Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T04:20:14.536Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Meat quality, carcass composition and intake

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

J. D. Wood*
Affiliation:
AFRC Institute of Food Research— Bristol Laboratory, Langford, Bristol BS18 7DY
Get access

Abstract

In pigs, variation in appetite under ad libitum feeding conditions is often associated with variation in carcass composition and meat quality. Breeds, strains and pigs types possessing high appetites are frequently fatter and have better meat quality (e.g. lower PSE incidence and more juicy meat) than those possessing low appetites, although for different physiological reasons. These conclusions are based on published reports of performance, carcass and meat characteristics in the following pig types: carriers of the halothane gene, Pietrain and Duroc breeds, animals selected for low backfat thickness and entire males. Selection schemes which reduce carcass fatness yet increase appetite are preferable to those which depress appetite so far as meat quality is concerned.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Production 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

Barton-Gade, P. 1984. Influence of halothane genotype on meat quality in pigs subjected to various pre-slaughter treatments. Proceedings of the 30th European Meeting Meat Research Workers, pp. 89.Google Scholar
Barton-Gade, P. 1987. Meat and fat quality in boars, castrates and gilts. Livestock Production Science 16: 187196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bejerholm, C. 1984. Experience in taste testing fresh pork at the Danish Meat Research Institute. Proceedings of the 30th European Meeting Meat Research Workers, pp. 196197.Google Scholar
Bejerholm, C. and Barton-Gade, P. 1986. Effect of intramuscular fat level on eating quality of pig meat. Proceedings of the 32nd European Meeting Meat Research Workers, pp. 389391.Google Scholar
Bruner, W. H. and Swiger, L. A. 1968. Effects of sex, season and breed on live and carcass traits at the Ohio swine evaluation station. Journal of Animal Science 27: 383388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chadwick, J. P. and Kempster, A. J. 1983. Repeat national survey (10 years on) of muscle pH values in commercial bacon carcasses. Meat Science 9: 101111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortin, A., Wood, J. D. and Whelehan, O. P. 1987. Breed and sex effects on the development and proportions of muscle, fat and bone in pigs. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 108: 3945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heffron, J. J. A. 1987. Calcium releasing systems in mitochondria and sarcoplasmic reticulum with respect to the aetiology of malignant hyperthermia: a review. In Evaluation and Control of Meat Quality in Pigs (ed. Tarrant, P. V., Eikelenboom, G. and Monin, G.), pp. 1726. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hetzer, H. O. and Miller, R. H. 1972. Rate of growth as influenced by selection for high and low fatness in swine. Journal of Animal Science 35: 730742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hetzer, H. O. and Miller, L. R. 1973. Selection for high and low fatness in swine: correlated responses of various carcass traits. Journal of Animal Science 37: 12891301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiner, R. L., Thornton, J. W. and Alsmeyer, R. H. 1965. Palatability and quantity of pork as influenced by breed and fatness. Journal of Food Science 30: 550555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houseman, R. A. 1973. A comparison of the voluntary feed intakes of boars, gilts and castrates. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production, New Series, 2: 9091 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Jensen, P. 1981. Carcass and meat quality of pigs with known genotypes for halothane susceptibility. In Porcine Stress and Meat Quality (ed. Froystein, T. and Slinde, E.), pp. 267273. Agricultural Food Research Society, Ås, Norway.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Dilworth, A. W., Evans, D. G. and Fisher, K. D. 1986. The effects of fat thickness and sex on pig meat quality with special reference to the problems associated with overleanness. 1. Butcher and consumer panel results. Animal Production 43: 517533.Google Scholar
McGloughlin, P., Allen, P., Tarrant, P. V. and Joseph, R. L. 1988. Growth and carcass quality of crossbred pigs sired by Duroc, Landrace and Large White boars. Livestock Production Science 18: 275288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malmfors, B. and Lundstrom, K. 1983. Consumer reactions to boar meat — a review. Livestock Production Science 10: 187196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malmfors, B. and Nilsson, R. 1979. Meat quality traits in Swedish Landrace and Yorkshire pigs with special emphasis on genetics. In Muscle Function and Porcine Meat Quality, Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Suppl. 21, pp. 113.Google Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 1983. Very Lean Pigs. Planning and Development Team Report. Meat and Livestock Commission, Bletchley.Google Scholar
Mortensen, A. B., Bejerholm, C. and Pedersen, J. K. 1986. Consumer test of meat from entire males, in relation to skatole in backfat. Proceedings of the 32nd European Meeting Meat Research Workers, pp. 2326.Google Scholar
Rhodes, D. N. 1972. Consumer testing of pork from boar and gilt pigs. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 23: 14831491.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sellier, P. 1987. Crossbreeding and meat quality in pigs. In Evaluation and Control of Meat Quality in Pigs (ed. Tarrant, P. V., Eikelenboom, G. and Monin, G.), pp. 1726. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Simpson, S. P., Webb, A. J. and Dick, S. 1987. Evaluation of Large White and Duroc boars as terminal sires under two different feeding regimes. Animal Production 45: 111116.Google Scholar
Smith, W. C. and Pearson, G. 1986. Comparative voluntary feed intakes, growth performance, carcass composition and meat quality of Large White, Landrace and Duroc pigs. New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture 14: 4350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steane, D. E. 1986. A review of the potential of the Duroc breed of pig. Research and Development in Agriculture 3: 153157.Google Scholar
Vangen, O. 1980. Studies on a two trait selection experiment in pigs. III. Correlated responses in daily feed intake, feed conversion and carcass traits. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 30: 125141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, A. J., Carden, A. E., Smith, C. and Imlah, P. 1982. Porcine stress syndrome in pig breeding. Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production, Vol 5, pp. 588608. Editorial Garsi, Madrid.Google Scholar
Whittemore, C. T., Tullis, J. B. and Emmans, G. C. 1988. Protein growth in pigs. Animal Production 46: 437445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, J. D., Edwards, S. A. and Bichard, M. 1988. Influence of the Duroc breed on pigmeat quality. Proceedings of the 34th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology, pp. 571572.Google Scholar
Wood, J. D., Enser, M. B., MacFie, H. J. H., Smith, W. C., Chadwick, J. P. and Ellis, M. 1978. Fatty acid composition of backfat in Large White pigs selected for low backfat thickness. Meat Science 2: 289300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wood, J. D., Enser, M. B., Whittington, F. M. and Moncrieff, C. B. 1989. The effects of fat thickness and sex on the composition of backfat in pigs. Livestock Production Science. In press.Google Scholar
Wood, J. D., Jones, R. C. D., Francombe, M. A. and Whelehan, O. P. 1986. The effects of fat thickness and sex on pig meat quality with special reference to the problems associated with overleanness. 2. Laboratory and trained taste panel results. Animal Production 43: 535544.Google Scholar
Wood, J. D. and Riley, J. E. 1982. Comparison of boars and castrates for bacon production. 1. Growth data and carcass and joint composition. Animal Production 35: 5563.Google Scholar
Wyllie, O., Morton, J. R. and Owen, J. B. 1979. Genetic aspects of voluntary food intake in the pig and their association with gain and food conversion efficiency. Animal Production 28: 381390.Google Scholar