Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T04:44:40.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Backfat quality in boars and barrows at 90 kg live weight

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. D. Wood
Affiliation:
AFRC Meat Research Institute, Longford, Bristol BS18 7DY
R. C. D. Jones
Affiliation:
AFRC Meat Research Institute, Longford, Bristol BS18 7DY
J. A. Bayntun
Affiliation:
AFRC Meat Research Institute, Longford, Bristol BS18 7DY
E. Dransfield
Affiliation:
AFRC Meat Research Institute, Longford, Bristol BS18 7DY
Get access

Abstract

Forty male commercial hybrid pigs, half castrated at 10 days of age, were used in a study to determine whether boars at bacon weight (90 kg live weight) have different fat quality from barrows. Fat quality was defined as the firmness and cohesiveness of subcutaneous fat, both properties being measured using an Instron materials testing instrument. Within each group of boars and barrows, half the pigs were fed a normal commercial diet and half a lower energy diet at a lower level of food intake. The latter diet provided relatively more energy as C18:2 (linoleic acid).

Firmness of subcutaneous fat was related to fat thickness and to concentrations of the chemical components in the fat which are affected by fat thickness. The single best predictor of firmness was C18:0 (stearic acid). Cohesiveness was less closely related to fat thickness and was most associated with the concentration of C18:2.

On the low energy/high C18:2 diet, all the pigs were judged to have soft fat, the difference between boars and barrows being small and explained by the difference in fat thickness. On the normal commercial diet, some barrows had particularly firm fat but they had thicker fat than any of the boars. Most (0·84) of the pigs in the experiment had P2 values (fat thickness over the m. longissimus at the last rib) between 8 and 15 mm. In this range there was no difference in firmness between boars and barrows. Cohesiveness was also similar between boars and barrows.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Brown, A. J. and Wood, J. D. 1979. Pig carcass evaluation — measurement of composition using a standardised butchery method. Memo. Meat Res. Inst., No. 42.Google Scholar
Dransfield, E. and Jones, R. C. D. 1984. Texture and mechanical properties of pork backfat. J. Fd Technol. 19: 181196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enser, M. 1984. The relationship between the composition and consistency of pig backfat. In Fat Quality in Lean Pigs (ed. Wood, J. D.), pp. 5357. Document No. EUR 8901 EN. Commission of the European Communities, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1983. Very Lean Pigs. Planning and Development Team Report. Meat and Livestock Commission, Bletchley, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
Mottram, D. S., Wood, J. D. and Patterson, R. L. S. 1982. Comparison of boars and castrates for bacon production. 3. Composition and eating quality of bacon. Anim. Prod. 35: 7580.Google Scholar
Pool, M. F. 1967. Objective measurement of connective tissue tenacity of poultry meat. J. Food Sci. 32: 550553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, J. D. 1984. Fat deposition and the quality of fat tissue in meat animals. In Fats in Animal Nutrition (ed. Wiseman, J.), pp. 407435. Butterworth, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, J. D. and Enser, M. 1982. Comparison of boars and castrates for bacon production. 2. Composition of muscle and subcutaneous fat, and changes in side weight during curing. Anim. Prod. 35: 6574.Google Scholar
Wood, J. D., Enser, M. B., MacFie, H. J. H., Smith, W. C., Chadwick, J. P. and Ellis, M. 1978. Fatty acid composition of backfat in Large White pigs selected for low backfat thickness. Meat Sci. 2: 289300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wood, J. D. and Riley, J. E. 1982. Comparison of boars and castrates for bacon production. 1. Growth data, and carcass and joint composition. Anim. Prod. 35: 5563.Google Scholar