+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on Google+Follow on Google+
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Related responses in the live performance and carcass measurements of progeny from sows selected for thinner backfat

Canadian Journal of Animal Science 73(3): 471-482
Related responses in the live performance and carcass measurements of progeny from sows selected for thinner backfat
Landrace-sired progeny (B-boars, G-gilts and CM-castrates) were obtained from sows in two Hampshire lines (Control, Select) derived by applying a selection index which had three times the emphasis on backfat reduction than on post-weaning growth to 90 kg. Experiment 1 used 7) pigs from the Generation 1 sows and a split-plot design with line as the main plot and sex-type as the sub-plot. A 16% CP diet was fed, ad libitum, in the 24 pens over the period from 26 to 100 kg liveweight. No significant (P lt 0.05) differences in live performance or carcass measurements were found between pigs from the two lines. However, characteristic differences among the sex types were observed, e.g., the slower growth by G, higher intake by CM and superior gain:feed by B. Experiment 2, following the same format with Generation 5 progeny (N=90 and 30 pens), revealed a difference (P lt 0.01) in daily intake (ADI) relative to liveweight (LWT) between Control (ADI=123 times LWT-0.729; R-2 =0.89, P lt 0.01) and Select (ADI=123 times LWT-0.716; R-2=0.84, P lt 0.01) pigs. The lack of significant differences for other live and carcass criteria could be explained if the index was favouring individuals with low appetites and reducing the potential for high rates of lean tissue deposition in the Select pigs. Growth of all the pigs from birth to market weight, examined by correlation and regression analyses, Suggested that pre-test feeding practices were also limiting the attainment (if maximum rates of lean tissue deposition.

(PDF 0-2 workdays service: $29.90)

Accession: 002477468

Related references

Effect of dietary lysineenergy ratios on carcass quality traits in progeny of sows selected for low backfat. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 75(4): 660-661, 1995

Live measurements of backfat thickness and loin eye height as related to fatness and muscling of carcass-side cuts in pigs. Animal Science Papers and Reports 24(Suppl. 3): 197-201, 2006

Live and carcass traits in selected Virginia barrows are linked with performance testing and carcass measurements. Animal Science Research Report, Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (6): 127-129, 1987

Differences in color markings, polledness, live animal measurements, and carcass traits of progeny of selected beef sires. Prog. Rep. Pa agric. Exp. Stn, 275, 10, 1967

Pig evaluation based on measurements on the live animal and on the carcass. 2. Carcass evaluation. Backfat thickness as a predictor of the yield of lean meat in valuable carcass cuts. Revista Argentina de Produccion Animal 8(1): 57-65, 1988

Value of subcutaneous fat and backfat measurements on the live animal and the carcass as predictors of external internal and total carcass fat in market weight pigs. J Anim Sci 26(6): 1288-1295, 1967

Effects of ad libitum and rationed feeding of sows during several consecutive parities on the productivity 1st communication Live weight development, dynamic of backfat thickness and frequency of selected sows. Zuechtungskunde 75(1): 31-41, Januar-Februar, 2003

Carcass characteristics of progeny from ram lambs selected for high or low ultrasonic backfat thickness. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 35(2): 177-183, 1992

Prediction of lean parts and carcass price from ultrasonic backfat measurements in live pigs. Livestock Production Science 14(1): 55-64, 1986

The performance of sows from a herd selected for low backfat thickness. Svinovodstvo (12): 29, 1980