Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-lrblm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T20:09:33.453Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Computerised tomography for carcass analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2017

M. J. Young ,
G. Simm  and
C.A. Glasbey
M. J. Young
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, Scotland
G. Simm
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, Scotland
C.A. Glasbey
Affiliation:
Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JG, Scotland
Get access

Extract

Computer tomography (CT) scanning is a method for non-invasive imaging of subjects developed for use in human medicine. It allows cross-sectional images, containing a wealth of information, to be obtained for a living animal (Davies et al., 1987). These can be used to provide very accurate assessment of body composition in live animals in a welfare-friendly manner. Not only is accuracy improved but also a wide range of novel traits lend themselves to assessment and objective measurements can be collected rapidly, using mathematical algorithms for image analysis (Glasbey & Robinson, 1999; Glasbey et al., 1999).

Type
Invited Theatre Presentations
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science , Volume 2001 , 2001 , pp. 250 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2001

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

Abdullah, A.Y.; Purchas, R.W.; Davies, A.S. 1998. Patterns of change with growth for muscularity and other composition characteristics of Southdown rams selected for high and low backfat depth. New Zealand journal of agricultural research 41: 367–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bookstein, F.L. 1991. Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data: Geometry and Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Butterfield, R.M. 1988. New concepts of sheep growth. University of Sydney: Sydney. 168p.Google Scholar
Davies, A.S.; Garden, K.L.; Young, M.J.; Reid, C.S.W. 1987. An atlas of X-ray tomographical anatomy of the sheep. Science Information Publishing Centre, DSIR: Bulletin No. 243. Wellington, New Zealand. 118p.Google Scholar
Dewar-Durie, A. 2000. The Scottish sheep industry: a way forward. Report to Scottish Executive. 60p.Google Scholar
Dryden, I. L.; Mardia, K. V. 1998. Statistical shape analysis. Chichester: Wiley. 347p.Google Scholar
Emmans, G.C.; Kyriazakis, I.; Fisher, C. 2000. Consequences of selecting for growth and body composition characteristics in poultry and pigs. p39–53 The challenge of genetic change in animal production. British society of animal science occasional publication No. 27. Ed. Hill, W.G.; Bishop, S.C.; McGuirk, B.; McKay, J.C.; Simm, G.; Webb, A.J..Google Scholar
Glasbey, C.A.; Horgan, G.W. 1995. Image analysis for the biological sciences. Chichester: Wiley. 218pGoogle Scholar
Glasbey, C.A.; Robinson, C.D. 1999. Estimation of tissue proportions in X-ray CT images using a new mixed pixel distribution. Task quarterly 3: 409–418.Google Scholar
Glasbey, C.A.,; Robinson, C.D.; Young, M.J. 1999. Segmentation of X-ray CT images using stochastic templates. In Proceedings of 10th international conference on image analysis and processing. IEEE Computer Society: Los Alamitos, California. pp746–751.Google Scholar
Hill, W.G.; Bishop, S.C.; McGuirk, B.; McKay, J.C.; Simm, G.; Webb, A.J. 2000. The challenge of genetic change in animal production: Forward to publication, page (iii). The challenge of genetic change in animal production. British society of animal science occasional publication No. 27. Ed. Hill, W.G.; Bishop, S.C.; McGuirk, B.; McKay, J.C.; Simm, G.; Webb, A.J. Google Scholar
Jackson, T.H.; Mansour, Y.A. 1974. Differences between groups of lamb carcasses chosen for good and poor conformation. Animal production 19: 93–105.Google Scholar
Jones, S.D.M. 1995. Future directions in carcass assessment. pp215–228. In Quality and grading of carcasses of meat animals. Ed. Jones, S.D.M. CRC Press: Boca Raton.Google Scholar
Jopson, N.B.; McEwan, J.C.; Dodds, K.G.; Young, M.J. 1995. Economic benefits of including computed tomography measurements in sheep breeding programmes. Proceedings of the association for the advancement of animal breeding and genetics 11: 194–197.Google Scholar
Kempster, A.J.; Cuthbertson, A.; Harrington, G. 1982. Carcass evaluation in livestock breeding, production and marketing. Granada: London. 306p.Google Scholar
Kirton, A.H.; Pickering, F.S. 1967. Factors associated with differences in carcass conformation of lamb. New Zealand journal of agricultural research 10: 183–200.Google Scholar
Kirton, A.H.; Woods, E.G.; Duganzich, D.M. 1983. Comparison of well and poorly muscled lamb carcasses as selected by experienced meat industry personnel. Proceedings of the New Zealand society of animal production 43: 111–113.Google Scholar
Lewis, R.M.; Simm, G.; Dingwall, W.S.; Murphy, S.V. 1996. Selection for lean growth in terminal sire sheep to produce leaner crossbred progeny. Animal science 63: 133–142.Google Scholar
Pálsson, H.D. 1939. Meat qualities in the sheep with special reference to Scottish breeds and crosses II: part III. Comparative development of selected individuals of different breeds and crosses as lambs and hoggets. Journal of agricultural science, Cambridge 30: 1–64.Google Scholar
Price, M.A. Development of carcass grading and classification systems. 1995. Future directions in carcass assessment. Pp173–199. In Quality and grading of carcasses of meat animals. Ed. Jones, S.D.M. CRC Press: Boca Raton.Google Scholar
Simm, G. 1998. Genetic improvement of cattle and sheep. Farming Press: Ipswich. 433p.Google Scholar
Simm, G.; Dingwall, W.S. 1989. Selection indices for lean meat production in sheep. Livestock production science 21: 223–233.Google Scholar
Taylor, St. C.S. 1985. Use of genetic size-scaling in evaluation of animal growth. Journal of animal science 61 (Supplement 2): 118–143.Google Scholar
Thompson, J.M. 1998. Meat quality. Sixth World congress on genetics applied to livestock production, January 1998, Armidale, Australia, Volume 25: 147–148.Google Scholar
Vangen, O.; Skjervold, H. 1981. Estimating body composition in pigs by computerized tomography. Pig news and information 2(2): 153–154.Google Scholar
Wood, J.D. 1995. The influence of carcass composition on meat quality. pp131–155. In Quality and grading of carcasses of meat animals. Ed. Jones, S.D.M. CRC Press: Boca Raton.Google Scholar
Wood, J.D.; Fisher, A.V. 1990. Reducing fat in meat animals. Elsevier Applied Science: London. 469p.Google Scholar
Young, M.J. 1989. The influence of changes in tissue shape on muscle: bone ratio in growing sheep. Proceedings of the British society of animal production. In. Animal production 48: 635. (abstract).Google Scholar
Young, M.J.; Garden, K.L.; Knopp, T.C. 1987. Computer aided tomography - comprehensive body compositional data from live animals. Proceedings of the New Zealand society of animal production 47: 69–71.Google Scholar
Young, M.J.; Logan, C.M.; Beatson, P.R.; Nsoso, S.J. 1996. Prediction of carcass tissue weight in vivo using live weight, ultrasound or X-ray CT measurements. Proceedings of the New Zealand society of animal production 56: 205–211.Google Scholar
Young, M.J.; Sykes, A.R. 1987. Bone growth and muscularity. Proceedings of the New Zealand society of animal production 47: 73–75.Google Scholar
Zhang, L.; Siqin, B. 1998. The genetic patterns and the performance testing of multivertebrae Mongolia sheep. Sixth World congress on genetics applied to livestock production, January 1998, Armidale, Australia, Volume 24: 246–249.Google Scholar