Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:31:24.738Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A note on purebred performance of Belgian Piétrain pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

A. N. Howard  and
W. C. Smith
A. N. Howard
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture, The University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU
W. C. Smith
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture, The University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU
Get access

Summary

In an analysis of data from 211 litters in a Pietrain herd, litter size at birth and at weaning was lower than is generally found in indigenous breeds. Mortality in growing and breeding pigs was high with circulatory failure accounting for 23% and 95% of deaths respectively. Pietrains, fed ad libitum over the live-weight range 27 to 87 kg, grew more slowly by 130 g/day than contemporary Large Whites on the same feeding regime, had higher killing-out percentages (by 3 to 4 units) and larger eye muscles in cross-section (by 9·9 cm2) but tended to have higher feed conversion ratios. There was no breed difference in backfat measurements but Pietrain carcasses were shorter by 83 mm and their muscle quality was markedly inferior to that of the Large Whites.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , October 1977 , pp. 255 - 258
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1977

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

Disney, J. G., Follett, M. J. and Ratcliff, P. W. 1967. Biochemical changes in beef muscle post mortem and the effect of rapid cooling in ice. J. Sci. Fd Agric. 18: 314–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, P. C. 1962. [Physico-chemical characteristics of degenerated meat in pigs. 2.] J. Tijdschr. Diergeneesk 87: 156–167.Google Scholar
Howard, A. N. 1973. An evaluation of the Pietrain breed in Britain. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.Google Scholar
Kirsch, W., Fender, M., Rabold, K., Fewson, D. and Schoen, P. 1963. [Comparative breeding, fattening and carcass trials with Improved Landrace, Piétrain and Fi crossbred pigs.] Züchtungskunde 35: 254–264.Google Scholar
Knoertzer, E. 1961. [Some biometric data on the Pietrain pig.] Bull. tech. Inf. Ingrs Servs agric. 164: 977–1011.Google Scholar
Kroeske, D. 1964. [The Pietrain pig.] Vlees 2: 18–21.Google Scholar
Lean, I. J., Curran, M. K., Duckworth, J. E. and Holmes, W. 1972. Studies on Belgian Pietrain pigs. 1. A comparison of Pietrain, Landrace and Pi&rain Landrace crosses in growth, carcass characteristics and meat quality. Anim. Prod. 15: 1–9.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1974. Pig Facts. A manual of economic standards. Meat and Livestock Commission, Bletchley, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1971. Pietrain pigs—removal of controls. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, London (Mimeograph).Google Scholar
Semprini, P. 1970. [Observations on food consumption and production at birth and weaning of Large White, Spotted Poland, Pietrain and crossbred pigs.] Atti Soc. ital. Sci. vet. 23: 453–455.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D. and Torrie, J. H. 1960. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. McGraw-Hill, London.Google Scholar