Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-05T06:56:28.535Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth and carcass traits in pigs after selection for lean tissue growth rate on low and high protein diets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

S. Stern ,
N. Lundeheim  and
K. Andersson
S. Stern
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Funbo-Lövsta, S–755 97 Uppsala, Sweden
N. Lundeheim
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Funbo-Lövsta, S–755 97 Uppsala, Sweden
K. Andersson
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Funbo-Lövsta, S–755 97 Uppsala, Sweden
Get access

Abstract

Two lines of pigs that had been selected for five generations for lean tissue growth rate (LTGR) on a high (HP) or low (LP) protein diet were evaluated on a commercial diet (165 g crude protein per kg diet). The growth characteristics of 534 animals were measured, and carcass data were obtained on 405 animals. Differences between lines were tested for significance taking genetic drift into account. The animals from the HP-line grew faster both before and during the test and were 6·5 days younger at slaughter than the LP-line pigs. The HP-line pigs had a higher lean content (587 v. 558 g/kg) and a thinner backfat layer (17·8 v. 22·7 mm) than the LP-line. LTGR was higher in the HP-line (374 v. 347 g/day). No significant differences between lines were found in meat quality or in the incidence of osteochondrosis in elbow or knee. The realized differences between lines confirm that selection for LTGR on a high protein diet was more effective in improving both leanness and growth rate compared with selection for LTGR on a low protein diet.

Keywords

dietary proteingrowth rateleannesspigsselection
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 61 , Issue 2 , October 1995 , pp. 341 - 346
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1995

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

Andersson, K. 1980. Studies on crossbreeding and carcass evaluation in pigs. Thesis. Report 46, Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala.Google Scholar
Agricultural Research Council. 1981. The nutrient requirements of pigs. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, Slough.Google Scholar
Campbell, R. G. and Taverner, M. R. 1988. Genotype and sex effects on the relationship between energy intake and protein deposition in growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 66: 676–686.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fowler, V. R., Bichard, M. and Pease, A. 1976. Objectives in pig breeding. Animal Production 23: 365–387.Google Scholar
Gu, Y., Schinckel, A. P. and Martin, T. G. 1992. Growth, development, and carcass composition in five genotypes of swine, journal of Animal Science 70: 1719–1729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hovenier, R., Kanis, E., Asseldonk, Th. van and Westerink, N. G. 1992. Genetic parameters of pig meat quality traits in a halothane negative population. Livestock Production Science 32: 309–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansen, S., Hakansson, J. and Andersson, K. 1993. Effect of selecting for increased lean tissue growth rate in swine on low or high dietary protein levels, journal of Animal Science 71: 1203–1208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karlsson, A., Enfalt, A. C., Essen-Gustavsson, B., Lundstrom, K., Rydhmer, L. and Stern, S. 1993. Muscle histochemical and biochemical properties in relation to meat quality during selection for increased lean tissue growth rate in pigs. Journal of Animal Science 71: 930–938.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lundeheim, N., Johansson, K. and Andersson, K. 1980. Estimated phenotypic and genetic parameters based on data from the Swedish pig progeny testing stations. Ada Agriculturae Scandinavica 30: 183–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McPhee, C. P. and Daniels, L. J. 1991. Effects of genotype, diet and sex on backfat depth in pigs measured physically at different carcass sites and ultrasonically at different Iiveweights. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 31: 761–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McPhee, C. P., Williams, K. C. and Daniels, L. J. 1991. The effect of selection for rapid lean growth on the dietary lysine and energy requirements of pigs fed to scale. Livestock Production Science 27: 185–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyström, P. E. and Andersson, K. 1993. Halothane gene effects on reproduction, production and organ weights in pigs. Ada Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 43: 201–206.Google Scholar
Rao, D. S. and McCracken, K. J. 1990. Protein requirements of boars of high genetic potential for lean growth. Animal Production 51: 179–187.Google Scholar
Rao, D. S. and McCracken, K. J. 1991. Effect of energy intake on protein and energy metabolism of boars of high genetic potential for lean growth. Animal Production 52: 499–507.Google Scholar
Reiland, S., Ordell, N., Lundeheim, N. and Olsson, S. E. 1978. Heredity of osteochondrosis, body constitution and leg weakness in the pig. Ada Radiologica Suppletnentum 358: 23–44.Google ScholarPubMed
Siebrits, F. K., Keitun, E. H., Ras, M. N. and Barnes, P. M. 1986. Protein deposition in pigs as influenced by sex, type and livemass. 1. The pattern and composition of protein deposition. South African Journal of Animal Science 16: 23–27.Google Scholar
Simonsson, A. 1988. [Feeding standards for pigs.] Research Information Centre, report no. 66, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala.Google Scholar
Smith, W. C., Ellis, M., Chadwick, J. P. and Laird, R. 1991. The influence of index selection for improved growth and carcass characteristics on appetite in a population of Large White pigs. Animal Production 52: 193–199.Google Scholar
Sorensen, D. A. and Kennedy, B. W. 1983. The use of the relationship matrix to account for genetic drift variance in the analysis of genetic experiments. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 66: 217–220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1985. SAS user's guide: statistics, version 5. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Stern, S., Johansson, K., Rydhmer, L. and Andersson, K. 1993. Performance testing of pigs for lean tissue growth rate in a selection experiment with low and high protein diets. 1 Experimental design and efficiency of selection. Ada Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 43: 136–143.Google Scholar
Stern, S., Johansson, K., Rydhmer, L. and Andersson, K. 1994. Performance testing of pigs for lean tissue growth rate in a selection experiment with low and high protein diets. 2. Correlated responses of lean percentage and growth rate. Ada Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A, Animal Science 44: 1–7.Google Scholar
Stern, S., Lundeheim, N., Johansson, K. and Andersson, K. 1995. Osteochondrosis and leg weakness in pigs selected for lean tissue growth rate. Livestock Production Science. In press.Google Scholar
Swedish Board of Agriculture. 1991. Författningssamling 1991: 122. Jonkoping, Sweden.Google Scholar
Vries, A. G. de, Wai, P. G. van der and Long, T. 1994. Genetic parameters of pork quality and production traits in Yorkshire populations. Livestock Production Science 40: 277–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woltmann, M. D., Clutter, A. C., Maxwell, C. V., Buchanan, D. D. and Vend, R. 1991. The interaction of dietary lysine level and divergent growth genotypes in growing-finishing pigs. 1991 Animal Science Research Report, pp. 9–15. Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, Oklahoma State University.Google Scholar