Animal Science Department

 

Authors

Date of this Version

2009

Comments

Published in 2009 Nebraska Swine Report. Published by Extension Division, Agricultural Research Division, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resouces, University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Copyright ©2009 Regents of the University of Nebraska.

Abstract

Pigs treated alike vary in performance due to their different genetic makeup and to environmental effect we cannot completely control. When a group of pigs is randomly allotted to treatments it is nearly impossible to get an "equal" group of pigs on each treatment. The natural variability among pigs and the number of pigs per treatment determine the expected variation among treatment groups due to random sampling.

At the end of an experiment, the experimenter must decide whether observed treatment differences are due to "real" effects of the treatments or to random differences due to the sample of pigs assigned to each treatment. Statistics are a tool used to aid in this decision. They are used to calculate the probability that observed differences between treatments were caused by the luck of the draw when pigs were assigned to treatments. The lower this probability, the greater confidence we have that "real" treatment effects exist. In fact when this probability is less than .05 (denoted P < .05 in the articles), there is less than a 5% chance (less than 1 in 20) that observed treatment differences were due to random sampling. The conclusion then is that the treatment effects are "real" and caused different performance for pigs on each treatment. But bear in mind that if the experimenter obtained this result in each of 100 experiments, 5 differences would be declared to be "real" when they were really due to chance. Sometimes the probability value calculatedfrom a statistical analysis is P < .01. Now the chance that random sampling of pigs caused observed treatment differences is less than 1 in 100. Evidence for real treatment differences is very strong.

Share

COinS