Attitudes and Beliefs Towards Ration Planning Among German Organic Pig and Poultry Farmers.

IF 2.7 2区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE
Animals Pub Date : 2025-03-12 DOI:10.3390/ani15060807
Margret Krieger, Susanne Hoischen-Taubner, Leonie Blume, Albert Sundrum
{"title":"Attitudes and Beliefs Towards Ration Planning Among German Organic Pig and Poultry Farmers.","authors":"Margret Krieger, Susanne Hoischen-Taubner, Leonie Blume, Albert Sundrum","doi":"10.3390/ani15060807","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Providing young monogastric animals with the essential amino acids they need is challenging in organic feeding. The nutrient content of organic feeds varies widely, and additives are restricted, so feed rations must be formulated based on analysis. A survey of 56 organic pig and poultry farmers in Germany was carried out to investigate their attitudes towards ration planning and to examine and evaluate the feeding management on their farms. Principal component analysis was used to characterise the different attitudes. Cluster analysis revealed three groups: Farmers in Group 1 (n = 28) were uncertain about the nutrient requirements of organic animals. They accepted the importance of need-based feeding for health and performance, but did not recognise the importance of regular ration adjustments and were uncertain about the animals' ability to compensate for deficiencies. In Group 2 (n = 11), need-based feeding and regular ration adjustments were most important to farmers, who were more likely to have professional feeding systems. In Group 3 (n = 17), farmers were least uncertain about nutrient requirements and did not believe that animals would lower their demand when undersupplied. Although the importance of need-based feeding was recognised, regular ration adjustment was of little importance for this group. Across all farms, 60% of the feed rations examined deviated significantly from recommendations. It is concluded that organic farmers need more guidance and perhaps pressure to fulfil their responsibility to provide their animals with the nutrients they need.</p>","PeriodicalId":7955,"journal":{"name":"Animals","volume":"15 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11939204/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animals","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15060807","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Providing young monogastric animals with the essential amino acids they need is challenging in organic feeding. The nutrient content of organic feeds varies widely, and additives are restricted, so feed rations must be formulated based on analysis. A survey of 56 organic pig and poultry farmers in Germany was carried out to investigate their attitudes towards ration planning and to examine and evaluate the feeding management on their farms. Principal component analysis was used to characterise the different attitudes. Cluster analysis revealed three groups: Farmers in Group 1 (n = 28) were uncertain about the nutrient requirements of organic animals. They accepted the importance of need-based feeding for health and performance, but did not recognise the importance of regular ration adjustments and were uncertain about the animals' ability to compensate for deficiencies. In Group 2 (n = 11), need-based feeding and regular ration adjustments were most important to farmers, who were more likely to have professional feeding systems. In Group 3 (n = 17), farmers were least uncertain about nutrient requirements and did not believe that animals would lower their demand when undersupplied. Although the importance of need-based feeding was recognised, regular ration adjustment was of little importance for this group. Across all farms, 60% of the feed rations examined deviated significantly from recommendations. It is concluded that organic farmers need more guidance and perhaps pressure to fulfil their responsibility to provide their animals with the nutrients they need.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Animals
Animals Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Animal Science and Zoology
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
3015
审稿时长
20.52 days
期刊介绍: Animals (ISSN 2076-2615) is an international and interdisciplinary scholarly open access journal. It publishes original research articles, reviews, communications, and short notes that are relevant to any field of study that involves animals, including zoology, ethnozoology, animal science, animal ethics and animal welfare. However, preference will be given to those articles that provide an understanding of animals within a larger context (i.e., the animals'' interactions with the outside world, including humans). There is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research in as much detail as possible. Full experimental details and/or method of study, must be provided for research articles. Articles submitted that involve subjecting animals to unnecessary pain or suffering will not be accepted, and all articles must be submitted with the necessary ethical approval (please refer to the Ethical Guidelines for more information).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信