Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:16:37.465Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of fat thickness and sex on pig meat quality with special reference to the problems associated with overleanness 2. Laboratory and trained taste panel results

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

J. D. Wood ,
R. C. D. Jones ,
M. A. Francombe  and
O. P. Whelehan
J. D. Wood
Affiliation:
Institute of Food Research-Bristol Laboratory, Langford, Bristol BS18 7DY
R. C. D. Jones
Affiliation:
Institute of Food Research-Bristol Laboratory, Langford, Bristol BS18 7DY
M. A. Francombe
Affiliation:
Institute of Food Research-Bristol Laboratory, Langford, Bristol BS18 7DY
O. P. Whelehan
Affiliation:
Institute of Food Research-Bristol Laboratory, Langford, Bristol BS18 7DY
Get access

Abstract

Evaluations of meat quality were made of 300 carcasses, of average weight 58 kg, falling into three fatness groups, 8, 12 and 16 mm for P2 fat thickness. There were equal numbers of entire males and gilts. An increase in fat thickness was associated with an increase in the firmness of loin and shoulder backfat, a reduced incidence of fat separation and changes in the composition of both muscle and backfat: the concentration of lipid increased and that of water decreased, more markedly in backfat. In addition, the concentration of collagen in backfat decreased. The loin joint was visually most attractive when P2 was 11 mm, attractiveness decreasing below and particularly above this value. Eating quality of grilled chops was assessed in a representative subsample of 96 pigs falling into the 8-mm and 16-mm P2 categories. The only statistically significant difference observed between these extremes of fat thickness was in juiciness which was lower in the leaner pigs; the correlation between juiciness score and m. longissimus lipid concentration (‘marbling fat’) was 0·31. Juiciness did not influence the assessment of overall eating quality which showed no association with fatness. Entire males of similar backfat thickness to gilts (12 mm P2) had a higher concentration of water and lower concentration of lipid in backfat and slightly softer backfat. There were no differences in eating quality, or in the presence of abnormal odours or flavours, between entire males and gilts. These results confirm those obtained in butcher and consumer panel tests in the same carcasses.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 43 , Issue 3 , December 1986 , pp. 535 - 544
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1986

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

Baron, P. J. and Carpenter, E. M. 1976. A review of consumer attitudes and requirements for meat. Report, Department of Agricultural Marketing, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, No. 23.Google Scholar
Bejerholm, A. C. 1984. Experience in taste testing fresh pork at the Danish Meat Research Institute. Proceedings of the 30th European Meeting of Meat Research Workers, Bristol, pp. 196–197.Google Scholar
Cowan, C. A. and Joseph, R. L. 1981. Production and quality of boar and castrate bacon. 2. Consumer and panel responses to bacon and fat samples. Irish Journal of Food Science and Technology 5: 105–116.Google Scholar
Dransfield, E. and Jones, R. C. D. 1984. Texture and mechanical properties of pork backfat. Journal of Food Technology 19: 181–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dransfield, E., Jones, R. C. D. and Wood, J. D. 1984. Mechanical properties of fatty tissues. Proceedings of the 30th European Meeting of Meat Research Workers, Bristol, pp. 170–171.Google Scholar
Duniec, H., Kielanowski, J. and Osinska, Z. 1961. Heritability of chemical fat content in the loin muscle of baconers. Animal Production 3: 195–198.Google Scholar
Fjelkner-Modig, S. 1985. Sensory and Biophysical Properties of Pork. Swedish Meat Research Institute, Kavlinge, Sweden.Google Scholar
Hiner, R. L., Thornton, J. W. and Alsmeyer, R. H. 1965. Palatability and quantity of pork as influenced by breed and fatness. Journal of Food Science 30: 550–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, P., Craig, H. B. and Robison, O. W. 1967. Phenotypic and genetic associations among carcass traits of swine. Journal of Animal Science 26: 1252–1260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jul, M. and Zeuthen, P. 1980. Quality of pig meat for fresh consumption. Progress in Food and Nutrition Science 4: (6), 1–132.Google ScholarPubMed
Kempster, A. J., Dilworth, A. W., Evans, D. G. and Fisher, K. D. 1986. The effects of fat thickness and sex on pig meat quality with special reference to the problems associated with overleanness. 1. Butcher and consumer panel results. Animal Production 43: 517–533.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Evans, D. G. and Chadwick, J. P. 1984. The effects of source population, feeding regimen, sex and day of slaughter on the muscle quality characteristics of British crossbred pigs. Animal Production 39: 455–464.Google Scholar
Malmfors, B. and Lundström, K. 1983. Consumer reactions to boar meat — a review. Livestock Production Science 10: 187–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1983. Very Lean Pigs. Planning and Development Team Report. Meat and Livestock Commission, Bletchley, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1985. Pig Year Book. Economics. Livestock and Marketing Services, 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. Animal Production 35: 75–80.Google Scholar
Rhodes, D. N. 1970. Meat quality: influence of fatness of pigs on the eating quality of pork. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 21: 572–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, D. N. 1971. Consumer testing of bacon from boar and gilt pigs. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 22: 485–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, D. N. 1972. Consumer testing of pork from boar and gilt pigs. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 23: 1483–1491.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Warriss, P. D. and Brown, S. N. 1985. The physiological responses to fighting in pigs and the consequences for meat quality. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 36: 87–92.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. 407–435. Butterworths, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, J. D., Dransfield, E. and Rhodes, D. N. 1979. The influence of breed on the carcass and eating, quality of pork. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 30: 493–498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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. Animal Production 35: 65–74.Google Scholar
Wood, J. D., Jones, R. C. D., Bayntun, J. A. and Dransfield, E. 1985. Backfat quality in boars and barrows at 90 kg live weight. Animal Production 40: 481–487.Google Scholar
Wood, J. D., Mottram, D. S. and Brown, A. J. 1981. A note on the eating quality of pork from lean pigs. Animal Production 32: 117–120.Google Scholar