Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-sv6ng Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-07T06:45:27.692Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Breed differences in body composition of equally mature sheep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

T. H. McClelland ,
B. Bonaiti  and
C. S. Taylor
T. H. McClelland
Affiliation:
ARC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
B. Bonaiti
Affiliation:
ARC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
C. S. Taylor
Affiliation:
ARC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
Get access

Summary

Sheep from the Soay, Finnish Landrace, Southdown and Oxford Down breeds were serially slaughtered at about 40, 50, 60 and 70% of their estimated mature body weight. Breed and sex comparisons were made at these degrees of maturity. Large differences were found in the weight of muscle, fat and bone, total muscle ranging from a mean of 3·3 kg in the Soay to 13·0 kg in the Oxford Down; the corresponding range for dissected fat was 1·2 to 9·2 kg.

Most of the breed and sex differences observed at the same degree of maturity disappeared when expressed as a percentage of body or carcass weight. Thus both sexes had almost the same body and carcass composition in terms of fat, muscle and bone percentage. There were breed differences in fat percentage, with the Soay significantly less fat than the other breeds. Total muscle as a percentage of body weight was remarkably close to 28·5% in all breeds in both sexes, and at all four stages of maturity.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , December 1976 , pp. 281 - 293
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1976

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

Bradford, G. E., Taylor, St C. S., Quirke, J. F. and Hart, R. 1974. An egg-transfer study of litter size, birth weight and lamb survival. Anim. Prod. 18: 249–263.Google Scholar
Halliday, R. 1975. Some factors influencing immunoglobulin transfer in sheep. Symposium on Transmission of Immunoglobulinsfrom Mother to Young (ed. Hemmings, W. A.), Bangor, 1974. Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Hammond, J. 1932. Growth and the Development of Mutton Qualities in the Sheep. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Jackson, T. H. and Mansour, Y. A. 1974. Differences between groups of lamb carcasses chosen for good and poor conformation. Anim. Prod. 19: 93–105.Google Scholar
Mcclelland, T. H. and Russel, A. J. F. 1972. The distribution of body fat in Scottish Blackface and Finnish Landrace lambs. Anim. Prod. 15: 301–306.Google Scholar
Rowett Research Institute and Hill Farming Research Organisation. 1974. Farming the Red Deer. Her Majesty's Stationery Office, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Russel, A. J. F., Gunn, R. G. and Doney, J. M. 1968. Components of weight loss in pregnant hill ewes during winter. Anim. Prod. 10: 43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, W. S. 1973. Compreg User's Guide, IUjRC Series Report No. 5. Program Library Unit, Edinburgh Regional Computing Centre.Google Scholar
Seebeck, R. M. 1966. Composition of dressed carcasses of lambs. Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 6: 291–297.Google Scholar
Wainman, F. W., Smith, J. S. and Dewey, P. J. S. 1975. The nutritive value for sheep of ruminant Diet AA6, a complete cobbed diet containing 30% barley straw. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 84: 109–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, A., Handler, P. and Smith, E. L. 1973. Principles of Biochemistry. 5th ed. McGraw-Hill, London.Google Scholar