Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T11:28:57.191Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Post-Natal Growth and Development of Muscle in Relation to Quality in Meat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2016

D. M. Joubert
D. M. Joubert*
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Cambridge
Get access

Extract

Dividing the meat carcass into its three main component tissues, bone, muscle and fat, it is known that they develop in a well-defined order, bone being the earliest maturing and fat the latest (Hammond, 1932). Of the three, muscle is the most important from the viewpoint of human nutrition and the factors influencing its growth obviously demand serious consideration. The literature on qualitative growth contains numerous references to microscopical meat studies, but, due to the diversity of conditions under which the observations were made, the results obtained cannot easily be co-ordinated. An investigation was therefore planned in which most of the major factors influencing growth and development of muscle in general, and the muscle fibre in particular, could be studied.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production , Volume 1954 , 1954 , pp. 49 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Production 1954

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

Adametz, L., 1888. Untersuchungen über den Bau und die Zusammensetzung der Muskeln bei verschiedenen Rinderrassen. Landw. Jb., 17 : 577.Google Scholar
Callow, E. H., 1948. Comparative studies of meat. II. The changes in the carcass during growth and fattening, and their relation to the chemical composition of the fatty and muscular tissues. J. agric. Sci. 38 : 174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glebina, E. I., 1952. [Changes in the muscle tissue of pigs due to cross-breeding.] Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 82 : 309. [In Russian.] (Anim. Breed. Abstr., 21, No. 299.)Google Scholar
Hammond, J., 1932. Growth and development of mutton qualities in the sheep. Edinburgh : Oliver and Boyd, xxvi + 597 pp.Google Scholar
Hammond, J., 1940. Some factors affecting the quality and composition of meat. Chem.& Ind., 59 : 521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, J., 1942. Factors influencing the composition and properties of meat. Chem. & Ind., 61 : 334.Google Scholar
Hammond, J., 1952. Farm animals. Their breeding, growth, and inheritance. London: Edward Arnold & Co. 2nd ed. viii + 266 pp.Google Scholar
Hammond, J., & Appleton, A. B., 1932. Study of the leg of mutton. In Hammond (1932), pp. 353–545.Google Scholar
Joubert, D. M., 1954. Unpublished investigation.Google Scholar
McMeekan, C. P., 1940-41. Growth and development in the pig, with special reference to carcass quality characters. J. agric. Sci., 30: 276, 387, 511; 31 : 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meara, P. J., 1947. Meat studies No. 1.–Post-natal growth and development of muscle, as exemplified by the gastrocnemius and psoas muscles of the rabbit. Onderstepoort J. vet. Sci., 21 : 329.Google ScholarPubMed
Pálsson, H., 1939-40. Meat qualities in the sheep with special reference to Scottish breeds and crosses. J. agric. Sci., 29 : 544; 30; 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raath, J. C., 1941. ‘n Studie van die invloed van seisoenskommelinge en die gevolglike veranderinge in die voedingswaarde van die natuurlike weiveld op die groei en ontwikkeling van slagosse en die kwaliteit van die karkas. M.Sc. (Agric.) Thesis, Univ. Pretoria.Google Scholar
Ramsbottom, J. M., Strandine, E. J., & Koonz, C. H., 1945. Comparative tenderness of representative beef muscles. Food Res., 10 : 497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robertson, D. D., & Baker, D. D., 1933. Histological differences in the muscles of full, half and rough fed steers. Res. Bull. Mo. agric. Exp. Sta.,No. 200.Google Scholar
Robinson, P., 1948. The effect of super-maintenance and sub-maintenance diets on mature Border Leicester-Cheviot ewes. J. agric. Sci., 38 : 345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Satorius, M., & Child, A. M., 1938. Effect of cut, grade, and class upon palatability and composition of beef roasts. Tech. Bull. Mo. agric. Exp. Sta., No. 131. Google Scholar
Trowbridge, P. F., Moulton, C. R., & Haigh, C. D., 1918. Effect of limited food on growth of beef cattle. Bull. Mo. agric. Exp. Sta., No. 28. Google Scholar
Vérges, J. B., 1939. Effect of the plane of nutrition on the carcase quality of Suffolk cross lambs. Suffolk Sheep Soc. Yearb. pp. 27–37.Google Scholar
Waters, H. J., 1909. The influence of nutrition upon the animal form. Proc.Ann. Meet. Soc. Prom. Agric. [Portland, U.S.A.]. pp. 70–98.Google Scholar