Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T06:15:43.697Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A note on the comparative growth performance of pigs sired by Piétrain × Hampshire, Hampshire × Large White and Large White boars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

W. B. Lishman  and
W. C. Smith
W. B. Lishman
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, The University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU
W. C. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, The University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU
Get access

Abstract

The performance of progeny sired by Piétrain × Hampshire, Hampshire × Large White and Large White boars was compared over the live-weight range 28 to 65 kg. Feeding was twice daily to ‘appetite’ up to a maximum of 2·27 kg meal/day. Breed of boar did not influence rate or efficiency of live-weight gain, mid-line or internal fat depths nor muscle quality. Progeny of Pietrain × Hampshire and Hampshire × Large White sires, compared with those of Large White boars, had higher killing-out percentages (1·4 and 1·2 units) and larger eye muscles in cross-section (19·3 and 11·6%). Significant but small breed differences were noted in joint proportions of the carcass.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , February 1979 , pp. 119 - 122
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1979

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

Curran, M. K., Lean, I. J., Duckworth, J. E. and Holmes, W. 1972. Studies on Belgian Pietrain pigs. 2. A comparison of growth and carcass characteristics of Pietrain used in three breed crosses with Landrace, Large White and Hampshire breeds. Anim. Prod. 15: 11–19.Google Scholar
Disney, J. G., Follett, M. J. and Ratcliff, R. 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. II.] Tijdschdr. Diergeneesk. 87: 156–167.Google Scholar
Howard, A. N. and Smith, W. C. 1976. The Belgian Pietrain as a sire of crossbred pigs slaughtered at 64 kg live weight. 1. Performance and carcass characteristics. Anim. Prod. 23: 389–393.Google Scholar
King, J. W. B. 1968. [The hybridization of pigs.] Stocarstvo 22: 485–493.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 Pietrain, Landrace crosses in growth, carcass characteristics and meat quality. Anim. Prod. 15: 1–9.Google Scholar
Lishman, W. B., Smith, W. C. and Bichard, M. 1975. The comparative performance of purebred and crossbred boars in commercial pig production. Anim. Prod. 21: 69–75.Google Scholar
Smith, W. C., Barkes, J. N. and Tonks, H. M. 1973. The relative performance and carcass characteristics of pigs sired by Hampshire and Large White boars. Anim. Prod. 17: 59–64.Google Scholar
Smith, W. C. and Lishman, W. B. 1974. A note on the comparative performance of pigs sired by Pietrain/Hampshire and Large White boars. Anim. Prod. 19: 119–122.Google Scholar