Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T00:35:31.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of increasing slaughter weight on the production performance and meat quality of finishing pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. N. Weatherup ,
V. E. Beattie ,
B. W. Moss ,
D. J. Kilpatrick  and
N. Walker
R. N. Weatherup
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough Co. Down BT26 6DR
V. E. Beattie
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough Co. Down BT26 6DR
B. W. Moss
Affiliation:
Department of Food Science, The Queen's University of Belfast, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT9 5PX
D. J. Kilpatrick
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture for Northern Ireland, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT9 5PX
N. Walker
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough Co. Down BT26 6DR
Get access

Abstract

A study was made in two parts to establish the production performance potential of pigs taken to heavy slaughter weights (a) in individual housing and (b) in group housing. In experiment 1 96 crossbred pigs, comprised of equal numbers of boars, castrated males and gilts, were housed individually from 50 kg live weight and offered food ad libitum until one of four target slaughter weights was reached (70, 80, 90 or 100 kg carcass weight). Detailed dissection and meat quality assessments were performed on sample joints taken from these pigs. There were significant interactions in that boars maintained a high level offood conversion efficiency while this deteriorated at heavier weights for castrated males and gilts. Protein deposition rates (PDR) were estimated to be close to, or in excess of, 200 glday for boars. Daily live-weight gains were similar at all four slaughter weights despite increases (P < 0·001) in daily food intake at the heavier weights. Sample joint contents of lean (P < 0·05) and bone (P = 0·001) decreased while subcutaneous fat content increased (P < 0·001) with increasing slaughter weight. Cooking loss was reduced (P < 0·001) at the heavier weights while other meat quality parameters were not significantly affected by slaughter weight or gender. In experiment 2 288 group-housed boars and gilts were slaughtered at the same four target carcass weights as in experiment 1. Daily food intake, daily live-weight gain and variability in performance were lower for group-housed animals. It is concluded that maximum lean growth lies beyond ad libitum food intake for group-housed pigs of the genotype used in the present study. There are opportunities to take pigs to high slaughter weights with no reduction in daily live-weight gain and concomitant improvements in some aspects of meat quality.

Keywords

carcass weightgrowthmeat qualitypigssex
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 67 , Issue 3 , December 1998 , pp. 591 - 600
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1998

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

Agricultural Research Council. 1981. The nutrient requirements of pigs. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough, UK.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1989. Single-space feeders: principles of design. Pig International. 19: 32–36.Google Scholar
Barton-Gade, P. A. 1987. Meat quality of boars, castrates and gilts. Livestock Production Science. 16: 187–196.Google Scholar
Bidanel, J. P., Ducos, A., Gubluez, R. and Labroue, F. 1994. Genetic parameters of backfat thickness, age at 100 kg and ultimate pH in on-farm tested French Landrace and Large White pigs. Livestock Production Science. 40: 291–301.Google Scholar
Bligh, E. G. and Dyer, W. J. 1959. A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Canadian Journal of Biochemistry and Physiology. 37: 911–917.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bustamante, M., Jesse, G. W., Becker, B. A. and Krause, G. F. 1996. Effects of individual vs group penning on the performance of weanling pigs. Journal of Animal Science. 74: 1457–1461.Google Scholar
Campbell, R. G. and Taverner, M. R. 1988. Genotype and sex effects on the relationship between energy intake and protein deposition in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science. 66: 676–686.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, R. G., Taverner, M. R. and Curie, D. M. 1984. Effect of feeding level and dietary protein content on the growth, body composition and rate of protein deposition in pigs growing from 45 to 90 kg. Animal Production. 38: 233–240.Google Scholar
Claus, R., Weiler, U. and Herzog, A. 1994. Physiological aspects of androstenone and skatole formation in the boar—a review with experimental data. Meat Science. 38: 289–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cross, H. R., West, R. L. and Dutson, T. R. 1981. Comparison of methods for measuring sarcomere length in beef semitendinous muscle. Meat Science. 5: 261–266.Google Scholar
Degussa, 1996. AminoDat 1.0. Degussa AG, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.Google Scholar
Ellis, M. and Horsfield, S. V. K. 1988. The potential for increasing slaughter weights for bacon pigs in the United Kingdom. Pig News and Information. 9: 31–34.Google Scholar
Ellis, M., Smith, W. C., Clark, J. B. K. and Innes, N. 1983. A comparison of boars, gilts and castrates for bacon manufacture. 1. On farm performance, carcass and meat quality characteristics and weight loss in the preparation of sides for curing. Animal Production. 37: 1–9.Google Scholar
Ellis, M., Webb, A. J., Avery, P. J. and 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmans, G. C. 1995. Ways of describing pig growth and food intake using equations. Pig News and Information. 16: 113–116.Google Scholar
Emmans, G. C. and Kyriazakis, I. 1997. Models of pig growth: problems and proposed solutions. Livestock Production Science. 51: 119–129.Google Scholar
European Community. 1988. Authorising methods for grading pig carcases in the United Kingdom. Annex 1A. Methods grading pig carcases in Northern Ireland. EC regulation 88/234 paper C.Google Scholar
Evans, D. G. and Kempster, A. J. 1979. A comparison of different predictors of the lean content of pig carcasses. 2. Predictors for use in population studies and experiments. Animal Production 28: 97–108.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: 39–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, M. F. and Wang, T. C. 1990. Digestible ideal protein—a measure of dietary protein value. Pig News and Information. 11: 353–357.Google Scholar
Gehlbach, G. D., Becker, D. E., Cox, J. L., Harmon, B. G. and Jensen, A. H. 1966. Effects of floor space allowance and number per group on performance of growing-finishing swine. Journal of Animal Science. 25: 386–391.Google Scholar
Genstat 5 Committee. 1993. Genstat 5 reference manual. Clarendon Press, Oxford, England.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, J. P., Brain, P. F. and Benton, D. 1978. The effects of duration of individual and group penning on behaviour and adrenocortical reactivity in male mice. Physiology and Behavior 21: 757–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haer, L. C. M. de and Vries, A. G. de. 1993. Feed intake patterns of and feed digestibility in growing pigs housed individually or in groups. Livestock Production Science 33: 277–292.Google Scholar
Kanis, E. 1988. Effect of average daily food intake on production performance in growing pigs. Animal Production. 46: 111–122.Google Scholar
Kanis, E. and Koops, W. J. 1990. Daily gain, food intake and food efficiency in pigs during the growing period. Animal Production 50: 353–364.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J. and Evans, D. G. 1979. A comparison of different predictors of the lean content of pig carcasses. 1. Predictors for use in commercial classification and grading. Animal Production 28: 87–96.Google Scholar
Koolmees, P. A., Korteknie, F. and Smulders, F. J. M. 1986. Accuracy and utility of sarcomere length assessment by laser diffraction. Food Microstructure. 5: 71–76.Google Scholar
Koops, W. J. and Grossman, M. 1991. Application of a multiphasic growth function to body composition in pigs. Journal of Animal Science 69: 3265–3273.Google Scholar
McCracken, K. J. 1993. High lean content or high lean growth rate—implications for nutrition. In Recent advances in animal nutrition in Australia (ed. Farrell, D. J.), pp. 223–232. University of New England, Armidale, Australia.Google Scholar
McCracken, K. J., Beattie, V. E., Weatherup, R. N., Mcllroy, S. G. and Henry, R. W. 1997. Effects of diet energy density and protein (amino acid) content on intake, body composition and energy metabolism of boars and gilts fed ad libitum from 22–46 kg. Fourteenth symposium on energy metabolism of farm animals, Newcastle, Northern Ireland, September 1997, pp. 237–240.Google Scholar
McCracken, K. J. and Rao, D. S. 1989. Protein: energy interactions in boars of high lean deposition potential. European Association for Animal Production, publication no. 43, pp. 13–16.Google Scholar
McCracken, K. J., Rao, D. S. and Urquhart, R. 1989. Feed intake, body composition and energy metabolism of high genetic potential boars from 30 to 340 kg. European Association for Animal Production, publication no. 58, pp. 111–114.Google Scholar
Malmfors, B. and Nilsson, R. 1978. Meat quality traits of boars in comparison with castrates and gilts. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research. 8: 209–217.Google Scholar
Martin, A. H., Sather, A. P., Fredeen, H. T. and Jolly, R. W. 1980. Alternative market weights for swine. II. Carcass composition and meat quality. Journal of Animal Science. 50: 699–705.Google Scholar
Moughan, P. J. and Verstegen, M. W. A. 1988. The modelling of growth in the pig. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science. 36: 145–166.Google Scholar
Nielsen, B. L. and Lawrence, A. B. 1993. The effect of group size on the behaviour and performance of growing pigs using computerised single-space feeders. Pig News and Information. 14: 127–129.Google Scholar
Patterson, D. C. 1985. A note on the effect of individual penning on the performance of fattening pigs. Animal Production. 40: 185–188.Google Scholar
Quiniou, N., Dourmad, J.-Y. and Noblet, J. 1996. Effect of energy intake on the performance of different types of pig from 45 to 100 kg body weight. 1. Protein and lipid deposition. Animal Science. 63: 277–288.Google Scholar
Quiniou, N., Noblet, J., Milgen, J. van and Dourmad, J.-Y. 1995. Effect of energy intake on performance, nutrient and tissue gain and protein and energy utilization in growing boars. Animal Science. 61: 133–143.Google Scholar
Rao, D. S. and McCracken, K. J. 1990a. Protein requirements of boars of high genetic potential for lean growth. Animal Production. 51: 179–187.Google Scholar
Rao, D. S. and McCracken, K. J. 1990b. Effect of protein intake on energy and nitrogen balance and chemical composition of gain in growing boars of high genetic potential. Animal Production. 51: 389–397.Google Scholar
Schinckel, A. P. and Lange, C. F. M. de. 1996. Characterization of growth parameters needed as inputs for pig growth models. Journal of Animal Science. 74: 2021–2036.Google Scholar
Squires, E. J., Adeola, O., Young, L. G. and Hacker, R. R. 1993. The role of growth hormones, fl-adrenergic agents and intact males in pork production: a review. Canadian Journal of Animal Science. 73: 1–23.Google Scholar
Stranks, M. H., Cooke, B. C., Fairbairn, C. B., Fowler, N. G., Kirby, P. S., McCracken, K. J., Morgan, C. A., Palmer, F. G. and Peers, D. G. 1988. Nutrient allowances for growing pigs. Research and Development in Agriculture 5: 71–88.Google Scholar
Tonn, S. R., Davis, D. L. and Craig, J. V. 1985. Mating behavior, boar-to-boar behavior during rearing and soundness of boars penned individually or in groups from 6 to 27 weeks of age. Journal of Animal Science. 61: 287–296.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Lunen, T. A. and Cole, D. J. A. 1996. The effect of lysine/digestible energy ratio on growth performance and nitrogen deposition of hybrid boars, gilts and castrated male pigs. Animal Science. 63: 465–475.Google Scholar
Void, E. and Moen, R. A. 1972. A note on the effects of castration upon the development of the skin in the pig. Animal Production 14: 253–254.Google Scholar
Walker, N. 1991. The effects on performance and behaviour of number of growing pigs per mono-place feeder. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 35: 3–13.Google Scholar
Walstra, P. 1980. Growth and carcass composition from birth maturity in relation to feeding level and sex in Dutch pigs. Communication no. 80–4. Agricultural University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Webb, A. J. 1989. Genetics of food intake in the pig. In The voluntary food intake of pigs (ed. Forbes, J. M., Varley, M. A. and Lawrence, T. L. J.), pp. 41–50. British Society of Animal Production occasional publication no. 13.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T. 1986. An approach to pig growth modeling. Journal of Animal Science. 63: 615–621.Google Scholar
Wood, J. D. and Riley, J. E. 1982. Comparison of boars and castrates for bacon production. 1. Growth data, and carcass and joint composition. Animal Production. 35: 55–63.Google Scholar