SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.7 número1Micropropagación de dos variedades de frutilla (Fragaria Ananassa Duch.) En diferentes medios de cultivoCaracterización de fincas productoras de limón (citrus aurantifolia) en Portoviejo, Ecuador índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Journal

Artigo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • Não possue artigos similaresSimilares em SciELO

Compartilhar


Revista de Investigación e Innovación Agropecuaria y de Recursos Naturales

versão impressa ISSN 2409-1618

Resumo

SARRIA BARDALES, José Antonio; CANTARO SEGURA, Jose Luis  e  MOSQUEIRA ROBLES, Alexandra. Comparative evaluation of feeders in the growth of cuyes (Cavia porcellus). RIIARn [online]. 2020, vol.7, n.1, pp.79-87. ISSN 2409-1618.

Abstract The objective of the research was to evaluate the productive and economic efficiency of guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) during the growth stage, through the use of three types of feeders (clay well, plastic bird-type hopper and metal rabbit-type hopper) in interaction with two types of accommodation (cages and pools). 72 freshly weaned male improved guinea pigs (14 ± 3 days), belonging to the Cieneguilla-UNALM genotype, were used for seven weeks. A complete randomized design with factorial arrangement of six treatments and three replications of four animals in each was used; being: pool with clay well (T1), pool with plastic bird-type hopper (T2), pool with metal rabbit-type feeder (T3), cage with clay well (T4), cage with bird-type hopper (T5) and cage with metallic rabbit type feeder (T6). Balanced feed, which was wholemeal in flour, and water were supplied ad libitum. Weight gain, feed consumption, feed conversion, losses, mortality and economic compensation were evaluated. The results indicate that the highest consumption (P<0.05), considering the decrease, as part of it, occurs in the treatments that used a clay well; meanwhile the plastic hopper feeder allowed the lowest percentage of lost food (P<0.05). Regarding the type of guinea pig, the cage system was superior (P <0.05) in weight gain. Finally, the T5 (plastic cage hopper) evidenced having the parameters below the numerical averages of the others, which had an impact on their remuneration and economic merit, being in this sense the most efficient alternative; considering only the food item as the productive cost

Palavras-chave : guinea pig; equipment; facilities; feeders.

        · resumo em Espanhol     · texto em Espanhol     · Espanhol ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License Todo o conteúdo deste periódico, exceto onde está identificado, está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons