In group C piglets, we also observed an increase
in the level of iron in the blood, but this value
was below the physiological minimum, as found by
Peters and Mahan [14] in their research. However,
when we looked at the value of Fe in the blood only of piglets which had iron administered, compared to
the average of the three administration method groups,
it was clear that the SC administration produced the
highest level, while PO administration produced the
lowest level. The values of Hb and Hct found in piglet
blood followed a similar trend.
The reason for lower values of Fe in piglet
blood after oral application of emulsion is likely due
to lower intake, i.e. mistakes during the administration.
In a previous study [13], no significant differences
were found in the time required for administration of
iron between the parenteral (injection) and peroral (in
the form of emulsion) methods of administration (24
vs. 20 s per pig, respectively). Often, though, during
peroral administration, piglets do not get the intended
dose of iron [19], while this hardly ever occurs with
parenteral administration. Maes et al. [12] reported no
difference resulting between peroral and parenteral administration
of iron in piglets. They administered iron
via feed for several days after the birth of piglets, but
it is obvious that in this kind of administration there
is a high risk of low consumption of feed by piglets in
this age group [19].
Peters and Mahan [14] reported that piglets
which did not have iron administered at birth had a
lower body weight and ADG at weaning compared to
piglets which revieved iron injections, which was also
confirmed in this study. At the end of the nurturing
stage (70th day), piglets which did not receive iron had
lower body weights, as a result of lower ADG during
the nurturing period and less weight at weaning.