, it aids populations in disadvantaged areas and plays an important role preventing soil desertification and maintaining the biological balance. Although in recent years, both census and consumption setbacks in developed countries have been observed, it is necessary to continue studies on lamb production to offer products of recognized quality. In Spain, as in most Mediterranean countries, evolution of the sheep sector has led to a decline in profitability of farms, high generational uncertainty, and concern following the abandonment of farming in some areas (Bernués et al., 2011a). In the Mediterranean area, more than anywhere else, consumers value the type of light lamb fed on concentrates (Beriain et al., 2000), which is considered a high quality product (Boyazoglu and Mohrand-Ferh, 2001). Any deviation in the expected weight has a negative impact on the acceptability, even if there are intraregional variations in preferences (Sañudo et al., 1996). In fact, 76% of the lambs slaughtered in Aragon, a region in northeastern Spain, have carcass weights of less than 13 kg (68% in the whole country) and, therefore, are under the light lamb designation (MAGRAMA, 2016). Current strategies in lamb production in Mediterranean areas
养羊在世界各地都很普遍。它的特点可以适应其他农业部门无法适应的地区和资源;因此，应考虑其经济影响(de Rancourt, 2007)。对贫困地区的人口具有救助作用，对防止土壤沙漠化和维持生态平衡具有重要作用。尽管近年来发达国家的人口普查和消费都出现了倒退，但仍有必要继续研究羊肉生产，以提供公认质量的产品。在西班牙，与大多数地中海国家一样，绵羊行业的发展导致农场盈利能力下降，代际不确定性高，以及一些地区放弃养殖后的担忧(bernusamas et al.， 2011)。在地中海地区，消费者比其他任何地方都更重视以精料喂养的轻质羔羊(Beriain等人，2000年)，这被认为是高质量的产品(Boyazoglu和Mohrand-Ferh, 2001年)。预期权重的任何偏差都会对可接受性产生负面影响，即使区域内偏好存在差异(Sañudo et al.， 1996)。事实上，在西班牙东北部的阿拉贡地区，屠宰的羔羊中有76%的胴体重量低于13公斤(占全国的68%)，因此属于轻型羔羊(MAGRAMA, 2016)。地中海地区羊肉生产的当前战略
{"title":"Current strategies in lamb production in Mediterranean areas","authors":"M. Campo, L. Mur, C. Fugita, C. Sañudo","doi":"10.2527/AF.2016-0041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2527/AF.2016-0041","url":null,"abstract":"Sheep farming is widespread worldwide. Its characteristics can adapt to areas and resources where other farming sectors could not; therefore, its economic impact should be considered (de Rancourt, 2007). Also, it aids populations in disadvantaged areas and plays an important role preventing soil desertification and maintaining the biological balance. Although in recent years, both census and consumption setbacks in developed countries have been observed, it is necessary to continue studies on lamb production to offer products of recognized quality. In Spain, as in most Mediterranean countries, evolution of the sheep sector has led to a decline in profitability of farms, high generational uncertainty, and concern following the abandonment of farming in some areas (Bernués et al., 2011a). In the Mediterranean area, more than anywhere else, consumers value the type of light lamb fed on concentrates (Beriain et al., 2000), which is considered a high quality product (Boyazoglu and Mohrand-Ferh, 2001). Any deviation in the expected weight has a negative impact on the acceptability, even if there are intraregional variations in preferences (Sañudo et al., 1996). In fact, 76% of the lambs slaughtered in Aragon, a region in northeastern Spain, have carcass weights of less than 13 kg (68% in the whole country) and, therefore, are under the light lamb designation (MAGRAMA, 2016). Current strategies in lamb production in Mediterranean areas","PeriodicalId":48645,"journal":{"name":"Animal Frontiers","volume":"6 1","pages":"31-36"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2527/AF.2016-0041","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68979550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Food and Agriculture Organization predicts that the global population will increase from the current 7 billion people to 9.5 billion by the year 2050 and will need 70% more meat, milk, and eggs (FAO, 2009). While the total and per capita consumption of poultry meat enjoyed the largest growth over the past decades, beef consumption also increased 18% (1990 to 2009). The livestock industry is therefore under pressure to invest in technologies that will increase efficiency, e.g., using fewer resources to produce more meat since competition for available land, water, food from plant origin, and energy intensifies due to the growing population. While technologies in the past mostly focused on improving productivity, e.g., growth rate, feed efficiency, and increased weight of the slaughter unit (Capper, 2011) at all cost (Figure 1), Capper and Hayes (2012) and other studies emphasized the importance of commitment to sustainability, consideration of environmental impact, and animal welfare to maintain the social license in a demand-driven market. When further considering that variability in palatability were the major reasons for decline in beef consumption in Australia and the USA during the 1980s and 1990s (Bindon and Jones, 2001; Howard et al., 2013), careless utilization of technologies that impact negatively on eating quality will influence the consumer’s attitude toward beef. Performance-enhancing technologies may include genetics, feed technologies and feeding strategies, growth-enhancing substances, and management strategies to mention some but not all. We focused on selected technologies that enhance performance, but at the same time, we also considered their relationships to sustainability, animal welfare, and product quality.
联合国粮农组织预测，到2050年，全球人口将从目前的70亿增加到95亿，对肉类、牛奶和鸡蛋的需求将增加70%(粮农组织，2009年)。在过去几十年中，禽肉的总消费量和人均消费量增长最快，而牛肉消费量也增长了18%(1990年至2009年)。因此，畜牧业面临着投资于提高效率的技术的压力，例如，由于人口增长，对可用土地、水、植物来源的食物和能源的竞争加剧，因此使用更少的资源生产更多的肉。虽然过去的技术主要集中在不惜一切代价提高生产率，例如生长率、饲料效率和屠宰单位体重的增加(Capper, 2011)(图1)，但Capper和Hayes(2012)和其他研究强调了在需求驱动的市场中承诺可持续性、考虑环境影响和动物福利以维持社会许可的重要性。进一步考虑到适口性的变化是20世纪80年代和90年代澳大利亚和美国牛肉消费量下降的主要原因(宾登和琼斯，2001;Howard et al.， 2013)，粗心地使用对食用质量产生负面影响的技术将影响消费者对牛肉的态度。提高性能的技术可能包括遗传学，饲料技术和饲养策略，生长促进物质和管理策略，仅提一些，但不是全部。我们专注于提高性能的选定技术，但同时，我们也考虑了它们与可持续性、动物福利和产品质量的关系。
{"title":"Performance-enhancing technologies of beef production","authors":"P. Strydom","doi":"10.2527/AF.2016-0040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2527/AF.2016-0040","url":null,"abstract":"The Food and Agriculture Organization predicts that the global population will increase from the current 7 billion people to 9.5 billion by the year 2050 and will need 70% more meat, milk, and eggs (FAO, 2009). While the total and per capita consumption of poultry meat enjoyed the largest growth over the past decades, beef consumption also increased 18% (1990 to 2009). The livestock industry is therefore under pressure to invest in technologies that will increase efficiency, e.g., using fewer resources to produce more meat since competition for available land, water, food from plant origin, and energy intensifies due to the growing population. While technologies in the past mostly focused on improving productivity, e.g., growth rate, feed efficiency, and increased weight of the slaughter unit (Capper, 2011) at all cost (Figure 1), Capper and Hayes (2012) and other studies emphasized the importance of commitment to sustainability, consideration of environmental impact, and animal welfare to maintain the social license in a demand-driven market. When further considering that variability in palatability were the major reasons for decline in beef consumption in Australia and the USA during the 1980s and 1990s (Bindon and Jones, 2001; Howard et al., 2013), careless utilization of technologies that impact negatively on eating quality will influence the consumer’s attitude toward beef. Performance-enhancing technologies may include genetics, feed technologies and feeding strategies, growth-enhancing substances, and management strategies to mention some but not all. We focused on selected technologies that enhance performance, but at the same time, we also considered their relationships to sustainability, animal welfare, and product quality.","PeriodicalId":48645,"journal":{"name":"Animal Frontiers","volume":"6 1","pages":"22-30"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2527/AF.2016-0040","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68979543","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations defines aquaculture as farming of aquatic organisms including fish, mollusks, crustaceans, and aquatic plants where farming implies some form of intervention in the rearing process and individual or corporate ownership of the stock being cultivated (FAO, 1988). In a recent report, the Food and Agriculture Organization emphasized the importance of enhancing aquaculture production to meet the daunting challenge of feeding a global population expected to reach 9.6 billion people by 2050 (FAO, 2014). At present, increases in fish production globally outpace population growth, largely due to important advances in aquaculture production. As a result, aquaculture now produces more than half of the fish consumed by humans and is projected to increase to 62% by 2030 to meet increasing demand (FAO, 2014). Although various types of technologies have been examined to improve fish growth and performance, productivity largely depends on interactions among genotype, nutrition, and environment. Significant advances in fish genetics, nutrition and feeding, culture systems, and management have cumulatively enhanced fish performance and increased overall global productivity. Technological advancements in these areas that enhance fish performance in aquaculture are discussed in this review.
{"title":"Enhancing fish performance in aquaculture","authors":"B. Small, R. Hardy, C. Tucker","doi":"10.2527/AF.2016-0043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2527/AF.2016-0043","url":null,"abstract":"The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations defines aquaculture as farming of aquatic organisms including fish, mollusks, crustaceans, and aquatic plants where farming implies some form of intervention in the rearing process and individual or corporate ownership of the stock being cultivated (FAO, 1988). In a recent report, the Food and Agriculture Organization emphasized the importance of enhancing aquaculture production to meet the daunting challenge of feeding a global population expected to reach 9.6 billion people by 2050 (FAO, 2014). At present, increases in fish production globally outpace population growth, largely due to important advances in aquaculture production. As a result, aquaculture now produces more than half of the fish consumed by humans and is projected to increase to 62% by 2030 to meet increasing demand (FAO, 2014). Although various types of technologies have been examined to improve fish growth and performance, productivity largely depends on interactions among genotype, nutrition, and environment. Significant advances in fish genetics, nutrition and feeding, culture systems, and management have cumulatively enhanced fish performance and increased overall global productivity. Technological advancements in these areas that enhance fish performance in aquaculture are discussed in this review.","PeriodicalId":48645,"journal":{"name":"Animal Frontiers","volume":"6 1","pages":"42-49"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2527/AF.2016-0043","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68979644","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Impact of genetics and breeding on broiler production performance: a look into the past, present, and future of the industry","authors":"M. Tavárez, F. L. D. S. Santos","doi":"10.2527/AF.2016-0042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2527/AF.2016-0042","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48645,"journal":{"name":"Animal Frontiers","volume":"6 1","pages":"37-41"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2527/AF.2016-0042","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68979574","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Barriers to global implementation of current and development of new performance-enhancing technologies in meat production","authors":"A. Dilger, A. Schroeder, W. M. Moseley","doi":"10.2527/AF.2016-0044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2527/AF.2016-0044","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48645,"journal":{"name":"Animal Frontiers","volume":"6 1","pages":"50-55"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2527/AF.2016-0044","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68979692","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Technology adoption has allowed for dramatic improvements in sow productivity, wean-to-finish growth performance, and carcass composition over the last 35 yr. In 1980, the average sow farm in the US marketed 9.2 pigs per sow per year (Table 1). The average market weight was 242 lb with pigs having more than 1 inch of fat at the 10th rib, a loin eye under 5 in2, and a carcass that produced less than 80 lb of lean meats (National Pork Board, 2016). Growth performance records from 1980 are scarce; however, in 1990, pigs grew at 1.27 lb/day and required 3.2 lb of feed per pound of gain from weaning to market (PigChamp, 1990). By comparison, today’s average sow weans 22 pigs per year and its pigs have a wean-to-finish average daily gain of 1.61 lb/day and use 2.6 lb of feed per pound of gain (National Pork Board, 2016). The average market weight is now 283 lb with 0.72 inches of back fat and a loin eye over 8 in2 (National Pork Board, 2016). Thus, the actual feed required per pig has decreased by 4% while market weight has increased by 17% (41 lb) in the last 25 yr. Of the 41-lb increase in live weight, 38 lb (93% of the increase) has been added to the amount of lean muscle provided by each carcass, with today’s pigs producing more than 118 lb of lean meat per animal. This has allowed for a 38% increase in pork production with only a 10% increase in the annual number of animals harvested over the same time period (USDA-NASS, 2015). These values obviously represent significant improvement in swine productivity. Combining increases in sow productivity and market weight, the average US pig farms are producing more than 4,000 lb of live weight per sow per year compared with approximately 1,770 lb in 1980 (Figure 1). Without these improvements in productivity, it would take another 9 million sows (approximately 15 million in total) compared with today’s 6 million sows to achieve the current level of pork produced (Patience, 2015; Figure 2). With global food demands expected to increase by 100% in 2050, technology must continue to be applied to commercial swine production (Tilman et al., 2011). As demonstrated by the swine industry’s record of rapid adoption and embracing new technology, production of safe, wholesome, and nutritious pork will continue to improve and increase while, at the same time, using fewer resources and reducing its impact on the environment. Therefore, our objective is to review the history of technology development and its application in shaping today’s swine industry (Table 2).
技术采用允许戏剧性改善母猪生产力,wean-to-finish生长性能,和尸体成分在过去35年。1980年,母猪农场在美国市场每年9.2猪母猪(表1),市场的平均体重是242磅猪有超过1英寸的脂肪10肋,腰5 in2下眼睛,和尸体产生少于80磅的瘦肉(国家猪肉委员会,2016)。1980年以来的增长业绩记录很少;然而，在1990年，猪的生长速度为1.27磅/天，从断奶到上市，每磅增重需要3.2磅饲料(PigChamp, 1990)。相比之下，今天的母猪平均每年断奶22头猪，其猪的断奶至育肥猪平均日增重为1.61磅/天，每磅增重使用2.6磅饲料(国家猪肉局，2016)。市场平均重量为283磅，背部脂肪0.72英寸，腰眼超过8英寸(国家猪肉局，2016年)。因此，在过去的25年里，每头猪的实际饲料需求减少了4%，而市场重量增加了17%(41磅)。在41磅的活重增加中，38磅(93%的增加)被添加到每具胴体提供的瘦肌肉量中，今天每头猪的瘦肉产量超过118磅。这使得猪肉产量增加了38%，而同期每年收获的动物数量仅增加了10% (USDA-NASS, 2015)。这些数值显然代表着猪生产能力的显著提高。结合母猪生产力和市场重量的提高，美国养猪场平均每头母猪每年的活重超过4000磅，而1980年的产量约为1770磅(图1)。如果生产力没有这些提高，要达到目前的猪肉产量水平，还需要900万头母猪(总计约1500万头)，而今天的600万头母猪(Patience, 2015;图2)。到2050年，全球粮食需求预计将增长100%，因此必须继续将技术应用于商业养猪生产(Tilman et al.， 2011)。正如养猪业快速采用和拥抱新技术的记录所表明的那样，安全、健康和营养猪肉的生产将继续改善和增加，同时使用更少的资源并减少对环境的影响。因此，我们的目标是回顾技术发展的历史及其在塑造当今养猪业中的应用(表2)。
{"title":"Performance-enhancing technologies in swine production","authors":"M. Tokach, B. Goodband, T. O’Quinn","doi":"10.2527/AF.2016-0039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2527/AF.2016-0039","url":null,"abstract":"Technology adoption has allowed for dramatic improvements in sow productivity, wean-to-finish growth performance, and carcass composition over the last 35 yr. In 1980, the average sow farm in the US marketed 9.2 pigs per sow per year (Table 1). The average market weight was 242 lb with pigs having more than 1 inch of fat at the 10th rib, a loin eye under 5 in2, and a carcass that produced less than 80 lb of lean meats (National Pork Board, 2016). Growth performance records from 1980 are scarce; however, in 1990, pigs grew at 1.27 lb/day and required 3.2 lb of feed per pound of gain from weaning to market (PigChamp, 1990). By comparison, today’s average sow weans 22 pigs per year and its pigs have a wean-to-finish average daily gain of 1.61 lb/day and use 2.6 lb of feed per pound of gain (National Pork Board, 2016). The average market weight is now 283 lb with 0.72 inches of back fat and a loin eye over 8 in2 (National Pork Board, 2016). Thus, the actual feed required per pig has decreased by 4% while market weight has increased by 17% (41 lb) in the last 25 yr. Of the 41-lb increase in live weight, 38 lb (93% of the increase) has been added to the amount of lean muscle provided by each carcass, with today’s pigs producing more than 118 lb of lean meat per animal. This has allowed for a 38% increase in pork production with only a 10% increase in the annual number of animals harvested over the same time period (USDA-NASS, 2015). These values obviously represent significant improvement in swine productivity. Combining increases in sow productivity and market weight, the average US pig farms are producing more than 4,000 lb of live weight per sow per year compared with approximately 1,770 lb in 1980 (Figure 1). Without these improvements in productivity, it would take another 9 million sows (approximately 15 million in total) compared with today’s 6 million sows to achieve the current level of pork produced (Patience, 2015; Figure 2). With global food demands expected to increase by 100% in 2050, technology must continue to be applied to commercial swine production (Tilman et al., 2011). As demonstrated by the swine industry’s record of rapid adoption and embracing new technology, production of safe, wholesome, and nutritious pork will continue to improve and increase while, at the same time, using fewer resources and reducing its impact on the environment. Therefore, our objective is to review the history of technology development and its application in shaping today’s swine industry (Table 2).","PeriodicalId":48645,"journal":{"name":"Animal Frontiers","volume":"6 1","pages":"15-21"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2527/AF.2016-0039","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68979539","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
With the current and predicted increase in world population, growing global demand and consumption of food will result in increasing competition for land, water, and energy. In turn, this will severely affect our ability to produce food as will the urgent requirement to reduce the impact of food systems on the environment (Godfray et al., 2010). Globalization has boosted trade in livestock inputs and products and resulted in industry growth, and concurrently livestock production has undergone a complex process of technical and geographical change (Gerber et al., 2007). This has resulted in a challenge to livestock producers; growing demand for their produce with a dwindling supply of resources, with the only solution being a significant increase in efficiency. Also, as incomes increase in the burgeoning economies, so does the demand for high-quality animal proteins such as meat, milk, and eggs; thus the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations suggests that food requirements will increase by 70% by 2050 (Anonymous, 2009). The recent success in developed and emerging technologies suggests that the animal industries are well placed to prosper through these new challenges. To ensure these technologies—such as metabolic modifiers including somatotropin, immunization against gonadotropin-releasing factor, and orally active dietary additives like ractopamine, zilpaterol, cysteamine, chromium, betaine, and dietary neuroleptics—can be effectively utilized throughout the animal industries, further emphasis is required on their acceptance and development. As a result of these technological advancements, producers have benefited because of improved production efficiencies while meat packers have improved processing efficiencies because of increased lean meat yield. Ostensibly, the consumer has also benefited because meat is leaner and less expensive to purchase. However, there have been some concerns that the focus on increasing production efficiency and lean meat yield has been to the detriment of meat quality (Dunshea et al., 2005). It is also interesting that at a time of apparently greater need for these technologies, there are external influences such as market differentiation and trade barriers as well as consumer resistance that challenge the use of technologies. A tenet of this article is that if we are to meet the increased global demand for animal protein, then we must continue to develop and adopt technologies to improve livestock efficiency, but we must be cognizant of the potential barriers affecting acceptance.
随着目前和预计的世界人口增长，全球粮食需求和消费的增长将导致对土地、水和能源的竞争加剧。反过来，这将严重影响我们生产粮食的能力，因为迫切需要减少粮食系统对环境的影响(Godfray et al.， 2010)。全球化促进了畜牧投入品和产品的贸易，促进了产业增长，同时畜牧生产也经历了一个复杂的技术和地理变化过程(Gerber et al.， 2007)。这给畜牧生产者带来了挑战;对农产品的需求不断增长，而资源供应却日益减少，唯一的解决办法就是大幅提高效率。此外，随着新兴经济体的收入增加，对高质量动物蛋白(如肉、奶和蛋)的需求也在增加;因此，联合国粮食及农业组织建议，到2050年，粮食需求将增加70% (Anonymous, 2009)。最近在发达技术和新兴技术方面取得的成功表明，动物产业已经准备好迎接这些新的挑战。为了确保这些技术——如代谢调节剂(包括生长激素)、促性腺激素释放因子免疫，以及口服活性膳食添加剂(如莱克多巴胺、zilpaterol、半胱胺、铬、甜菜碱和膳食神经抑制剂)——能够在整个动物工业中得到有效利用，需要进一步强调它们的接受和发展。由于这些技术的进步，生产者受益于生产效率的提高，而肉类包装商由于瘦肉产量的增加而提高了加工效率。表面上看，消费者也因为肉更瘦、更便宜而受益。然而，有人担心，对提高生产效率和瘦肉产量的关注已经损害了肉类质量(Dunshea et al.， 2005)。同样有趣的是，在显然更需要这些技术的时候，市场分化和贸易壁垒等外部影响以及消费者抵制对技术的使用提出了挑战。本文的宗旨是，如果我们要满足全球对动物蛋白日益增长的需求，那么我们必须继续开发和采用提高牲畜效率的技术，但我们必须认识到影响接受的潜在障碍。
{"title":"Metabolic modifiers as performance-enhancing technologies for livestock production","authors":"F. Dunshea, D. N. D’Souza, H. Channon","doi":"10.2527/AF.2016-0038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2527/AF.2016-0038","url":null,"abstract":"With the current and predicted increase in world population, growing global demand and consumption of food will result in increasing competition for land, water, and energy. In turn, this will severely affect our ability to produce food as will the urgent requirement to reduce the impact of food systems on the environment (Godfray et al., 2010). Globalization has boosted trade in livestock inputs and products and resulted in industry growth, and concurrently livestock production has undergone a complex process of technical and geographical change (Gerber et al., 2007). This has resulted in a challenge to livestock producers; growing demand for their produce with a dwindling supply of resources, with the only solution being a significant increase in efficiency. Also, as incomes increase in the burgeoning economies, so does the demand for high-quality animal proteins such as meat, milk, and eggs; thus the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations suggests that food requirements will increase by 70% by 2050 (Anonymous, 2009). The recent success in developed and emerging technologies suggests that the animal industries are well placed to prosper through these new challenges. To ensure these technologies—such as metabolic modifiers including somatotropin, immunization against gonadotropin-releasing factor, and orally active dietary additives like ractopamine, zilpaterol, cysteamine, chromium, betaine, and dietary neuroleptics—can be effectively utilized throughout the animal industries, further emphasis is required on their acceptance and development. As a result of these technological advancements, producers have benefited because of improved production efficiencies while meat packers have improved processing efficiencies because of increased lean meat yield. Ostensibly, the consumer has also benefited because meat is leaner and less expensive to purchase. However, there have been some concerns that the focus on increasing production efficiency and lean meat yield has been to the detriment of meat quality (Dunshea et al., 2005). It is also interesting that at a time of apparently greater need for these technologies, there are external influences such as market differentiation and trade barriers as well as consumer resistance that challenge the use of technologies. A tenet of this article is that if we are to meet the increased global demand for animal protein, then we must continue to develop and adopt technologies to improve livestock efficiency, but we must be cognizant of the potential barriers affecting acceptance.","PeriodicalId":48645,"journal":{"name":"Animal Frontiers","volume":"6 1","pages":"6-14"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2527/AF.2016-0038","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68979537","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Shortly after the discovery of antibiotics and their successful application to treat infectious diseases, researchers discovered the growth-promoting capacity of sub-therapeutic antibiotic treatment (Jukes and Williams, 1953; Taylor and Gordon, 1955; Dubos et al., 1963). For more than 60 yr, sub-therapeutic antibiotic treatment has been shown to increase growth rate and weight gain in a wide variety of livestock, including chickens, pigs, cows, and sheep, indicating an evolutionarily conserved relationship between microbes and host metabolism. Because of the high cost of antibiotics at the time of initial discovery (Cromwell, 2002), antibiotics were provided low levels in the animal feed. This economically constrained dosage choice turned out to be a fortunate one, since later studies demonstrated that highdose antibiotic treatment could lead to reduced weight gain or weight loss (Dubos et al., 1963; Carvalho et al., 2012). Many classes of antibiotics are efficacious for growth promotion, including those used to treat human diseases and categorized by the FDA as highly important or critically important for human health, such as b-lactams, macrolides, lincosamides, and tetracyclines (Apley et al., 2012), although the specific antibiotic within the class may differ for human vs. animal use (e.g., azithromycin is a macrolide used for humans, and tylosin a veterinary macrolide). While many antibiotics have been banned in Europe for decades (Millet and Maertens, 2011), their use is only recently being phased out in the United States in response to FDA guidance for a voluntary withdrawal. The antimicrobial dose for growth promotion is often one to two orders of magnitude lower than for therapeutic applications (Apley et al., 2012; Subbiah et al., 2016) and does not have the primary goal of treating disease or preventing infection (Allen and Stanton, 2014). For example, chlortetracycline would be administered at 70 mg/animal/day for growth promotion, at 350 mg/animal/day to for prophylaxis against catching infection, and at 22 mg/kg body weight—approximately 6,600 mg/animal for a 300-kg steer (Cazer et al., 2014). The practice of using low-dose antibiotic growth promotion continues today around the world and is projected to increase in several countries (Van Boeckel et al., 2015). While it has economic benefits associated with increasing weight gain and feed efficiency (the conversion of food to animal mass), results can vary across production facilities, and there is growing evidence and concerns that widespread use of low-dose antibiotics increases the selection for antibiotic-resistant bacteria and their transmission to the human population (Allen et al., 2013). In recent years, there has been both legislative actions and consumer pressure to reduce or eliminate the use of antibiotics for growth promotion (Borron, 2012; Antibiotics shape microbiota and weight gain across the animal kingdom
在发现抗生素并成功应用于治疗传染病后不久，研究人员发现亚治疗性抗生素治疗具有促进生长的能力(Jukes和Williams, 1953;泰勒和戈登，1955年;Dubos et al.， 1963)。60多年来，亚治疗性抗生素治疗已被证明可以提高多种牲畜的生长速度和体重增加，包括鸡、猪、牛和羊，这表明微生物与宿主代谢之间存在进化上保守的关系。由于抗生素在最初发现时的成本很高(克伦威尔，2002年)，抗生素在动物饲料中的含量很低。这种经济上受限制的剂量选择被证明是幸运的，因为后来的研究表明，大剂量抗生素治疗可能导致体重增加或减轻(Dubos等人，1963;Carvalho et al.， 2012)。许多种类的抗生素对促进生长是有效的，包括那些用于治疗人类疾病并被FDA归类为对人类健康非常重要或至关重要的抗生素，如b-内酰胺类、大环内酯类、林科胺类和四环素类(Apley等，2012)，尽管该类抗生素在人类和动物使用中可能有所不同(例如，阿奇霉素是一种用于人类的大环内酯类药物，而泰洛素是一种兽医用大环内酯类药物)。虽然许多抗生素在欧洲已经被禁止了几十年(Millet和Maertens, 2011)，但它们的使用直到最近才在美国被逐步淘汰，以响应FDA对自愿退出的指导。用于促进生长的抗菌剂量通常比用于治疗的剂量低一到两个数量级(Apley等人，2012;Subbiah et al.， 2016)，其主要目的不是治疗疾病或预防感染(Allen and Stanton, 2014)。例如，用于促进生长的剂量为70毫克/头动物/天，用于预防感染的剂量为350毫克/头动物/天，对于300公斤重的牛，剂量为22毫克/头动物——约为6600毫克/头动物(Cazer等人，2014年)。使用低剂量抗生素促进生长的做法今天在世界各地仍在继续，预计在一些国家会增加(Van Boeckel等人，2015)。虽然它具有与增加体重和饲料效率(食物转化为动物质量)相关的经济效益，但不同生产设施的结果可能有所不同，而且越来越多的证据和担忧表明，广泛使用低剂量抗生素增加了对抗生素耐药细菌的选择及其向人类的传播(Allen et al.， 2013)。近年来，有立法行动和消费者的压力，以减少或消除使用抗生素促进生长(Borron, 2012;抗生素会影响整个动物王国的微生物群和体重增加
{"title":"Antibiotics shape microbiota and weight gain across the animal kingdom","authors":"Laura M. Cox","doi":"10.2527/AF.2016-0028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2527/AF.2016-0028","url":null,"abstract":"Shortly after the discovery of antibiotics and their successful application to treat infectious diseases, researchers discovered the growth-promoting capacity of sub-therapeutic antibiotic treatment (Jukes and Williams, 1953; Taylor and Gordon, 1955; Dubos et al., 1963). For more than 60 yr, sub-therapeutic antibiotic treatment has been shown to increase growth rate and weight gain in a wide variety of livestock, including chickens, pigs, cows, and sheep, indicating an evolutionarily conserved relationship between microbes and host metabolism. Because of the high cost of antibiotics at the time of initial discovery (Cromwell, 2002), antibiotics were provided low levels in the animal feed. This economically constrained dosage choice turned out to be a fortunate one, since later studies demonstrated that highdose antibiotic treatment could lead to reduced weight gain or weight loss (Dubos et al., 1963; Carvalho et al., 2012). Many classes of antibiotics are efficacious for growth promotion, including those used to treat human diseases and categorized by the FDA as highly important or critically important for human health, such as b-lactams, macrolides, lincosamides, and tetracyclines (Apley et al., 2012), although the specific antibiotic within the class may differ for human vs. animal use (e.g., azithromycin is a macrolide used for humans, and tylosin a veterinary macrolide). While many antibiotics have been banned in Europe for decades (Millet and Maertens, 2011), their use is only recently being phased out in the United States in response to FDA guidance for a voluntary withdrawal. The antimicrobial dose for growth promotion is often one to two orders of magnitude lower than for therapeutic applications (Apley et al., 2012; Subbiah et al., 2016) and does not have the primary goal of treating disease or preventing infection (Allen and Stanton, 2014). For example, chlortetracycline would be administered at 70 mg/animal/day for growth promotion, at 350 mg/animal/day to for prophylaxis against catching infection, and at 22 mg/kg body weight—approximately 6,600 mg/animal for a 300-kg steer (Cazer et al., 2014). The practice of using low-dose antibiotic growth promotion continues today around the world and is projected to increase in several countries (Van Boeckel et al., 2015). While it has economic benefits associated with increasing weight gain and feed efficiency (the conversion of food to animal mass), results can vary across production facilities, and there is growing evidence and concerns that widespread use of low-dose antibiotics increases the selection for antibiotic-resistant bacteria and their transmission to the human population (Allen et al., 2013). In recent years, there has been both legislative actions and consumer pressure to reduce or eliminate the use of antibiotics for growth promotion (Borron, 2012; Antibiotics shape microbiota and weight gain across the animal kingdom","PeriodicalId":48645,"journal":{"name":"Animal Frontiers","volume":"34 1","pages":"8-14"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2016-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2527/AF.2016-0028","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"68979527","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：