Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-04T23:03:02.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Estimation of carcass composition and cut composition from computed tomography images of live growing pigs of different genotypes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 September 2014

Maria Font-i-Furnols*
Affiliation:
IRTA-Product Quality, Finca Camps i Armet, 17121 Monells, Spain
Anna Carabús
Affiliation:
IRTA-Product Quality, Finca Camps i Armet, 17121 Monells, Spain
Candido Pomar
Affiliation:
Dairy and Swine Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2000 College Street, Sherbrooke, QC, J1M 1Z3Canada
Marina Gispert
Affiliation:
IRTA-Product Quality, Finca Camps i Armet, 17121 Monells, Spain
*
Get access

Abstract

The aim of the present work was (1) to study the relationship between cross-sectional computed tomography (CT) images obtained in live growing pigs of different genotypes and dissection measurements and (2) to estimate carcass composition and cut composition from CT measurements. Sixty gilts from three genotypes (Duroc×(Landrace×Large White), Pietrain×(Landrace×Large White), and Landrace×Large White) were CT scanned and slaughtered at 30 kg (n=15), 70 kg (n=15), 100 kg (n=12) or 120 kg (n=18). Carcasses were cut and the four main cuts were dissected. The distribution of density volumes on the Hounsfield scale (HU) were obtained from CT images and classified into fat (HU between −149 and −1), muscle (HU between 0 and 140) or bone (HU between 141 and 1400). Moreover, physical measurements were obtained on an image of the loin and an image of the ham. Four different regression approaches were studied to predict carcass and cut composition: linear regression, quadratic regression and allometric equations using volumes as predictors, and linear regression using volumes and physical measurements as predictors. Results show that measurements from whole animal taken in vivo with CT allow accurate estimation of carcass and cut composition. The prediction accuracy varied across genotypes, BW and variable to be predicted. In general, linear models, allometric models and linear models, which included also physical measurements at the loin and the ham, produced the lowest prediction errors.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014. The Animal Consortium and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food in Canada. 

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

Barchia, IM, Arthur, PF, Giles, LR and Eamens, GJ 2010. Temporal growth and development of body tissues of pigs as assessed by X-ray computed tomography. Animal Production Science 50, 322328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardera, A, Martίnez, R, Boada, I, Font-i-Furnols, M and Gispert, M 2012. VisualPork towards the simulation of a virtual butcher. Paper presented at FAIM I Conference of COST FA1102, 25–26 September, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
Boada, I, Spinola, J, Rodriguez, J, Martínez, R and Font i Furnols, M 2009. VisualPork towards the simulation of a virtual butcher. Paper presented at II Workshop on the use of computed tomography (CT) in pig carcass classification. Other CT applications: live animals and meat technology,16–17 April, Monells, Spain.Google Scholar
Carabús, A, Gispert, M, Rodriguez, P, Brun, A, Francàs, C, Soler, J and Font i Furnols, M 2011. Differences in body composition between pigs crossbreds of 30 kg measured in vivo by computed tomography. Paper presented at the 62nd EAAP Annual Meeting, 29 August–2 September, Stavanger, Norway.Google Scholar
Causeur, D, Daumas, G, Dhorne, T, Engel, B, Font i Furnols, M and Højsgaard, S 2003. Statistical handbook for assessing pig carcass classification methods: Recommendations from the ‘EUPIGCLASS’ project group. Retrieved November 12, 2013, from http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/pigmeat/policy-instruments/statistical-handbook-for-assessing-pig-classification-methods_en.pdf Google Scholar
Davies, AS and Pryor, WJ 1977. Growth changes in the distribution of dissectable and intramuscular fat in pigs. The Journal of Agricultural Science 89, 257266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engel, B, Lambooij, E, Buist, WG and Vereijken, P 2012. Lean meat prediction with HGP, CGM and CSB-Image-Meater, with prediction accuracy evaluated for different proportions of gilts, boars and castrated boars in the pig population. Meat Science 90, 338344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, AV, Green, DM, Whittemore, CT, Wood, JD and Schofield, CP 2003. Growth of carcass components and its relation with conformation in pigs of three types. Meat Science 65, 639650.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Font i Furnols, M and Gispert, M 2009. Comparison of different devices for predicting the lean meat percentage of pig carcasses. Meat Science 83, 443446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Font i Furnols, M, Teran, F and Gispert, M 2009. Estimation of lean meat content in percentage of pig carcasses with computer tomography images by means of PLS regression. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 98, 3137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Font i Furnols, M, Carabús, A, Brun, A, Francàs, C and Gispert, M 2012. Body composition evaluated by computer tomography and allometric growth of viscera and organs in pigs from 30 to 120 kg. In Proceedings of the 58th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, 12–17th August 2012, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
Judas, M, Höreth, R and Dobrowolski, A 2006. Computertomographie als Methode zur Analyse der Schlachtkörper von Schweinen. Fleischwirtshaft 12, 102105.Google Scholar
Kempster, AJ and Evans, DG 1979. The effects of genotype, sex, and feeding regimen on pig carcass development: 2. Tissue weight distribution and fat partition between depots. The Journal of Agricultural Science 93, 349358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolstad, K 2001. Fat deposition and distribution measured by computer tomography in three genetic groups of pigs. Livestock Production Science 67, 281292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolstad, K and Vangen, O 1996. Breed differences in maintenance requirements of growing pigs when accounting for changes in body composition. Livestock Production Science 47, 2332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolstad, K, Jopson, NB and Vangen, O 1996. Breed and sex differences in fat distribution and mobilization in growing pigs fed at maintenance. Livestock Production Science 47, 3341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kouba, M and Bonneau, M 2009. Compared development of intermuscular and subcutaneous fat in carcass and primal cuts of growing pigs from 30 to 140 kg body weight. Meat Science 81, 270274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kouba, M, Bonneau, M and Noblet, J 1999. Relative development of subcutaneous, intermuscular, and kidney fat in growing pigs with different body compositions. Journal of Animal Science 77, 622629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lambe, NR, Wood, JD, McLean, KA, Walling, GA, Whitney, H, Jagger, S, Fullarton, P, Bayntun, J and Bünger, L 2013. Effects of low protein diets on pigs with a lean genotype 2. Compositional traits measured with computed tomography (CT). Meat Science 95, 129136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Landgraf, S, Susenbeth, A, Knap, PW, Looft, H, Plastow, GS, Kalm, E and Roehe, R 2006. Developments of carcass cuts, organs, body tissues and chemical body composition during growth of pigs. Animal Science 82, 889899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcoux, M, Pomar, C, Faucitano, L and Brodeur, C 2007. The relationship between different pork carcass lean yield definitions and the market carcass value. Meat Science 75, 94102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nissen, PM, Busk, H, Oksama, M, Seynaeve, M, Gispert, M, Walstra, P, Hansson, I and Olsen, E 2006. The estimated accuracy of the EU reference dissection method for pig carcass classification. Meat Science 73, 2228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Picouet, PA, Teran, F, Gispert, M and Font i Furnols, M 2010. Lean content prediction in pig carcasses, loin and ham by computed tomography (CT) using a density model. Meat Science 86, 616622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walstra, P and Merkus, GSM 1995. Procedure for the assessment of the lean meat percentage as a consequence of the new EU reference dissection method in pig carcass classification. DLO-Research Institute of Animal Science and Health (ID-DLO), Zeist, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material

Figure S1

Download Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material(File)
File 95.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material

Figure S2

Download Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material(File)
File 17.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material

Figure S3

Download Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material(File)
File 17.6 KB
Supplementary material: File

Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material

Figure S4

Download Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material(File)
File 17.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material

Table S1

Download Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material(File)
File 18.9 KB
Supplementary material: File

Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material

Table S2

Download Font-i-Furnols Supplementary Material(File)
File 23.1 KB