<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id>0375-1589</journal-id>
<journal-title><![CDATA[South African Journal of Animal Science]]></journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title><![CDATA[S. Afr. j. anim. sci.]]></abbrev-journal-title>
<issn>0375-1589</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[The South African Society for Animal Science (SASAS)]]></publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id>S0375-15892012000100008</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The performance of broilers on a feed depends on the feed protein content given previously]]></article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Gous]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R.M.]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Emmans]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G.C.]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Fisher]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C.]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="A01">
<institution><![CDATA[,University of KwaZulu-Natal Animal and Poultry Science ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Pietermaritzburg ]]></addr-line>
<country>Scotland</country>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="pub">
<day>00</day>
<month>00</month>
<year>2012</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>00</day>
<month>00</month>
<year>2012</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>42</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<fpage>63</fpage>
<lpage>73</lpage>
<copyright-statement/>
<copyright-year/>
<self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S0375-15892012000100008&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso&amp;tlng=en"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&amp;pid=S0375-15892012000100008&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso&amp;tlng=en"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_pdf&amp;pid=S0375-15892012000100008&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso&amp;tlng=en"></self-uri><abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="en"><p><![CDATA[It has been proposed that all animals have an inherent relationship between body protein and lipid that can be described allometrically, and the hypothesis tested in the research reported here is that the animal will at all times attempt to retain this relationship. The test was accomplished by feeding broilers, of three genotypes and in two experiments, in such a way as to produce lean and fat birds that were then subjected to a range of dietary protein levels in a second feeding period, during which their performance was measured. Birds were initially offered one of two feeds with widely different protein to energy ratios until they reached a pre-defined liveweight, after which they were given one of two feed protein contents in Experiment 1 and four in Experiment 2. Their performance was monitored until a second pre-defined liveweight was reached, at which time they were killed for carcass analysis. The genotype selected to be lean, in Experiment 1, showed no response to protein level in the second period, whether they were fat or lean at the start. Conversely, the genetically fat birds showed some additional growth in males and additional efficiency in the females. Averaged across genotypes and sexes, birds initially in the fat state gained only 6.9 g lipid/d versus 13.5 g lipid/d for the nutritionally lean broilers. In Experiment 2, growth rate and feed conversion efficiency (FCE) were related directly to dietary protein content and were higher for those birds made nutritionally fat. Carcass lipid gain was lower for the initially fat birds on the three highest dietary protein treatments. All birds made fat at 880 g and 1000 g, by giving them a low protein feed, had a much reduced fat content in their subsequent gain, provided that the protein content of the feed used was sufficiently high, indicating that they were making use of the excessive lipid reserves as an energy source. The hypothesis tested cannot be rejected by the evidence presented.]]></p></abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Fatness]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[broiler nutrition]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[dietary protein content]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[body lipid]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[protein ratio]]></kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front><body><![CDATA[ <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="4"><b><a name="top"></a>The    performance of broilers on a feed depends on the feed protein content given    previously</b></font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>R.M. Gous</b><a href="#back"><sup>#</sup></a>;    <b> G.C. Emmans; C. Fisher</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Animal and Poultry    Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa Scottish    Agricultural College, Bush Estate, Midlothian, EH26 0QE, Scotland</font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p> <hr size="1" noshade>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>ABSTRACT</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">It has been proposed    that all animals have an inherent relationship between body protein and lipid    that can be described allometrically, and the hypothesis tested in the research    reported here is that the animal will at all times attempt to retain this relationship.    The test was accomplished by feeding broilers, of three genotypes and in two    experiments, in such a way as to produce lean and fat birds that were then subjected    to a range of dietary protein levels in a second feeding period, during which    their performance was measured. Birds were initially offered one of two feeds    with widely different protein to energy ratios until they reached a pre-defined    liveweight, after which they were given one of two feed protein contents in    Experiment 1 and four in Experiment 2. Their performance was monitored until    a second pre-defined liveweight was reached, at which time they were killed    for carcass analysis. The genotype selected to be lean, in Experiment 1, showed    no response to protein level in the second period, whether they were fat or    lean at the start. Conversely, the genetically fat birds showed some additional    growth in males and additional efficiency in the females. Averaged across genotypes    and sexes, birds initially in the fat state gained only 6.9 g lipid/d versus    13.5 g lipid/d for the nutritionally lean broilers. In Experiment 2, growth    rate and feed conversion efficiency (FCE) were related directly to dietary protein    content and were higher for those birds made nutritionally fat. Carcass lipid    gain was lower for the initially fat birds on the three highest dietary protein    treatments. All birds made fat at 880 g and 1000 g, by giving them a low protein    feed, had a much reduced fat content in their subsequent gain, provided that    the protein content of the feed used was sufficiently high, indicating that    they were making use of the excessive lipid reserves as an energy source. The    hypothesis tested cannot be rejected by the evidence presented.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Keywords:</b>    Fatness, broiler nutrition, dietary protein content, body lipid : protein ratio    </font></p> <hr size="1" noshade>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>Introduction</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Experimental evidence    indicates that pigs that are fatter than their desired level show a reduction    in lipid gain if given a feed that is adequate in dietary protein (Kyriazakis    &amp; Emmans, 1991; Kyriazakis <i>et al,</i> 1991; Stamataris <i>et al,</i>    1991; Ferguson &amp; Theeruth, 2002). It has been proposed by these authors    that this response will continue until the degree of fatness has returned to    levels similar to those observed in animals that have been unrestricted or that    have followed normal growth. Ferguson &amp; Theeruth (2002) presented supporting    evidence in the literature for the proposition that although a maximum limit    is set on the growth of body protein for a given degree of maturity, no such    limit exists for lipid deposition. Emmans (1981) and Whittemore (1998) have    alluded to body lipid reserves as being labile, fluctuating on account of feed    level, previous feed offered, and environmental conditions.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">When growing chickens    are given <i>ad libitum</i> access to feeds of low first-limiting amino acid    to energy ratio, they take more time and eat more feed energy to reach a given    weight, and are also fatter at that weight (Jackson <i>et al.,</i> 1982; Gous    <i>et al</i>., 1990). Feeds that have these effects may be used in practice,    either by accident or by design. The performance of chickens following such    treatment is thus of practical interest, as well as theoretical. Although this    is a general problem in growth theory, it has become more relevant with the    development of growth simulation models, where the state of the animal at any    stage of growth is seen as the consequence of the food and environment to which    it has been subjected to that point, and which must then impact on subsequent    food intake and chemical growth (Emmans, 1981). Eits <i>et al.</i> (2003) showed    that responses of broilers to dietary protein depend on previous protein nutrition    and sex, and as a result, suggested that protein levels in grower and finisher    diets should be optimised simultaneously, not independently.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Any growth model    may be seen, in large part, as proposing solutions to two problems: (i) What    will be the rates of growth and feed intake in non-limiting nutritional and    environmental conditions, and what are these conditions for a given genotype?    (ii) What will be the rates of growth and feed intake if either the nutritional    or environmental conditions are limiting? But there is a further problem, which    has received little theoretical attention, despite the enormous amount of experimental    literature (see reviews by Wilson &amp; Osbourn, 1960; Donovan, 1984; Berge,    1991; Ryan <i>et al.,</i> 1993 among others): (iii) Following a period in which    potential growth is not achieved because of nutritional or environmental constraints,    what will be the rates of growth and feed intake on the return to non-limiting    conditions, and what are these conditions?</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The main hypothesis    that underlies the research reported here is that an animal will, at all times,    attempt to restore the lipid : protein ratio at any given protein weight which    is that set by its genotype. It will do this subject to maximizing its rate    of protein growth. Were this not the case, the prediction of voluntary food    intake by a bird or animal given <i>ad libitum</i> access to food would be more    difficult, as this rule is central to Emmans' (1981) food intake theory in governing    the amount of body lipid that might be utilised as an energy source. The fatness    of an animal has been shown to affect its voluntary food intake (Foot, 1972;    Sibbald &amp; Rhind, 1997), so an accurate prediction of changes in body lipid    content during growth is necessary for forecasting subsequent voluntary food    intake.</font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>Materials and    Methods</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Two experiments    dealing with the influence of the state of a broiler on its response to protein    were conducted at the Poultry Research Institute in Roslin, Scotland. In the    first experiment, 100 chicks of two strains were reared in tier brooders from    day old, before being transferred to single cages at about 900 g liveweight.    At this weight, three or four birds of each sex of each genotype from each of    the initial feeds (see below) were killed and their total bodies, including    feathers, were chemically analysed. The experiment was of a factorial design    with 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 = 16 treatments, with each replicated on three chickens housed    individually (n = 48). The factors were strains, which were the lean and fat    broiler lines developed by Whitehead (1990); sexes; feed protein contents of    124 (LP) g CP/kg or 310 (HP) g CP/kg, fed from day old to 900 g; and feed protein    contents from 900 g liveweight, which were HP or MP (248 g CP/kg). For clarity,    the design used can be viewed in <a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t04.jpg">Table    4</a>.</font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">At the nominal    (pre-defined) liveweight of 1750 g, all birds in the second period of the experiment    were killed and their total bodies, including feathers, were chemically analysed.    The birds were fed <i>ad libitum</i> throughout. From 900 g to 1750 g the birds    were weighed and their feed intakes measured daily. The feeds used are shown    in <a href="#t1">Table 1</a>. LP contained 0.4 of HP and 0.6 of the dilution    feed, while MP contained 0.8 of HP and 0.2 of the dilution feed.</font></p>     <p><a name="t1"></a></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p align="center"><img src="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t01.jpg"></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">In trial 2, Ross    female broiler chicks were reared in tier brooders before being transferred    to single cages at a nominal (pre-defined) liveweight of 1000 g. They were fed    LP or HP up to this weight. At 1000 g, nine chicks from each of the two early    feeds were killed and their total bodies analysed. A further 48 birds, 24 from    each initial feed, were transferred to one of four feed protein contents, which    were LP, MP and HP, as before, and LMP, which had 186 g CP/kg and was a mixture    of 0.6 of HP and 0.4 of the dilution feed. Each of the 2 first feeds x 4 second    feed treatments was replicated on six birds, of which two were killed at each    of the nominal slaughter weights of 1500 and 2000 g. As with the chicks sampled    at 1000 g, the total bodies of these sampled birds were chemically analysed.    From 1000 g to the nominal slaughter weights, the birds were weighed and their    feed intakes measured daily.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The temperature    of the room in which the birds were kept during the second phase of each experiment    was maintained at 22 &deg;C to 25 &deg;C.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The composition    of the high protein feed (HP) is shown in <a href="#t1">Table 1</a>. All other    feeds used in the two phases of the two experiments were produced by blending    HP with a protein-free diluent, also shown in <a href="#t1">Table 1</a>. This    procedure ensured that all feeds contained the same amino acid balance. The    two basal feeds contained the same concentrations of energy, major and minor    minerals, and vitamins.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Each carcass, including    feathers, was minced in order to analyse the water, fat, protein and ash contents,    using the AOAC (1990) procedures.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Keeping birds to    2500 g liveweight in cages led to some problems with leg weakness. Because some    birds had to be culled for this reason, the full design of Experiment 2 was    not met. The liveweight intervals used were 1000 - 1500 g and 1500 - 2000 g.    The data were analysed using Minitab's general linear model (GLM), where all    terms were fitted. The growth and intake variables analysed were as follows:    Experiment 1, daily feed intake, daily gain and feed efficiency; Experiment    2, daily feed intake, daily gain and feed efficiency for the weight intervals    1000 - 1500 g and 1500 - 2000 g. Body composition data were analysed: Experiment    1, at 900 and 1800 g liveweight; Experiment 2, at 1000 g, 1500 g and 2000 g.    Gains of the chemical components were analysed for the 900 - 1800 g interval    for Experiment 1 and for the 1000 - 1500 g and 1500 - 2000 g intervals for Experiment    2.</font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>Results</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">In the first experiment    there were no significant differences between treatments in the liveweights    at which the second period treatments were started. The mean value of 896 g    was close to the target value of 900 g. The LP birds took 34.5 d to reach this    weight from day old, which was longer (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01) than the 27.1 d taken    by the HP birds. There were no appreciable or significant effects of sex or    genotype on the time taken.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The mean final    slaughter weight was 1781 g, again close to the intended value of 1750 g. As    there were no significant treatment effects in initial or final weight, all    treatments were compared, as was intended, over the same liveweight range.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Rate of gain in    the second period was faster (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01) in the lean genotype, by 6.7    g/d (or 1.9 d less time), than in the fat, and in the males, which grew 13.2    g/d faster (or 4.3 d less time) than the females (<a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t02.jpg">Table    2</a>). There were no significant effects of prior or current feed protein content    on growth rate, and no interaction was significant. The growth of the birds    from HP and from LP, averaged over all other factors, is illustrated in <a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08f01.jpg">Figure    1</a>. The absence of any compensatory growth is clear.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The main effects    of genotype, prior feed protein content, sex and current dietary protein content    on feed intake were all statistically significant (<i>P</i> &lt;0.05), as shown    in <a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t02.jpg">Table 2</a>. The daily rate    of feed consumption was higher for the fat genotype, for birds originally fed    LP, for males, and for the birds subsequently fed MP (248 g CP/kg). Although    there was no difference in feed intake by the fat line between those fed the    HP and the MP feeds (126.8 <i>vs.</i> 127.0 g/d respectively), the difference    in feed intake by birds of the lean line on the two feeds was large (107 <i>vs.</i>    127 g/d). This was the only interaction that was significant (<i>P</i> &lt;0.05).</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">All of the main    effects on FCE were statistically significant (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01), with higher    FCE values occurring in the lean line, the birds initially fed HP, the males,    and those subsequently fed HP. The only first-order interaction that was significant    was that between genetic line and the protein content of the feed given in the    first period. There was virtually no difference in FCE between the birds of    the fat line that had been given LP or HP in the first period (401 <i>vs.</i>    405 g gain/kg feed respectively). But the birds of the lean line that had been    fed HP showed a considerably increased FCE (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01) of 566, compared    with a value of 445 g/kg for those of the same genotype that had been fed LP    in the first period.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">As was intended,    the birds from LP contained more lipid (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01) than those given    HP (135 <i>vs.</i> 74 g lipid/kg) at the end of the first period, as shown in    <a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t03.jpg">Table 3</a>. The subsequent feeding    treatments produced significant (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01) differences in carcass composition    at the end of the second period of the experiment. Water, ash and protein contents    were higher for the lean line than for the fat line, and the lipid content was    considerably lower, 111 <i>vs.</i> 181 g lipid/kg (<a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t04.jpg">Table    4</a>). Females had higher lipid contents in their carcasses than males. The    high protein diet in the second period resulted in carcasses with higher water    and protein contents, but with a lower lipid content (134 g lipid/kg <i>vs.</i>    159) than broilers fed the medium protein feed.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">From the point    of view of this experiment, the most important result was the marked reduction    in the rate of lipid gain in Phase 2 of the experiment for the birds made fat    at 900 g by being fed LP. They gained only 6.9 g lipid/d compared with those    from HP, which gained 13.5 g lipid/d (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01). The lipid content    in the gain was only 128 g/kg compared to 237 (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01). Consequently,    the birds previously fed LP contained less body lipid (135 <i>vs.</i> 158 g    lipid/kg) than those from HP at the end of the trial.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">In the second experiment,    the time taken to reach the starting weight of 1000 g (<a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t05.jpg">Table    5</a>) differed significantly (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01) between the LP (30.5d) and    the HP (24.7d) treatments. The mean weights at the start of the second period    were very similar for the LP treatment, 1025 g, and the HP, 1038 g. Mortalities    and culling resulted in few birds remaining for the period from 2000 g to 2500    g liveweight, so only the results of the two periods, from 1000 g to 1500 g    and from 1500 g to 2000 g liveweight, are reported below.</font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The birds from    LP grew faster (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01) (<a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t05.jpg">Table    5</a>) than those from HP in the 1000 to 1500 g liveweight interval. Growth    rate was also related directly to dietary protein content in both periods. Only    the birds from HP that were continued on HP did not follow the common trend;    these birds grew more slowly, 55.0 g/d, than the birds on the next lowest protein    content, 61.0 g/d. Statistically significant differences in growth rate on the    second feed disappeared in the period 1500 g to 2000 g liveweight, although    the trend remained (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01) in those birds initially fed on LP.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Mean feed intake    in the first liveweight interval increased linearly (114, 115, 119 and 121 g/d,    respectively) as the protein content in the second feed declined (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01)    (<a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t05.jpg">Table 5</a>), but this was not    evident in the second period. Feed conversion efficiency in the period 1000    to 1500 g liveweight was higher (<i>P</i> &lt;0.01) for birds that had been    fed LP in the first period, and declined as the dietary protein content was    reduced. Differences in FCE between those birds from LP and those from HP were    no longer evident in the period 1500 -2000 g liveweight, although significant    differences remained between birds on feeds of the different protein contents    (<a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t05.jpg">Table 5</a>).</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">At the end of the    initial period the LP birds had 154, and the HP birds 74 g lipid/kg carcass    (<a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t06.jpg">Table 3</a>). Although the birds    from LP remained fatter (<i>P</i> &lt;0.05) at 1500 g liveweight than those    from HP (169 <i>vs.</i> 135 g lipid/kg) (<a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t06.jpg">Table    6</a>) their rate of gain in lipid during this period was lower on the three    highest dietary protein treatments (overall, 11.8 <i>vs.</i> 14.3 g/d). During    the period 1500 g to 2000 g liveweight, their lipid gains were also lower (<i>P</i>    &lt;0.05), 9.8 <i>vs.</i> 13.8 g/d (<a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t07.jpg">Table    7</a>).</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Overall, birds    that were made fat by giving them a low protein feed had a much-reduced fat    content in their subsequent gain, provided that the protein content of the feed    was sufficiently high (Experiment 2). In Experiment 1, lipid was 0.08 and 0.18    of the gain in the lean and fat lines that had been made fat initially, but    0.19 and 0.30 of the gain in the two strains kept lean; in Experiment 2, the    proportion of lipid in the gain was 0.15 for birds made fat and then fed the    highest protein in the period 1000 - 1500 g liveweight versus 0.25 for those    birds that were lean at 1000 g liveweight, but the equivalent proportions for    birds fed the lowest dietary protein feed were 0.31 and 0.33. Over all the dietary    protein treatments, the proportions of lipid in the gain were 0.20 and 0.26    in the first period of Phase 2, and in the second period, 0.16 and 0.23, respectively.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">There were differences    in the carcass water contents at 1500 g and 2000 g liveweight (<a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t06.jpg">Table    6</a>) between broilers on the various dietary treatments and of different initial    fatnesses, but the carcass ash and protein contents showed no consistent differences    between treatments. However, because of the differences in carcass composition    between treatments at the start of Phase 2 of this experiment, gains in carcass    water, ash and protein all showed highly significant differences between treatments    (<a href="/img/revistas/sajas/v42n1/08t07.jpg">Table 7</a>). Carcass water gains    differed <i>(P </i> &lt;0.01) between dietary treatments in both periods of    Phase 2, with the highest gains being produced by the highest dietary protein    contents, and between initial states in the period 1000 g - 1500 g liveweight    (39.4 g/d <i>vs.</i> 33.7 g/d), the initially fat birds producing the higher    rate of gain; the carcass protein gains generally following the dietary protein    content, and being higher for birds that were fat initially (13.0 <i>vs.</i>    10.7 g/d in the period 1000 g -1500 g liveweight).</font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>Discussion</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The consumption    of food by an animal will dictate the amount of protein and lipid that will    be deposited each day, but food intake in turn is dependent, among other factors,    on the state of the animal at the time. Emman's (1981) food intake theory suggested    that if a broiler is fatter than its inherent fatness, as defined by its genetically    determined lipid : protein ratio, then it will attempt to use the extra body    lipid as an energy source if and when this is possible. If the food contains    a higher protein : energy ratio than that required to maximise protein growth,    and the bird contains excess fat, food intake will be reduced to the point at    which just sufficient of the first-limiting nutrient is consumed, with the associated    energy, and the resultant shortfall in energy will be obtained by mobilising    body lipid reserves. This increases the efficiency of utilization of the feed    for growth. If there is no excess lipid, then the bird would have to increase    food intake, and hence energy, accordingly.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Kyriazakis &amp;    Emmans (1992), in considering the growth of animals after a period of nutritional    limitation, proposed that any perturbations in body composition at the end of    that period will be corrected over time, and that the rates of such corrections    are always set by the conditions of rehabilitation. These propositions imply    that body lipid content is labile, and the evidence they presented is consistent    with that presented here, as are the results of Eits <i>et al.</i> (2003).</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">A similar model    has been described by Broekhuizen <i>et al.</i> (1994), which invokes a measure    of well being corresponding closely to the fatness of the animal and is defined    as the ratio of the weight of mobilizable reserve tissue to that of structural    tissue, the latter being assumed to correlate with skeletal size. In their model,    the animal (fish) responds immediately to changes in the reserves : structural    tissue ratio (similar to the lipid : protein ratio used here), this ratio depending    on feeding history, which provides a simple, implicit memory. Of particular    relevance, the key assumption in their model is that the animal has an 'ideal'    reserve : structure ratio which it seeks to maintain, almost identical to Emmans'    (1981) theory. Small deviations from the ideal are corrected by changes in the    proportion of assimilate allocated to the two pools, but major changes are seen    as indicating persistent adverse environmental conditions and trigger a protective    response.</font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The results from    the experiments reported here throw some light on the problem of growth after    a period of under-feeding of protein. There were clear differences between the    genotypes used, including sexes. The genotype selected to be lean showed no    differences in growth or efficiency, while the genetically fat birds showed    some improvement in growth in the males and efficiency in the females. In the    commercial females, enhanced growth and efficiency were both shown, provided    that a feed with a high enough protein content was used. Differences between    strains do occur, although the responses are not always consistent: Cherry <i>et    al.</i> (1978) had previously noted that the slower growing broiler strains    in their study exhibited more compensatory gain than the faster growing strains,    whereas Marks (1978) found that fast growing quail lines were capable of demonstrating    greater compensatory growth after a protein restriction than non-selected control    quail.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The males and females    of the genetically fat strain and the commercial females may be seen as more    'normal' genotypes than the genetically lean strain. In these three normal genotypes,    feed efficiency improved when the birds that had been made fat nutritionally    were subsequently given a high protein feed. The reason for this, as shown by    the body analysis, was straight forward: Birds made fat at the start by giving    them a low protein feed had a much-reduced fat content in their subsequent gain,    provided that the protein content of this feed was sufficiently high.</font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">From a simulation    modelling perspective, it is useful to see the animal as having an inherent    lipid : protein ratio, which it attempts to maintain, implying that the animal    will be able to consume a feed, or a combination of feeds, that will allow it    to retain this ratio, and that at all times it will attempt to correct this    ratio if it has previously been made to deviate from it through incorrect feeding    in a given environment. This it does by utilizing the excess body lipid as an    energy source, provided that the dietary protein content is sufficiently high    to allow this. Presumably the rate at which it can make use of this body lipid    will depend also on the prevailing environmental temperature and other 'conditions    of rehabilitation', as proposed by Kyriazakis &amp; Emmans (1992). The hypothesis    that an animal will at all times attempt to retain its inherent lipid : protein    ratio cannot be rejected by the evidence presented above.</font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>Conclusions</b></font></p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The evidence presented    here suggests that, like growing pigs, broilers will at all times attempt to    maintain a genetically determined lipid : protein ratio by utilizing excess    body lipid as an energy source when the supply of the limiting nutrient is sufficient    to allow this. This means that the optimum protein content of feeds for broilers    in each phase of the growing period should not be determined independently of    the other feeds being used in the feeding programme.</font></p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>References</b></font></p>     <!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">AOAC, 1990. Official    Methods of Analysis. (Vol. 1. 15th ed.). Association of Official Analytical    Chemists, Virginia, USA.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623444&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Broekhuizen, N.,    Gurney, W.S.C., Jones, A. &amp; Bryant, A.D., 1994.Modelling compensatory growth.    Func. Ecol.8, 770-782.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623445&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800002&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Cherry, J.A., Siegel,    P.B. &amp; Beane, W.L., 1978. Genetic nutritional relationships in growth and    carcass characteristics of broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 57, 1482-1487.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623446&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800003&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"> Eits, R.M., Kwakkel,    R.P., Verstegen, M.W.A. &amp; Emmans, G.C., 2003. Responses of broiler chickens    to dietary protein: Effects of early life protein nutrition on later responses.    Br. Poult. Sci. 44, 398-409.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623447&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800004&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"> Emmans, G.C.,    1981. A model of the growth and feed intake of <i>ad libitum</i> fed animals,    particularly poultry. In: Computers in Animal Production. pp. 103-110. Occ.    Publ. No. 5. Br. Soc. Anim. Prod. </font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623448&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800005&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Ferguson, N.S.    &amp; Theeruth, B.K., 2002. Protein and lipid deposition rates in growing pigs    following a period of excess fattening. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 32, 97-105. </font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623449&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800006&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Foot, J.Z., 1972.    A note on the effect of body condition on the voluntary intake of dried grass    wafers by Scottish Blackface ewes. Anim. Prod. 14, 131-134. </font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623450&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800007&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Gous, R.M., Emmans,    G.C., Broadbent, L.A. &amp; Fisher, C., 1990. Nutritional effects on the growth    and fatness of broilers. Br. Poult. Sci. 31, 495-505. </font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623451&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800008&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Jackson, S., Summers,    J.D. &amp; Leeson, S., 1982. Effect of dietary protein and energy on broiler    carcass composition and efficiency of nutrient utilization. Poult. Sci. 61,    2224-2228.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623452&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800009&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"> Jones, G.D.P.    &amp; Farrell, D.J., 1989. Reducing body fat in broiler chickens and some physiological    consequences. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 19, 179-183. </font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623453&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800010&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Kyriazakis, I.    &amp; Emmans, G.C., 1992. The growth of mammals following a period of nutritional    limitation. J.Theor. Biol. 156, 485-498.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623454&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800011&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Kyriazakis, I.,    Stamataris, C., Emmans, G.C. &amp; Whittemore, C.T., 1991. The effects of food    protein content on the performance of pigs previously given foods with low or    moderate protein contents. Anim. Prod. 52,165-173.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623455&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800012&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Marks, H.L., 1978.    Compensatory growth in Japanese quail following protein restriction. Poult.    Sci. 57,1473-1477.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623456&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800013&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Pesti, G.M. &amp;    Fletcher, D.L., 1984. The response of male broiler chickens to diets with various    protein contents, during the grower and finisher phases. Br. Poult. Sci. 25,    415-423. Plavnik, I. &amp; Hurwitz, S., 1988. Early feed restriction in chicks:    effect of age, duration, and sex. Poult. Sci. 67,384-390.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623457&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800014&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref -->    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623458&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800015&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Plavnik, I. &amp;    Hurwitz, S., 1989. Effect of dietary protein, energy, and feed pelleting on    the response of chicks to early feed restriction. Poult. Sci. 68, 1118-1125.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623459&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800016&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"> Ryan, W.J., Williams,    I.H. &amp; Moir, R.J., 1993. Compensatory growth in sheep and cattle. II. Changes    in body composition and tissue weights. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 44, 1623-1638.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623460&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800017&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"> Sibbald, A.M.    &amp; Rhind, S.M., 1997. The effect of previous body condition on appetite and    associated insulin profiles in sheep. Anim. Sci. 64, 247-252. </font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623461&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800018&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Stamataris, C.,    Kyriazakis, I. &amp; Emmans, G.C., 1991. The performance and body composition    of young pigs following a period of growth retardation by food restriction.    Anim. Prod. 53, 373-381. </font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623462&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800019&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"> Whitehead, C.C.,    1990. Responses of body composition, growth and feed efficiency to dietary protein    in genetically lean and fat broilers up to seven weeks of age. Br. Poult. Sci.    31, 163-172. </font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623463&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800020&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Whittemore, C.T.,    1998. The Science and Practice of Pig Production, 2<sup>nd</sup> ed. Blackwell    Science Ltd., Oxford. Wilson, P.N. &amp; Osbourn, D.F., 1960. Compensatory growth    after undernutrition in mammals and birds. Biol. Rev. 35, 324-363.</font>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623464&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800021&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref -->    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=623465&pid=S0375-1589201200010000800022&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><p>&nbsp;</p>     <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Copyright resides    with the authors in terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 South African    Licence.    <br>   See: <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/za" target="_blank">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/za</a>    Condition of use: The user may copy, distribute, transmit and adapt the work,    but must recognise the authors and the South African Journal of Animal Science.    <br>   <a name="back"></a><a href="#top">#</a> Corresponding author: <a href="mailto:gous@ukzn.ac.za">gous@ukzn.ac.za</a></font></p>      ]]></body>
<REFERENCES></REFERENCES<back>
<ref-list>
<ref id="B1">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>AOAC</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Official Methods of Analysis.]]></source>
<year>1990</year>
<volume>1</volume>
<edition>15th</edition>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[^eVirginia^eUSA VirginiaUSA]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Association of Official Analytical Chemists]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Broekhuizen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[N.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Gurney]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[W.S.C.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Jones]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bryant]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A.D.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Modelling compensatory growth.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Func. Ecol.]]></source>
<year>1994</year>
<volume>8</volume>
<page-range>770-782</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cherry]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J.A.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Siegel,]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[P.B.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Beane]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[W.L.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Genetic nutritional relationships in growth and carcass characteristics of broiler chickens.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Poult. Sci.]]></source>
<year>1978</year>
<volume>57</volume>
<page-range>1482-1487.</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Eits]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R.M.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Kwakkel]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R.P.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Verstegen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M.W.A.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Emmans]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G.C.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Responses of broiler chickens to dietary protein: Effects of early life protein nutrition on later responses.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Br Poult Sci.]]></source>
<year>2003</year>
<volume>44</volume>
<page-range>398-409</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Emmans]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G.C.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[A model of the growth and feed intake of ad libitum fed animals, particularly poultry.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Computers in Animal Production.]]></source>
<year>1981</year>
<page-range>103-110</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ferguson]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[N.S.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Theeruth]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B.K.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Protein and lipid deposition rates in growing pigs following a period of excess fattening.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci.]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<volume>32</volume>
<page-range>97-105</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Foot]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J.Z.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[A note on the effect of body condition on the voluntary intake of dried grass wafers by Scottish Blackface ewes.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Anim. Prod.]]></source>
<year>1972</year>
<volume>14</volume>
<page-range>131-134</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Gous]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R.M.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Emmans]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G.C.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Broadbent]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L.A.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Fisher]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Nutritional effects on the growth and fatness of broilers.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Br. Poult. Sci.]]></source>
<year>1990</year>
<volume>31</volume>
<page-range>495-505</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Jackson]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Summers]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J.D.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Leeson]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Effect of dietary protein and energy on broiler carcass composition and efficiency of nutrient utilization.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Poult. Sci.]]></source>
<year>1982</year>
<volume>61</volume>
<page-range>2224-2228</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Jones]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G.D.P.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Farrell]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D.J.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Reducing body fat in broiler chickens and some physiological consequences.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci.]]></source>
<year>1989</year>
<volume>19</volume>
<page-range>179-183</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Kyriazakis]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[I.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Emmans]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G.C.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The growth of mammals following a period of nutritional limitation.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[J.Theor. Biol.]]></source>
<year>1992</year>
<volume>156</volume>
<page-range>485-498</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Kyriazakis]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[I.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Stamataris]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Emmans]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G.C.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Whittemore]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C.T.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The effects of food protein content on the performance of pigs previously given foods with low or moderate protein contents.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Anim. Prod.]]></source>
<year>1991</year>
<volume>52</volume>
<page-range>165-173</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Marks]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H.L.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Compensatory growth in Japanese quail following protein restriction.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Poult. Sci.]]></source>
<year>1978</year>
<volume>57</volume>
<page-range>1473-1477</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B14">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Pesti]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G.M.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Fletcher]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D.L.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The response of male broiler chickens to diets with various protein contents, during the grower and finisher phases.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Br. Poult. Sci.]]></source>
<year>1984</year>
<volume>25</volume>
<page-range>415-423.</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B15">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Plavnik]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[I.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hurwitz]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Early feed restriction in chicks: effect of age, duration, and sex.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Poult. Sci.]]></source>
<year>1988</year>
<volume>67</volume>
<page-range>384-390.</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B16">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Plavnik]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[I.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hurwitz]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Effect of dietary protein, energy, and feed pelleting on the response of chicks to early feed restriction.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Poult. Sci.]]></source>
<year>1989</year>
<volume>68</volume>
<page-range>1118-1125.</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ryan]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[W.J.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Williams]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[I.H.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Moir]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R.J.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Compensatory growth in sheep and cattle.: II. Changes in body composition and tissue weights.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Aust. J. Agric. Res.]]></source>
<year>1993</year>
<volume>44</volume>
<page-range>1623-1638.</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sibbald]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A.M.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Rhind]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S.M.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The effect of previous body condition on appetite and associated insulin profiles in sheep.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Anim. Sci]]></source>
<year>1997</year>
<volume>64</volume>
<page-range>247-252</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Stamataris]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Kyriazakis]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[I.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Emmans]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G.C.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The performance and body composition of young pigs following a period of growth retardation by food restriction.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Anim. Prod.]]></source>
<year>1991</year>
<volume>53</volume>
<page-range>373-381</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B20">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Whitehead]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C.C.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Responses of body composition, growth and feed efficiency to dietary protein in genetically lean and fat broilers up to seven weeks of age.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Br. Poult. Sci.]]></source>
<year>1990</year>
<volume>31</volume>
<page-range>163-172</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B21">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Whittemore]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C.T.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[The Science and Practice of Pig Production]]></source>
<year>1998</year>
<edition>2nd</edition>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Oxford. ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Blackwell Science Ltd.]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B22">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Wilson]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[P.N.]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Osbourn]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D.F.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Compensatory growth after undernutrition in mammals and birds.]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Biol. Rev.]]></source>
<year>1960</year>
<volume>35</volume>
<page-range>324-363.</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>
