Table 3. Effect of LSB supplementation on body condition of sows
Sow diet | CON | LSB | SEM | p-value |
Litter diet | CON | LSB | CON | LSB | SD | LD | SD × LD |
Body weight (kg) |
At day 109 | 264.75 | 263.71 | 2.655 | 0.7711) | - | - |
After farrowing | 243.72 | 243.42 | 2.755 | 0.9361) | - | - |
At day 21 | 237.88 | 236.13 | 236.49 | 239.53 | 3.225 | 0.8172) | 0.882 | 0.583 |
Loss | 6.97 | 4.85 | 4.71 | 6.36 | 1.717 | 0.8702) | 0.918 | 0.414 |
Backfat thickness (mm) |
At day 109 | 16.42 | 16.34 | 0.269 | 0.8271) | - | - |
At day 21 | 15.27 | 15.46 | 16.24 | 15.43 | 0.345 | 0.3082) | 0.500 | 0.287 |
Loss | 0.97 | 1.21 | −0.04 | 0.95 | 0.226 | 0.0482) | 0.057 | 0.239 |
Analysis of variance (with room, parity, sow diet, and their interactions as effects); the interactions were non-significant, therefore, they were removed from the model.
Analysis of variance (with room, parity, sow diet, litter diet, and their interactions as effects); the interactions with room and parity were non-significant, therefore, they were removed from the model.
LSB, control diet + 2 × 109 CFU/kg of Saccharomyces cerevisiae var. boulardii CNCM I-1079; CON, control lactation/creep feed diets; SD, sow diet; LD, litter diet.