Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T02:12:41.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The relationship between the body shape of living pigs and their carcass morphology and composition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

A. B. Doeschl ,
D. M. Green ,
C. T. Whittemore ,
C. P. Schofield ,
A. V. Fisher  and
P. W. Knap
A. B. Doeschl*
Affiliation:
PIC International Group, 2 Kingston Business Park, Kingston Bagpuize, Oxfordshire OX13 5AS, UK
D. M. Green
Affiliation:
School of Geosciences, Agriculture Building, King’s Buildings, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
C. T. Whittemore
Affiliation:
School of Geosciences, Agriculture Building, King’s Buildings, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK
C. P. Schofield
Affiliation:
BBSRC Silsoe Research Institute, Wrest Park, Silsoe, Bedford MK45 4HS, UK
A. V. Fisher
Affiliation:
Division of Farm Animal Science, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
P. W. Knap*
Affiliation:
PIC International Group, 2 Kingston Business Park, Kingston Bagpuize, Oxfordshire OX13 5AS, UK
*
Stationed at Animal Health and Nutrition Department, Scottish Agricultural College, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian EH26 0PH, UK.Correspondence to this address. E-mail: [email protected]
Stationed at PIC Deutschland GmbH, Ratsteich 31, 24837 Schleswig, Germany
Get access

Abstract

The conformation, tissue composition, and chemical composition of three types of pigs, given food ad libitum and slaughtered over a nominal live weight range of 35 to 115 kg, was assessed in relation to data provided on the live animals by a visual image analysis (VIA) system. The pig types were named as ‘3⁄4 Landrace’, ‘1⁄2 Pietrain’, and ‘1⁄4 Meishan’ types, representing ‘attenuated’, ‘blocky’, and ‘flabby’ types. Three analyses of the shape, conformation and composition data were performed. First, the relationship between conformation and age/size was assessed using linear regression of logarithmically transformed VIA and carcass data. In relation to age, ‘1⁄2 Pietrain’ pigs were found by both VIA and carcass measurements to have the widest shoulders. Both analyses also found this type to have the widest ham, trunk, and shoulders in relation to body length across most of the body length range studied, although the greatest rate of increase in ham width in relation to body length was found in the ‘1/4 Meishan’ type pigs. Second, the relationship between composition and VIA shape was examined using linear regression of transformed and standardized data. Significant relationships were found between fat, lipid, muscle, and protein weight and VIA shape, although relationships were weaker for protein and muscle weight. For fat and lipid, the VIA shape measures from the trunk region proved the most informative, whereas the VIA ham measures proved the most informative for muscle and protein. Third, detrended measures of composition/conformation and shape were used to remove the effect of animal size from the data. Removal of the variation due to growth generally led to substantial decreases in the adjusted R2 statistics and in the R2-like statistics for prediction. Although in the models without detrending, relative fat and lipid weight had been found most strongly correlated with VIA shape, relative muscle was found most strongly correlated with shape in the detrended data. This was considered to result from the low between-animal variation in the data set combined with greater across-weight variation in fat and lipid weights than muscle and protein weights in the data without trend removal. Future trials with greater between-animal variation imposed would allow more precise determination of the relationship between conformation and shape.

Keywords

carcass compositionconformationgrowthpigsvisual image analysis
Type
Growth, development and meat science
Information
Animal Science , Volume 79 , Issue 1 , August 2004 , pp. 73 - 83
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2004

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

Bastianelli, D. and Sauvant, D. 1997. Modelling the mechanism of pig growth. Livestock Production Science 51: 97–107.Google Scholar
Brody, S. 1945. Bioenergetics and growth: with special reference to the efficiency complex in domestic animals. Reinhold, New York.Google Scholar
Brown, A. J. and Wood, J. D. 1979. Pig carcass evaluation – measurement of composition using a standard butchery method Meat Research Institute memorandum no. 42. Agricultural Research Council, London.Google Scholar
Brown, C. 2004. Who matters? The changing market: perspective from multiple retailers. In The appliance of pig science (ed. Thompson, J. E. Gill, B. P. and Varley, M. A.), British Society of Animal Science, occasional publication no. 31, pp. 19–22.Google Scholar
Davies, A. S. 1974. A comparison of tissue development in Pietrain and Large White pigs from birth to 64 kg live weight. Animal Production 19: 267–376.Google Scholar
Doeschl, A. B., Whittemore, C. T., Knap, P. W. and Schofield, C. P. 2004. Using visual image analysis to describe pig growth in terms of size and shape. Animal Science In press.Google Scholar
Emmans, G. C. and Kyriazakis, I. 1997. Models of pig growth: problems and proposed solutions. Livestock Production Science 51: 97–107.Google Scholar
Fisher, A. V., Green, D. M., Whittemore, C. T., Wood, J. D. and Schofield, C. P. 2003. Growth of carcass components and its relation with conformation in pigs of three types. Meat Science 65: 639–650.Google Scholar
Fortin, A., Wood, J. D. and Whelehan, O. P. 1987. Breed and sex effects on the development and proportions of muscle, fat and bone in pigs. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 108: 141–153.Google Scholar
Green, D. M., Brotherstone, S., Schofield, C. P. and Whittemore, C. T. 2003. Food intake and live growth performance of pigs measured automatically and continuously from 25 to 115 kg live weight. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 83: 1150–1155.Google Scholar
Huxley, J. 1932. Problems of relative growth. Methuen, London.Google Scholar
Marchant, J. A., Schofield, C. P. and White, R. P. 1999. Pig growth and conformation monitoring using image analysis. Animal Science 68: 141–150.Google Scholar
Montgomery, D. C. and Peck, E. A. 1992. Introduction to linear regression analysis, second edition. Wiley series in probability and statistics. John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Mueller, E., Moser, G., Bartenschlager, H. and Geldermann, H. 2000. Trait values of growth, carcass and meat quality in Wild Boar, Meishan and Pietrain pigs as well as their crossbred generations. Zeitschrift für Tierzürchtung und Zürchtungsbiologie 117: 189–202.Google Scholar
Quiniou, N., Noblet, J. and Dourmad, J.-Y. 1996. Effect of energy intake on the performance of different types of pig from 45 to 100 kg body weight. 2. Tissue gain. Animal Science 63: 289–296.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1999. SAS/STAT user’s guide, version 8. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Tullis, J. B. 1982. Protein growth in pigs. Ph. D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
White, R. P., Schofield, C. P., Green, D. M., Parsons, D. J. and Whittemore, C. T. 2004. The effectiveness of a visual image analysis (VIA) system for monitoring the performance of growing/finishing pigs. Animal Science 78: 409–418.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T., Green, D. M., Wood, J. D., Fisher, A. V. and Schofield, C. P. 2003. Physical and chemical composition of the carcass of three different types of pigs grown from 25 to 115 kg live weight. Animal Science 77: 235–245.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. and Schofield, C. P. 2000. A case for size and shape scaling for understanding nutrient use in breeding sows and growing pigs. Livestock Production Science 65: 203–208.Google Scholar