Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T23:56:39.268Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The carcass composition of male, castrated male and female pigs resulting from two levels of feeding

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. S. Davies ,
G. Pearson  and
J. R. Carr
A. S. Davies
Affiliation:
Department of Physiology and Anatomy, and Department of Dairy Husbandry, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
G. Pearson
Affiliation:
Department of Physiology and Anatomy, and Department of Dairy Husbandry, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
J. R. Carr
Affiliation:
Department of Physiology and Anatomy, and Department of Dairy Husbandry, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

An anatomical study compared the effects of sex and a twofold nutritional difference in growth rate between 20 and 100 kg live weight, on 63 entire males, castrated male and female Large White × Landrace pigs. While the effect of growth rate was significant for overall fat deposition in the carcasses of all three sexes, it was greatest for the entire male. In contrast, sex and nutritional effects on the distribution of fat and on the proportion and distribution of muscle and bone were small.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 95 , Issue 2 , October 1980 , pp. 251 - 259
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

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

Butterfield, R. M. & Berg, R. T. (1974). Possibilities to change the muscle development of different parts of the body by breeding and feeding. 1st World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production 1, 625–633. Madrid: Editorial Garsi.Google Scholar
Carden, A. E. & Goenaga, P. B. (1977). Effects of restrictions of energy, protein or both on growth and body composition of pigs. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 89, 687–698.Google Scholar
Carden, A. E. & Goenaga, P. R. (1979). Effects of severe food restriction on bone growth and distribution in pigs. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92, 329–335.Google Scholar
Davies, A. S. (1974a). A comparison of tissue development in Pietrain and Large White pigs from birth to 64 kg live weight. 1. Growth changes in carcass composition. Animal Production 19, 367–376.Google Scholar
Davies, A. S. (1974b). A comparison of tissue development in Piotrain and Large White pigs from birth to 64 kg live weight. 2. Growth changes in muscle distribution. Animal Production 19, 377–387.Google Scholar
Davies, A. S. & Kallweit, E. (1979). The effect of body weight and maturity on the carcass composition of the pig. Zeitschrift filr Tierziichtung und Ziichtungsbiologie 96, 6–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, A. S. & Pryor, W. J. (1977). Growth changes in the distribution of dissectable and intramuscular fat in pigs. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 89, 257–266.Google Scholar
Desmoulin, B. (1978). Etudes sur la composition corporelle du pore. Applications scientifiques ou techniques. Journies de la Recherche Porcine en France 10, 211–234.Google Scholar
Fowler, V. R., Taylor, A. G. & Livingstone, R. M. (1969). Nutritional implications of differences in tissue growth due to sex. In Meat Production from Entire Male Animals (ed. Rhodes, D. N.), pp. 51–61. London: Churchill.Google Scholar
Goenaga, P. R. & Carden, A. E. (1978). Effects of severe food restriction on growth rate, muscle distribution and muscle: bone ratio in pigs. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 90, 633–636.Google Scholar
Hansson, I.Lundstrom, K. & Malmfors, B. (1975). Effect of sex and weight on growth, feed efficiency and carcass characteristics of pigs. 2. Carcass characteristics of boars, barrows and gilts, slaughtered at 4 different weights. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 5, 69–80.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J. & Evans, D. G. (1979). The effects of genotype, sex and feeding regimen on pig carcass development. 2. Tissue weight distribution and fat partition between depots. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 93, 349–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lohse, C. L. (1973). The influence of sex on muscle growth in Merino sheep. Growth 37, 177–187.Google ScholarPubMed
Mcmeekan, C. P. (1940). Growth and development of the pig, with special reference to carcass quality characters. 2. The influence of the plane of nutrition on growth and development. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 30, 387–436.Google Scholar
Mcmeekan, C. P. (1941). Growth and development of the pig, with special reference to carcass quality characters. 4. The use of sample joints and of carcass measurements as indices of composition of the bacon pig. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 31, 1–49.Google Scholar
Murray, D. M. & Slezacek, O. (1975). The effect of growth rate on muscle distribution in sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 85, 189–191.Google Scholar
Murray, D. M., Tulloh, N. M. & Winter, W. M. (1974). Effeots of three different growth rates on empty body weight, carcass weight and dissected carcass composition of cattle. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 82, 535–547.Google Scholar
Pryor, W. J. & Warren, G. H. (1973). Chemical fat in the musculature of the sheep caroass. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 80, 219–224.Google Scholar
Richmond, R. J. & Berg, R. T. (1971). Fat distribution in swine as influenced by liveweight, breed, sex and ration. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 51, 523–531.Google Scholar
Vague, J. & Fenasse, R. (1965). Comparative anatomy of adipose tissue. In Handbook of Physiology, Section 5, Adipose Tissue (ed. Renold, R. E. and Cahill, G. F.), pp. 25–36. Washington, D.C.: American Physiological Society.Google Scholar
Witt, M. & Sohröder, J. (1969). Verlauf der Mastleistung bei Ebern, Borgen und Sauen im Mastabschnitt von 40 bis 110 kg Lebendgewicht. Die Fleischunrtschaft 49, 353–356.Google Scholar