The effect of slaughter weight on the carcass characteristics of pork with sex type as co-variable
E. Pieterse A B E , L. C. Hoffman A , F. K. Siebrits B C , E. L. Gloy A B and E. Polawska DA University of Stellenbosch, Department of Animal Science, Private Bag X 1, Matieland, 7601.
B Agricultural Research Council – Animal Nutrition and Animal Products Institute, Private Bag X 2, Irene, 0026.
C Tshwane University of Technology, Department of Animal Production, Private Bag X680, Pretoria, 0001.
D Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of Genetics and Animal Breeding, 05-552 Jastrzębiec, Poland.
E Corresponding author. Email: elsjep@sun.ac.za
Animal Production Science 56(1) 55-60 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN14183
Submitted: 10 March 2014 Accepted: 25 September 2014 Published: 21 July 2015
Abstract
A study was conducted with 192 pigs of three sex types with treatments according to slaughter weight (65 kg to 144 kg). The main statistical differences observed were for slaughter weight with significant (P < 0.05) and highly significant (P < 0.01) differences describing more than 10% of variance observed for all characteristics (liveweight, warm carcass weight, dressing percentage, eye muscle area, subcutaneous fat thickness, intramuscular fat area, subcutaneous fat : eye muscle area, intramuscular fat : eye muscle area, fat thickness, muscle depth, carcass length, ham circumference, ham length and chest depth) measured. Sex differences (P < 0.05) were also observed for dressing percentage, fat measurements and muscle depth measured between the 5th and 6th lumbar vertebrae. Sex type differences, in all instances, accounted for 10% or less variance except for subcutaneous fat : eye muscle area ratio (18.47%). It was shown that although significant sex type differences (P < 0.05) existed; slaughter weight had the largest effect on carcass characteristics in the given circumstances accounting for most of the observed variance.
Additional keywords: dressing percentage, eye muscle area, fat thickness, muscle depth.
References
Apple J, Maxwell C, Galloway D, Hutchison S, Hamilton C (2009) Interactive effects of dietary fat source and slaughter weight in growing-finishing swine: I. Growth performance and longissimus muscle fatty acid composition. Journal of Animal Science 87, 1407–1422.| Interactive effects of dietary fat source and slaughter weight in growing-finishing swine: I. Growth performance and longissimus muscle fatty acid composition.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXjsFKisL8%3D&md5=e396087ff0cf9fb451c55251925ff77bCAS | 19066246PubMed |
Blanchard PJ, Warkup CC, Ellis M, Willis MB, Avery P (1999) The influence of the proportion of Duroc genes on growth, carcass and pork eating quality characteristics. Animal Science - Glasgow 68, 495–502.
Braňa DV, Rojo-Gómez GA, Ellis M, Cuaron JA (2013) Effect of gender (gilt and surgically and immunocastrated male) and ractopamine hydrochloride supplementation on growth performance, carcass and pork quality characteristics of finishing pigs under commercial conditions. Journal of Animal Science 91, 5894–5904.
| Effect of gender (gilt and surgically and immunocastrated male) and ractopamine hydrochloride supplementation on growth performance, carcass and pork quality characteristics of finishing pigs under commercial conditions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24265327PubMed |
Channon HA, Kerr MG, Walker PJ (2004) Effect of Duroc content, sex and ageing period on meat and eating quality attributes of pork loin. Meat Science 66, 881–888.
| Effect of Duroc content, sex and ageing period on meat and eating quality attributes of pork loin.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3sXpt1emsLg%3D&md5=517f75f1c7a1e2e9671bea4133f31b54CAS | 22061021PubMed |
Cisneros F, Ellis M, McKeith F, McCaw J, Fernando R (1996) Influence of slaughter weight on growth and carcass characteristics, commercial cutting and curing yields, and meat quality of barrows and gilts from two genotypes. Journal of Animal Science 74, 925–933.
Corino C, Musella M, Mourot J (2008) Influence of extruded linseed on growth, carcass composition, and meat quality of slaughtered pigs at one hundred ten and one hundred sixty kilograms. Journal of Animal Science 86, 1850–1860.
| Influence of extruded linseed on growth, carcass composition, and meat quality of slaughtered pigs at one hundred ten and one hundred sixty kilograms.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXpt12hsLo%3D&md5=8ef4e6c0c7e9092cd2efb1bd3f740247CAS | 18441078PubMed |
D’Souza D, Pethick D, Dunshea F, Suster D, Pluske J, Mullan B (2004) The pattern of fat and lean muscle tissue deposition differs in the different pork primal cuts of female pigs during the finisher growth phase. Livestock Production Science 91, 1–8.
| The pattern of fat and lean muscle tissue deposition differs in the different pork primal cuts of female pigs during the finisher growth phase.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ellis M, Webb A, Avery P, Brown I (1996) The influence of terminal sire genotype, sex, slaughter weight, feeding regime and slaughter-house on growth performance and carcass and meat quality in pigs and on the organoleptic properties of fresh pork. Animal Science 62, 521–530.
| The influence of terminal sire genotype, sex, slaughter weight, feeding regime and slaughter-house on growth performance and carcass and meat quality in pigs and on the organoleptic properties of fresh pork.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Genstat (2000) Genstat for Windows. Release 4.2.
Gispert M, Àngels Oliver M, Velarde A, Suarez P, Pérez J, Font i Furnols M (2010) Carcass and meat quality characteristics of immuno castrated male, surgically castrated male, entire male and female pigs. Meat Science 85, 664–670.
| Carcass and meat quality characteristics of immuno castrated male, surgically castrated male, entire male and female pigs.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20416805PubMed |
Gu Y, Schinckel A, Martin T (1992) Growth, development, and carcass composition in five genotypes of swine. Journal of Animal Science 70, 1719–1729.
Heyer A, Lebret B (2007) Compensatory growth response in pigs: effects on growth performance, composition of weight gain at carcass and muscle levels, and meat quality. Journal of Animal Science 85, 769–778.
| Compensatory growth response in pigs: effects on growth performance, composition of weight gain at carcass and muscle levels, and meat quality.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXit1Wktb4%3D&md5=9d0dc95c951dbf1eedfdc195f67c4852CAS | 17296780PubMed |
Latorre MA, Lazaro R, Valencia DG, Medel P, Mateos GG (2004) The effects of gender and slaughter weight on the growth performance, carcass traits, and meat quality characteristics of heavy pigs 1. Journal of Animal Science 82, 526–533.
Raj S, Skiba G, Weremko D, Fandrejewski H, Migdał W, Borowiec F, Poławska E (2010) The relationship between the chemical composition of the carcass and the fatty acid composition of intramuscular fat and backfat of several pig breeds slaughtered at different weights. Meat Science 86, 324–330.
| The relationship between the chemical composition of the carcass and the fatty acid composition of intramuscular fat and backfat of several pig breeds slaughtered at different weights.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3cXptVejs7k%3D&md5=96708ec91e0fe406f6a8094d7ec8da57CAS | 20665991PubMed |
Tibau J, Gonzalez J, Soler J, Gispert M, Lizardo R, Mourot J (2002) Influence of pig slaughter weight (range 25 to 140 kg) on the chemical composition of the carcass: effect of genotype and sex. In ‘34émes Journées de la Recherche Porcine, sous l’égide de l’Association Françcaise de Zootechnie, Paris, France, 5–7 février 2002’. pp. 121–127. (Institut Technique du Porc: Paris, France)
Whittemore C (1998) ‘The science and practice of pig production.’ (Blackwell Science Ltd: Oxford)
Wood J, Enser M, Fisher A, Nute G, Sheard P, Richardson R, Hughes S, Whittington F (2008) Fat deposition, fatty acid composition and meat quality: a review. Meat Science 78, 343–358.
| Fat deposition, fatty acid composition and meat quality: a review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXhsVCls7s%3D&md5=888ca6c1a34f7dd1dd0eca5d3e83e849CAS | 22062452PubMed |
