Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-rvbq7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-15T23:49:59.993Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relationship between muscle and bone development of the hind limb in lambs of different breeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

M. R. Anous
M. R. Anous
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Recherches sur la Viande de I'INRA, 78350 Jouy en Josas, France
Get access

Abstract

A total of 52 ram lambs of different morphological types slaughtered at a comparable stage of body development (carcass weights = 19·5 (s.d. 3·10) kg) were used to study the variation in the relationship between muscle and bone development in the hind limb using multivariate techniques. Development of individual muscles was expressed relative to the weight of the major bone to which they are closest, considered here as their carrier bone.

Variability of muscle: bone ratios of individual muscles varied considerably from one muscle to another. The coefficient of variation (CV) ranging from 0·111 to 0·462 (average CV = 0·199). Relative to the same bone, the variability of muscle: bone ratios for each of the three anatomical regions of the hind limb was still important. This suggests that variability may be due to other factors besides muscle weight, such as bone shape.

The correlation between the various muscle: bone ratios was low in some cases. However, a significant association existed between muscle: bone ratios of individual muscles and the total muscle: bone ratio in the hind limb which indicated that some muscle: bone ratios can be used as indicators of muscling in the selection of meat animals such as m. semimembranosus/femm, m. gluteobiceps/femur, m. adductores/'femur and m. semitendinosus/femur.

The most discriminant variables of the population in multivariate analysis were m. soleus/tibia, m. extensor digitorium lateralis/tibia, m. quadmtus femoris/coxal, m. gemelli/coxal and m. vastus medialis/femur. It was also possible to distinguish the different morphological types of the different breeds by the values of the ratios between these variables.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 48 , Issue 1 , February 1989 , pp. 121 - 129
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1989

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

Anous, M. R. 1986. Variabilité de la répartition du tissu musculaire du membre posterieur de I'agneau. 1. Muscles individuels. Reproduction Nutrition Developpment 26: 943–967.Google Scholar
Berg, R. T. and Butterfield, R. M. 1976. New Concepts of Cattle Growth. Sydney University Press, Sydney.Google Scholar
Butterfield, R. M. 1965. Practical implications of anatomical research in beef cattle. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 25: 152–163.Google Scholar
Dumont, B. L. and Boccard, R. 1967. Critères modernes d'amélioration génétique des populations bovines dans le monde. Le rapport Muscle/Os, critère de sélection des bovins de boucherie. Atti Del II. Simposio Internazionale Di Zootecnia, Milano, pp. 149–155.Google Scholar
Hankins, O. G., Knapp, B. and Phillips, R. W. 1943. The muscle-bone ratio as an index of merit in beef and dual-purpose cattle. Journal of Animal Science 2: 42–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempster, A. J. 1978. Bone growth and development with particular reference to breed differences in carcass shape and lean to bone ratio. Current Topics in Veterinary Medicine 2: 149–166.Google Scholar
Lefebvre, J. 1976. Analyse des donnees centrees. In Introduction aux Analysis Statistiques Multidimensionnelles, pp. 175–183. Masson, Paris.Google Scholar