Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-03T04:35:05.849Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth and body composition of Omani local sheep 2. Growth and distribution of musculature and skeleton

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

O. Mahgoub  and
G. A. Lodge
O. Mahgoub
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, College of Agriculture, Sultan Qaboos University, PO Box 34, Al-Khod 123, Sultanate of Oman
G. A. Lodge
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, College of Agriculture, Sultan Qaboos University, PO Box 34, Al-Khod 123, Sultanate of Oman
Get access

Abstract

Distribution of tissue weight in the musculature and skeleton was studied in ram, wether and ewe Omani sheep raised under an intensive management system and slaughtered over the range 18 to 38 kg live weight. Ram lambs had higher muscle weight in the forequarters than wether and ewe lambs whereas the latter ‘sexes’ had heavier hindquarters and slightly more muscle in the muscle groups of proximal hind- and forelimbs and those surrounding the spinal column. Some of the neck region muscles, e.g. m. splenius and m. longissimus capitis et atlantis, were more developed in ram than in wether and ewe lambs. The proportions in the side muscle weight of some muscles (mainly in the hindquarter) decreased with increased slaughter weight whereas others (mainly in forequarter) increased, with the majority of the muscles showing no significant slaughter weight effects. The magnitude of change in proportions of individual muscles with increased slaughter weight was small and unlikely to have a commercial impact on meat production from Omani sheep.

As a proportion of total carcass bone, the axial skeleton and the hindlimb decreased with increased slaughter weight whereas the forelimb did not show a significant change. Ram lambs had heavier individual bones than wether and ewe lambs and higher proportions of the axial skeleton and lower proportions of the hindlimb than wethers at 28 kg live weight. There were few differences between the various ‘sexes’ in length, width or circumference of bones. Except for the 12th rib, individual bones, in all sexes, grew at a rate lower than empty body weight.

It is suggested that future improvement of Omani sheep should take into consideration the high proportion of bone in the carcass of these animals as well as the relatively higher proportion of bone in the limbs than in the axial skeleton.

Keywords

bonesmusclesOmani sheep
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 58 , Issue 3 , June 1994 , pp. 373 - 379
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1994

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

Brannang, E. 1971. Studies on monozygous cattle twins. XXIII. The effect of castration and age of castration on the development of single muscle, bones and special sex characters. Part II. Swedish Journal of Agricultural Research 1:69–78.Google Scholar
Butler-Hogg, B. W. and Brown, A. J. 1986. Muscle weight distribution in lambs: a comparison of entire male and female. Animal Production 42:343–348.Google Scholar
Butler-Hogg, B. W. and Whelehan, O. P. 1987. Muscle growth and distribution of muscle weight in Clun and Southdown sheep. Animal Production 44:133–142.Google Scholar
Butterfield, R. M. 1988. New concepts of sheep growth. Department of Veterinary Anatomy, University of Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Edriss, M. A. 1992. Relationships between live body and bone measurements and body weight, carcass weight and carcass components in ram lambs. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology (Islamic Republic of Iran) 1:43–48.Google Scholar
Hammond, J. 1932. Growth and development of mutton qualities in sheep. Oliver and Boyd, London.Google Scholar
Hooper, A. B. C. 1978. Bone length and muscle weight in mice subjected to genetic selection for the relative length of the tibia and radius. Life Sciences 22:283–286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huxley, J. 1932. Problems of relative growth. Methuen, London.Google Scholar
Jones, S. D. M., Burgess, T. D. and Dupchak, K. 1983. Effects of dietary energy intake and sex on carcass tissue and offal growth in sheep. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 63:303–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jury, K. E., Fourie, P. D. and Kirton, A. H. 1977. Growth and development of sheep. IV. Growth of the musculature. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 20:115–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodge, G. A. 1989. The university experience and perspective. First international symposium on agriculture and fisheries development in Oman. Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat.Google Scholar
Mahgoub, O. 1988. Studies in normal and manipulated growth of sheep with special reference to skeletal growth. Ph.D. thesis, Lincoln College, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Mahgoub, O. and Lodge, G. A. 1994. Growth and body composition of Omani local sheep. 1. Live-weight growth and carcass and non-carcass characteristics. Animal Production 58:365–372.Google Scholar
Pálsson, H. 1955. Conformation and body composition. In Progress in the physiology of farm animals. Vol. 2. (ed. Hammond, J.), pp. 430–542. Butterworths, London.Google Scholar
Pálsson, H. and Verges, J. B. 1952. Effect of plane of nutrition on growth and development of carcass quality in lambs. Parts I and II. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 42:1–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1985. SAS user's guide: statistics. Version 5.18. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
World Association of Veterinary Anatomists. 1972. Nomina anatomica veterinaria. International Committee on Veterinary Anatomical Nomenclature.Google Scholar