Two decades of swine nutrition: what have we learned?

From Base Mixes to More Precise Formulation

Twenty years ago, many independent producers were feeding diets consisting primarily of corn, soybean meal and a base mix. Synthetic amino acids were used sparingly, if at all.

As feed mills became more automated, we gained the ability to incorporate additional ingredients and formulate diets more precisely.

One of the biggest advancements during this period was the increased use of synthetic amino acids.

Initially, lysine was the primary synthetic amino acid available. As additional amino acids became commercially available and research expanded, nutritionists could formulate diets with less soybean meal while still meeting the pig’s nutritional requirements.

That wasn’t necessarily an easy transition.

Producers had been feeding corn and soybean meal for generations. Convincing them they could reduce soybean meal inclusion, incorporate synthetic amino acids and maintain performance required research and time.

Today, using synthetic amino acids is standard practice in many feeding programs. It’s easy to forget how significant that change was when it first occurred.

The advancement also demonstrates how closely feed manufacturing and nutrition are connected. Without improvements in manufacturing capabilities, many of the formulation strategies we use today would have been more difficult to implement.

Learning to Feed New Ingredients

The expansion of the ethanol industry brought another major change to swine nutrition.

As ethanol plants were built across the Midwest, distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) became increasingly available. At the same time, higher corn prices created additional interest in alternative ingredients.

But incorporating DDGS into swine diets wasn’t as simple as replacing one ingredient with another.

We needed research to understand appropriate inclusion rates, nutrient digestibility and how differences in processing affected ingredient quality.

Not all DDGS sources are created equal. Processing methods can influence the nutritional value of the finished product, making ingredient evaluation an important part of formulation.

Feed mills also had to adapt.

When producers were feeding primarily corn and soybean meal, they didn’t need extensive ingredient storage. As DDGS and other byproducts became available, mills needed additional bins and handling capabilities.

That created opportunities to incorporate other ingredients, including wheat middlings and bakery byproducts.

What seemed like a significant change 15 years ago is now a routine part of feeding pigs.

Rethinking Nursery Nutrition

One of the more recent developments I’ve been interested in is how we’re feeding newly weaned pigs.

Historically, nursery diets relied heavily on dairy ingredients, particularly lactose and whey products, to help pigs transition to solid feed.

In recent years, we’ve evaluated alternative ingredients from the human food industry, including sugar sources and steam-rolled oats.

At Carthage, our nursery feeding program has moved toward using food-grade ingredients originally produced for human consumption.

There are two primary reasons behind that change: performance and cost.

Research presented by Iowa State University has demonstrated that pigs can prefer diets containing sucrose over those containing traditional lactose sources. In one preference comparison, 76.9% of the feed consumed during the second phase came from the sucrose diet.

A nursery diet can look good on paper, but if pigs aren’t eating it, we’re not accomplishing what we need to.

Improving early feed intake can help support growth and reduce the number of pigs falling behind. When alternative ingredients can also be sourced economically, producers have an opportunity to improve the overall value of their feeding programs.

I think this is an important example of how nutritional research continues to challenge traditional formulation practices.

Just because we’ve used an ingredient for decades doesn’t mean we shouldn’t evaluate alternatives.

Feed Manufacturing Comes Full Circle

The evolution of feed manufacturing is another interesting part of this story.

Many producers once ground and mixed feed directly on the farm. As operations expanded, some transitioned to smaller stationary mills before eventually relying on larger commercial facilities.

Those changes made it possible to manufacture more complex diets at greater scale.

Today, we’re seeing some producers invest in their own feed mills again.

In a way, we’ve come full circle.

Of course, the facilities being built today are considerably different from the tractor-powered grinders many of us grew up around. Modern mills have automation, greater ingredient storage capacity and more precise manufacturing capabilities.

But the underlying goal remains familiar: producing feed efficiently while maintaining control over quality and cost.

What Will the Next Five Years Bring?

When I look back at the past two decades, it’s interesting to think about how many things we now consider standard practice were once significant changes.

Synthetic amino acids, DDGS and alternative nursery ingredients all required research and a willingness to approach nutrition differently.

And I don’t expect that to change.

As genetics improve, animal health challenges evolve and feed manufacturing technology advances, our nutritional programs will have to continue adapting.

For producers, I think the biggest takeaway is to keep evaluating what’s working and where there’s room for improvement.

Are we making the best use of available ingredients? Are our feeding programs keeping pace with genetics? Are we evaluating performance alongside feed cost?

Those questions are just as important today as they were 20 years ago.

Genetics, health and feed manufacturing have never stood still for long. What we do today may be commonplace in five years.

The next advancement in swine nutrition may be something we’re already researching today. The question is whether we’re willing to keep learning, evaluating and improving.