Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T07:24:05.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pig meat quality from entire males

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 September 2009

K. Lundström ,
K. R. Matthews  and
J.-E. Haugen
K. Lundström*
Affiliation:
Department of Food Science, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Box 7051, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
K. R. Matthews
Affiliation:
EBLEX, Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, Stoneleigh Park, Kenilworth, Warwickshire, CV8 2TL, UK
J.-E. Haugen
Affiliation:
Nofima Mat AS, Norwegian Institute of Food, Fisheries and Aquaculture Research, Osloveien 1, NO-1430 Ås, Norway
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

This paper constitutes an updated review of the production and meat quality aspects of rearing entire male pigs. Since a major obstacle in rearing entire males is the incidence of boar taint, possible methods for detection are also summarised. Safe and fast methods for detection of boar taint would be valuable in avoiding complaints from consumers. Pig meat quality is determined by many aspects, among which odour and taste are the most important attributes. Odour may be negatively affected by the presence of a pheromonal steroid, androstenone, and a fermentation product of l-tryptophan, skatole. Male pigs are surgically castrated in many countries to minimise the risk of accumulation of high levels of androstenone and skatole. Raising entire male pigs is more profitable because they have superior production characteristics and improved meat quality due to leaner carcasses and higher protein content, as compared to castrated pigs. Furthermore, surgical castration is negative from an animal welfare point of view. In most studies, no differences in sensory quality have been found between lean meat from entire male pigs with low levels of androstenone and skatole and pork from castrates and females. The question that remains is: which substances are responsible for boar taint besides androstenone and skatole and whether they need to be considered? The threshold values used for androstenone and skatole might also be too high for highly sensitive persons. Recent research shows that a human odorant receptor, ORD7D4, is involved in sensitivity to androstenone. If the ORD7D4 genotypes of consumer and expert panels are known, this might facilitate consumer studies in the future. There is still a great need for rapid on/at-line detection methods in abattoirs for identifying carcasses with unacceptable levels of boar taint compounds. Several emerging rapid technologies with a potential for boar taint detection have been investigated. They represent various measurement principles such as chemical sensor arrays (electronic noses), mass-spectrometry fingerprinting, ultra-fast gas chromatography, gas-phase spectrometry and biosensors. An industrial detection method should allow 100% correct classification of both acceptable and not-acceptable samples with regard to boar taint sorting criteria. There are, however, still too high a percentage of false negatives ranging from 5% to 20%. In addition, these methods do not yet seem to fulfil the industrial specifications with regard to cost efficiency, simplicity and analysis time. There is still no dedicated measurement technology available for on/at-line detection of boar-tainted carcasses that measures both androstenone and skatole.

Keywords

pig meat qualitycastrationentire malesdetection methodsreview
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 3 , Issue 11 , November 2009 , pp. 1497 - 1507
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

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

Agerhem, H, Tornberg, E 1995. A comparison of the off-flavour of meat from entire males cooked to two different internal end-point temperatures. In Proceedings of the EAAP workshop on Production and Utilisation of Meat from Entire Males, 27–29 September 1995, Milton Keynes, UK.Google Scholar
Amoore, JE, Buttery, RG 1978. Partition coefficients and comparative olfactometry. Chemical Senses and Flavour 3, 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ampuero, S, Bee, G 2006. The potential to detect boar tainted carcasses by using an electronic nose based on mass spectrometry. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 48 (suppl. 1), P1, 10.1186/1751-0147-48-S1-P1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ampuero, S, Bee, G 2008. Identification of boar off-flavour with an electronic nose. In Proceedings of the EAAP meeting, 26–27 March 2008, Girona, Spain.Google Scholar
Andersson, A, Hansson, I, Lundström, K, Karlsson, A 1995. Influence of sex and breed on the precision of the official Swedish pig carcass grading. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 25, 51–59.Google Scholar
Andresen, Ø, Frøystein, T, Rødbotten, M, Mortensen, HP, Eik-Nes, O, Lea, P 1993. Sensoric evaluation of boar meat with different levels of androstenone and skatole. In Measurement and prevention of boar taint in entire male pigs (ed. M. Bonneau), pp. 69–74. INRA Edition, Paris.Google Scholar
Annor-Frempong, IE, Nute, GR, Wood, JD, Whittington, FW, West, A 1998. The measurement of the responses to different odour intensities of boar taint using a sensory panel and an electronic nose. Meat Science 50, 139–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Babol, J, Squires, EJ, Gullett, EA 1996. Investigation of factors responsible for the development of boar taint. Food Research International 28, 573–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bañón, S, Andreu, C, Laencina, J, Garrido, M-D 2004. Fresh and eating pork quality from entire versus castrate heavy males. Food Quality and Preference 15, 293–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berdagué, JL, Talou, T 1993. Examples of semiconductor gas sensors applied to meat products. Sciences des Aliments 13, 141–148.Google Scholar
Bielefeld, F 2006. Alternatives to conventional castration (report on conference ProSchwein). Tierärztliche Umschau 61, 669–671.Google Scholar
Blixt, Y, Borch, E 1999. Using an electronic nose for determining the spoilage of vacuum-packaged beef. International Journal of Food Microbiology 46, 123–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonneau, M 1982. Compounds responsible for boar taint, with special emphasis on androstenone: a review. Livestock Production Science 9, 687–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonneau, M, Desmoulin, B, Frouin, A, Bidard, J-P 1980. Conséquences des processus technologiques de transformation des viandes de porc mâle sur la teneur en androsténone des graisses. Annales de Technologie Agricole 29, 69–73.Google Scholar
Bonneau, M, Le Denmat, M, Vaudelet, JC, Veloso-Nunes, JR, Mortensen, AB, Mortensen H, P 1992a. Contributions of fat androstenone and skatole to boar taint: I. Sensory attributes of fat and pork meat. Livestock Production Science 32, 63–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonneau, M, Le Denmat, M, Vaudelet, JC, Veloso-Nunes, JR, Mortensen, AB, Mortensen, HP 1992b. Contributions of fat androstenone and skatole to boar taint: II. Eating quality of cooked hams. Livestock Production Science 32, 81–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonneau, M, Walstra, P, Claudi-Magnussen, C, Kempster, AJ, Tornberg, E, Fischer, K, Diestre, A, Siret, F, Chevillon, P, Claus, R, Dijsterhuis, G, Punter, P, Matthews, KR, Agerhem, H, Béague, MP, Oliver, MA, Gispert, M, Weiler, U, von Seth, G, Leask, H, Font i Furnols, M, Homer, DB, Cook, GL 2000. An international study on the importance of androstenone and skatole for boar taint: IV. Simulation studies on consumer dissatisfaction with entire male pork and the effect of sorting carcasses on the slaughter line, main conclusions and recommendations. Meat Science 54, 285–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourrounet, B, Talou, T, Gaset, A 1995. Application of a multi-gas-sensor device in the meat industry for boar-taint detection. Sensors and Actuators B 26–27, 250–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bundesanzeiger 2007. Allgemeine Verwaltungsvorschrift über die Durchfürung der amtlichen Überwachung der Einhaltung von Hygienvorschriften für Lebensmittel tierischen Ursprungs und zum Verfahren zur Prüfung von Leitlinien für eine gute Verfahrenspraxis (AVV Lebenmittelhygiene – AVV LmH), Jahrgang 59, Nummer 180a, pp. 51–52, ISSN 0720-6100. Bundesanzeiger Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, Köln.Google Scholar
Chumkam, S, Ravungsook, S 2003. Effect of immunization against gonadotrophin releasing hormone on growth rate and carcass quality in boar. In Proceedings of the 41st Kasetsart University Annual Conference, Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar
Claus, R 1975. Messung des Ebergeruchstoffes im Fett von Schweinen mittels eines Radioimmunotest. 1.Mitteilung: Geruchdepotbildung in Abhängigkeit vom Alter. Zeitschrift für Tierzucht und Züchtungsbiologie 92, 118–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deen, J, O’Connor, J, Sorensen, S, Baker, T 2008. An economic model to assess costs of Improvac to the swine producer for control of boar taint. In Proceedings of the 20th International Pig Veterinary Society (IPVS) Congress, 22–26 June 2008, Durban, South Africa.Google Scholar
Dehnhard, M, Claus, R, Herbert, E, Hillebrand, M 1995. Skatol- und Androstenonkonzentrationen in Fleischerzeugnissen aus Eberschlachtkörpern. Die Ebermast Heft 449, 55–72.Google Scholar
de Kock, HL, Heinze, PH, Potgieter, CM, Dijksterhuis, GB, Minnaar, A 2001. Temporal aspects related to the perception of skatole and androstenone, the major boar odour compounds. Meat Science 57, 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Desmoulin, B, Bonneau, M, Frouin, A, Bidard, JP 1982. Consumer testing of pork and processed meat from boars: the influence of fat androstenone level. Livestock Production Science 9, 707–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diestre, A, Oliver, MA, Gispert, M, Arpa, I, Arnau, J 1990. Consumer responses to fresh meat and meat products from barrows and boars with different levels of boar taint. Animal Production 50, 519–530.Google Scholar
Dijksterhuis, GB, Engel, B, Walstra, P, Font i Furnols, M, Agerhem, H, Fischer, K, Oliver, MA, Claudi-Magnussen, C, Siret, F, Béague, MP, Homer, DB, Bonneau, M 2000. An international study on the importance of androstenone and skatole for boar taint: II. Sensory evaluation by trained panels in seven European countries. Meat Science 54, 261–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dikeman, ME 2007. Effects of metabolic modifiers on carcass traits and meat quality. Meat Science 77, 121–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Di Natale, C, Pennazza, G, Macagnano, A, Martinelli, E, Paolesse, R, D’Amico, A 2003. Thickness shear mode resonator sensors for the detection of androstenone in pork fat. Sensor and Actuators B 91, 169–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dragoeva, A, Stoikov, A 2003. Ecological efficiency in fattening non-castrated males pigs. Ecology and Future – Journal of Agricultural Science and Forest Science 2, 82–85.Google Scholar
D’Souza, DN, Mullan, BP 2002. The effect of genotype, sex and management strategy on the eating quality of pork. Meat Science 60, 95–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
D’Souza, DN, Mullan, BP 2003. The effect of genotype and castration method on the eating quality characteristics of pork from male pigs. Animal Science 77, 67–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Food Safety Authority 2004. Welfare aspects of the castration of piglets. The EFSA Journal 91, 1–18. Retrieved February 2, 2008, from http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/Scientific_Opinion/report_ahaw03_ej91_pigcast_v2_en1,0.pdfGoogle Scholar
Evans, A 2006. Global control of boar taint. Part 3. Immunological castration. Pig Progress 22, 6–9.Google Scholar
Fjelkner-Modig, S 1986. Sensory properties of pork, as influenced by cooking temperature and breed. Journal of Food Quality 9, 89–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Font i Furnols, M 2000. Utilització de mascles enters per a la producció de carn: avaluació sensorial i estudis de consumidors. PhD thesis, Department of Statistics and Operative Investigation, Polytechnics University of Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona, Spain. Retrieved April 28, 2008, from http://www.tdx.cat/TDX-0423101-092628Google Scholar
Font i Furnols, M, Gispert, M, Diestre, A, Oliver, MA 2003. Acceptability of boar meat by consumers depending on their age, gender, culinary habits, and sensitivity and appreciation of androstenone odour. Meat Science 64, 433–440.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Font i Furnols, M, Gispert, M, Guerrero, L, Velarde, A, Tibau, J, Soler, J, Hortós, M, García-Regueiro, JA, Pérez, J, Suárez, P, Oliver, MA 2008. Consumers’ sensory acceptability of pork from immunocastrated male pigs. Meat Science 80, 1013–1018.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibis, M 1994. Einfluss der Substanzen Indol und Skatol auf die Schweinefleischqualität. Dissertation, Universität Hohenheim, Hohenheim, Germany.Google Scholar
Gilbert, AN, Wysocki, CJ 1987. The smell survey results. National Geographic 172, 514–525.Google Scholar
Haugen, JE 2003. Rapid detection of boar taint with chemical sensor technology. The challenge of gas-sensor based methods. In Proceedings of the EAAP Working group on Production and the Utilisation of Meat from Entire Male Pigs, 13–14 November 2003, Dublin, Ireland.Google Scholar
Haugen, JE, Kvaal, K 1998. Electronic nose and artificial neural network. Meat Science 49 (suppl. 1), S273–S286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haugen, JE, Lundby, F, Wäckers, FL, Olson, D, Kauppinen, I, Ferber, A, de Wiel, D, Briens, M, Tuyttens, F 2008a. Rapid detection methods for boar taint; fast GC, FTIR-PAS and biosensing. In Proceedings of the EAAP meeting, 26–27 March 2008, Girona, Spain.Google Scholar
Haugen, JE, Zamaratskaia, G, Lundström, K, Chen, G, Squires, J, Lou, Y, Whittington, F 2008b. The boar taint case: need for standardisation and harmonisation. In Proceedings of the 1st European Food Congress, 4–9 November 2008, Ljubljana, Slovenia.Google Scholar
Hennessy, D 2006. Global control of boar taint. Part 4. Immunological castration in action. Pig Progress 22, 14–16.Google Scholar
Hennessy, D, Walker, J 2004. Effect of boar taint vaccine, Improvac, on pork quality. In Proceedings of the 18th International Pig Veterinary Society (IPVS) Congress, Hamburg, Germany.Google Scholar
Hurst, WJ 1999. Electronic noses and sensor array systems. Culinary and Hospitality Industry Publications Services, Weimar, TX, USA.Google Scholar
Jarmoluk, L, Martin, AH, Fredeen, HT 1970. Detection of boar taint (sex odour) in pork. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 50, 750–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeong, JY, Choi, JH, Han, DJ, Lee, DH, Hennessy, D, Kim, CJ 2008a. The effects of immunocastration on meat quality and sensory properties of pork loins. In Proceedings of the 20th International Pig Veterinary Society (IPVS) Congress, Durban, South Africa, s. 269.Google Scholar
Jeong, JY, Choi, JH, Han, DJ, Lee, DH, Hennessy, D, Kim, CJ 2008b. The effects of immunocastration on meat quality and sensory properties of pork bellies. In Proceedings of the 20th International Pig Veterinary Society (IPVS) Congress, Durban, South Africa, s. 325.Google Scholar
Kauppinen, J, Wilcken, K, Kauppinen, I, Koskinen, V 2004. High sensitivity in gas analysis with photoacoustic detection. Microchemical Journal 76, 151–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, A, Zhuang, H, Chi, Q, Vosshall, LB, Matsunami, H 2007. Genetic variation in a human odorant receptor alters odour perception. Nature 449, 468–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lunde, K, Egelandsdal, B, Choinski, J, Mielnik, M, Flåtten, A, Kubberød, E 2008. Marinating as a technology to shift sensory thresholds in ready-to-eat entire male pork meat. Meat Science 80, 1264–1272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lundström, K, Malmfors, B, Fjelkner-Modig, S, Szatek, A 1983. Consumer testing of boar meat in Sweden. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 13, 39–46.Google Scholar
Mackinnon, JD, Pearce, MC 2007. Improvac (Pfizer Animal Health): an immunological product for the control of boar taint in entire male pigs: II. Practical applications in pig production and potential production benefits. The Pig Journal 59, 68–90.Google Scholar
Matthews, KR, Homer, DB 1997. The effect of sex on the eating quality of British style sausages prepared from individual entire male and female pigs. In Boar taint in entire male pigs (ed. M. Bonneau, K Lundström and B Malmfors), EAAP Publication no. 92, pp. 169–172. Wageningen Pers., Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Matthews, KR, Homer, DB, Punter, P, Béague, MP, Gispert, M, Kempster, AJ, Agerhem, H, Claudi-Madgnussen, C, Fischer, K, Siret, F, Leask, H, Font i Furnols, M, Bonneau, M 2000. An international study on the importance of androstenone and skatole for boar taint: III. Consumer survey in seven European countries. Meat Science 54, 271–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCauley, I, Hennessy, DP, Boghossian, V, Sali, L, Salvatore, L, Reynolds, J, Mawson, R 1997. Effect of methods of cooking and processing pork on the perception of boar taint. In Boar taint in entire male pigs (ed. M Bonneau, K Lundström and B Malmfors), EAAP Publication no. 92, pp. 156–160. Wageningen Pers., Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Miyahara, M, Matsuda, S, Komaki, H, Sakari, H, Tsukise, A 2004. Effects of sexual distinction on growth rate and meat production in three-way cross pigs. Japanese Journal of Swine Science 41, 228–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission 1996. Blueprint for quality British pork. MLC, Milton Keynes, UK.Google Scholar
Moore, KL, Mullan, BP, Hennessy, DP, Dunshea, FR, D’Souza, DN 2005. Paylean® improves feed conversion efficiency of entire and immunocastrated male pigs. In Manipulating pig production X (ed. JE Paterson), p. 63. Proceedings of the 10th biennial conference of the Australasian Pig Science Association, Christchurch, NZ.Google Scholar
Mortensen, AB, Sorensen, SE 1984. Relationship between boar taint and skatole determined with a new analysis method. In Proceedings of the 30th European Meeting of Meat Research Workers, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
Naděje, B, Koucký, M, Ševčíková, S, Adamec, T, Laštovková, J 2000. Assessment of boar and barrow meat. Czech Journal of Animal Science 45, 539–544.Google Scholar
Nute, GR, Baker, A, Hughes, SI, Wood, JD 2007. Eating quality of pork loin steaks from control and Improvac treated pigs. University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.Google Scholar
Olson, DM, Rains, GC, Meiners, T, Takasu, T, Tertuliano, M, Tumlinson, JH, Wäckers, FL, Lewis, WJ 2003. Parasitic wasps learn and report diverse chemicals with unique conditionable behaviors. Chemical Senses 28, 545–549.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patterson, RLS 1968. 5α-androst-16-ene-3-one: Compound responsible for taint in boar fat. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 19, 31–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pauly, C, Spring, P, O’Doherty, JV, Ampuero Kragten, S, Bee, G 2008. Performances, meat quality and boar taint of castrates and entire male pigs fed a standard diet and a raw potato starch-enriched diet. Animal 2, 1707–1715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, DR, Tanaka, T, McDaniel, AH 2006. Diverse tastes: genetics of sweet and bitter perception. Physiology and Behavior 88, 215–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rius, MA, García-Regueiro, JA 2001. Skatole and indole concentrations in Longissimus dorsi and fat samples of pigs. Meat Science 59, 285–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rius, MA, Hortós, M, García -Regueiero, JA 2005. Influence of volatile compounds on the development of off-flavours in pig back fat samples classified with boar taint by test panel. Meat Science 71, 595–602.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Röck, F, Barsan, N, Weimar, U 2008. Electronic nose: current status and future trends. Chemical Reviews 108, 705–725.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Santos, JP, Garcia, M, Aleixandre, M, Horillo, MC, Gutierrez, J, Sayago, I, Fernandez, MJ, Ares, L 2004. Electronic nose for the identification of pig feeding and ripening time in Iberian hams. Meat Science 66, 727–732.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sheard, PR, Nute, GR, Richardson, RI, Perry, A, Taylor, AA 1999. Injection of water and polyphosphate into pork to improve juiciness and tenderness after cooking. Meat Science 51, 371–376.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singayan-Fajardo, J, Quizon, M, Hennessy, D 2006. Eating quality and acceptability of pork from Improvac immunized boars. In Proceedings of the 19th International Pig Veterinary Society (IPVS) Congress, Copenhagen, Denmark.Google Scholar
Siret, F, Béague, MP, Fischer, K, Chevillon, P 1997. Consumer acceptability and characterization of the cooking odour of pork with different androstenone and skatole contents: comparison of two cooking procedures. In Boar taint in entire male pigs (ed. M Bonneau, K Lundström and B Malmfors), EAAP Publication no. 92, pp. 161–164. Wageningen Pers., Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Sole, MAR, García-Regueiero, JA 2001. Role of 4-phrenyl-3-buten-2-one in boar taint. Identification of new compounds related to sensorial description in pig fat. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 49, 5303–5309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stolzenbach, S, Lindahl, G, Lundström, K, Chen, G, Byrne, DV 2009. Perceptual masking of boar taint in Swedish fermented sausages. Meat Science 81, 580–588.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suster, D, Leury, BJ, Kerton, DJ, Borg, MR, Butler, KL, Dunshea, FR 2006. Longitudinal DXA measurements demonstrate lifetime differences in lean and fat tissue deposition between boars and barrows under individual and group-penned systems. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 57, 1009–1015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Udesen, F 1998. Financial consequences of production of entire male pigs. In Skatole and boar taint (ed. WK Jensen), ISBN 87-985837-1-9, chapter 13, pp. 195–202. Danish Meat Research Institute, Roskilde, Denmark.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, R 1995. First steps in developing an instrument for measuring boar taint. In Proceedings of the EAAP Working Group on Production and Utilisation of Meat from Entire Male Pigs, 27–29 September1995, Milton Keynes, UK.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, R 2001. Patent numbers EP1233267-A, EP1233267-A1. Detection of boar taint by determining skatole and androstenone concentration in uncastrated bodies, by determining their content in a sample by ion mobility spectrometry. European Patent Application, TNO.Google Scholar
Vestergaard, J, Haugen, JE, Byrne, DV 2006. Application of an electronic nose for measurements of boar taint in entire male pigs. Meat Science 74, 564–577.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vold, E 1970. Fleischproduktionseigenschaften bei Ebern und Kastraten IV: Organoleptische und gaschromatographische Untersuchungen wasserdampfflüchtiger Stoffe des Rückenspeckes von Ebern. Meldinger fra Norges Landbrugshøgskole 49, 1–25.Google Scholar
Walstra, P 1974. Fattening of young boars: quantification of negative and positive aspects. Livestock Production Science 1, 187–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walstra, P, Claudi-Magnussen, C, Chevillon, P, von Seth, G, Diestre, A, Matthews, KR, Homer, DB, Bonneau, M 1999. An international study on the importance of androstenone and skatole for boar taint: levels of androstenone and skatole by country and season. Livestock Production Science 62, 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walstra, P, Engel, B, Mateman, G 1986. The androstenone–skatole dilemma as applied in a consumer test. In Proceedings of the 32nd European Meeting of Meat Research Workers, Ghent, Belgium, pp. 27–29.Google Scholar
Walstra, P, Maarse, G 1970. Onderzoek gestachlengen van mannelijke mestvarkens. IVO-rapport C-147, Rapport 2. Researchgroep voor Vlees en Vleeswaren TNO, Zeist, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Weiler, U, Fischer, K, Kemmer, H, Dobrowolski, A, Claus, R 1997. Influence of androstenone sensitivity on consumer reactions to boar meat. In Boar taint in entire male pigs (ed. M Bonneau, K Lundström and B Malmfors), EAAP Publication no. 92, pp. 147–151. Wageningen Pers., Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Weiler, U, Font i Furnols, M, Fischer, K, Kemmer, H, Oliver, MA, Gispert, M, Dobrowolski, A, Claus, R 2000. Influence of differences in sensitivity of Spanish and German consumers to perceive androstenone on the acceptance of boar meat differing in skatole and androstenone concentrations. Meat Science 54, 297–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Windholz, M, Budavari, S, Blumetti, RF, Otterbein, ES 1983. The Merck index: An encyclopedia of chemicals, drugs and biologicals, 10th edition. Merck & Co., Rahway, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
Wood, JD 1984. Fat quality in pig meat in UK. In Fat quality in lean pigs (ed. JD Wood), Special report no. 2, pp. 9–14. AFRC Meat Research Institute, Langford,UK.Google Scholar
Wood, JD, Buxton, PJ, Whittington, FM, Enser, M 1986. The chemical composition of fat tissues in the pig: effects of castration and feeding treatment. Livestock Production Science 15, 73–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, JD, Nute, GR, Fursey, GAJ, Cuthbertson, A 1995. The effect of cooking conditions on the eating quality of pork. Meat Science 40, 127–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zamaratskaia, G, Andersson, HK, Chen, G, Andersson, K, Madej, A, Lundström, K 2008. Effect of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone vaccine (Improvac™) on steroid hormones, boar taint compounds and performance in entire male pigs. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 43, 351–359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zamaratskaia, G, Squires, EJ 2009. Biochemical, nutritional and genetic effects on boar taint in entire male pigs. Animal, 10.1017/S1751731108003674 (in press).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed