Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:45:27.154Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies of growth and development in the young pig Part I. The carcass composition at 56 days of age of pigs reared along different growth curves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

F. W. H. Elsley
F. W. H. Elsley
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, Leeds
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. A comparison was made of the carcass composition at 56 days of age of early-weaned pigs grown along predetermined growth curves to 30, 40 and 50 lb. live weight and of suckled pigs grown to 50 lb. live weight at 56 days of age.

Eight blocks of four pigs were slaughtered when 56 days old and comprehensive carcass dissections undertaken.

2. There were no differences in the proportionate weight of the joints or of individual bones between the suckled and early-weaned pigs weighing 50 lb. at 56 days of age.

The difference in the proportionate weights of the joints between the three groups of early-weaned pigs reflected the change in development which took place with increasing live weight. There was, however, no clear gradient of development along the bones of the limbs with increasing weight at 56 days of age.

3. The dissected joints (hams, shoulders, neck, pelvis and loin) from the early-weaned pigs which weighed 50 lb. live weight contained 0·5% less bone, 1·5% less muscle and 1·7% more fat than the carcasses of suckled pigs reared to 50 lb. at 56 days of age.

The dissected joints of the early-weaned pigs reared to 30 lb. at 56 days of age contained 1·4% more bone, 2·7% more muscle and 5·3% less fat than the joints of the early-weaned pigs reared to 40 lb. and 2·6% more bone, 5·2% more muscle and 8·8% less fat than the joints of early-weaned pigs reared to 50 lb.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 61 , Issue 2 , October 1963 , pp. 233 - 241
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1963

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

Boaz, T. G. & Elsley, F. W. H. (1962). Anim. Prod. 4, 9.Google Scholar
Bocm, (1960). Eleven sow and litter tests. Barlby Report. Personal communication.Google Scholar
Braude, R. (1957). Outlook on Agriculture, 1, 175.Google Scholar
Callow, E. H. (1937). Rep. Fd Invest. Bd, Lond., p. 69.Google Scholar
Clausen, H. (1959). Cornell. Nutr. Feed. Mfr. Proc. p. 113.Google Scholar
Cray, A. S. (1955). J. Farms Cl., Lond., p. 33.Google Scholar
Csike, L. (1960). Allatenyesztes, 7, 223; see also ABA, 27, 907.Google Scholar
Dickinson, A. G. (1960). J. Agric. Sci. 54, 378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H. (1963). J. Agric. Sci. 61, 243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frape, D. C., Hays, V. W., Speer, V. C., Jones, J. D. & Catron, D. V. (1959). J. Anim. Sci. Proc. 18, 1492.Google Scholar
King, J. W. B. (1957). Proc. Brit. Sci. Anim. Prod., p. 49.Google Scholar
Lucas, I. A. M., Calder, A. F. C. & Smith, H. (1959). J. Agric. Sci. 53, 136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, I. A. M., Livingstone, R. M. & McDonald, T. (1962). Anim Prod. 4, 195.Google Scholar
McMeekan, C. P. (1940 a). J. Agric. Sci. 30, 276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMeekan, C. P. (1940 b). J. Agric. Sci. 30, 387.Google Scholar
McMeekan, C. P. (1940 c). J. Agric. Sci. 30, 511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minnaar, G. F. (1960). Fmg in S. Afr., 02 1960.Google Scholar
Walker-Love, J. (1959). Fmrs' Wkly, 11 1959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar