A Comparison of Practical Methods to Estimate Pork Carcass Composition

Fahey, Thomas J.; Schaefer, D.M.; Kauffman, R. G.; Epley, Richard J.; Gould, P. F.; Romans, John R.; Smith, G. C.; Topel, D. G.

doi:10.2527/jas1977.4418

Cited by 53 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There was a positive correlation between the weight of FSL and all carcass traits except marbling and HFDI probe measured at the ham. In contrast, Fahey et al (1977) reported a negative correlation between the weight of corrected fat-free lean in the carcass and backfat thickness. In addition, Edwards et al (1981) found a negative correlation between the weight of muscle in the four lean cuts and backfat thickness.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Because of selection procedures and numbers, there was greater variability, especially in fatness, within this group of hogs as compared with those used in the Fahey et al (1977) study. The variation was similar to that in the Edwards et al (1981) experiment.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This constant was based on the assumption that fat contains about 80% lipid (Fahey et al, 1977). Thus, 100 kg lean containing 10% fat is composed of 90 kg fat-free lean plus 8 kg lipid plus 2 kg water and connective tissue.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Presently, hogs are evaluated in swine improvement programs (Hubbard, 1981) and contests (NPPC, 1976) on the basis of weight of lean in the carcass and days to produce 39 kg of muscle. The data from which these equations were generated (Fahey et al, 1977) consisted of a small sample (N=41) of barrow carcasses possessing minimal variations in fatness and weight, having unknown production information and representing a population of carcasses typical of those exhibited in carcass competitions. However, Edwards et al (1981) reported that, based on a sample of pigs with a wide range in backfat thickness, the variables used to estimate muscle content of pork carcasses as described by Fahey et al (1977) were appropriate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The data from which these equations were generated (Fahey et al, 1977) consisted of a small sample (N=41) of barrow carcasses possessing minimal variations in fatness and weight, having unknown production information and representing a population of carcasses typical of those exhibited in carcass competitions. However, Edwards et al (1981) reported that, based on a sample of pigs with a wide range in backfat thickness, the variables used to estimate muscle content of pork carcasses as described by Fahey et al (1977) were appropriate. The objectives of the present study were: 1) to reevaluate the equations to predict composition of market hogs of known age or days on test by including a broader spectrum of the population that included both gilts and barrows possessing large variations in type, weight and composition and 2) to develop a method to incorporate age or days on test with compositional data in order to estimate the rate of growth of lean for comparative purposes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Revised Approaches to Estimate Lean of Pork Carcasses of Known Age or Days on Test2

Grisdale

Christian

Cross

et al. 1984

Journal of Animal Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carcass measurements for 185 market hogs representing two sexes and four body types, slaughtered at 91 to 132 kg, were examined as predictors of carcass composition. Dependent variables included weight of fatstandardized lean (FSL), percentage FSL in the standardized side, weight of FSL gained/day on test, and weight of FSL produced/day of age. The greatest degree of predictive accuracy in each equation occurred when longissimus muscle area and fat depth at the three-fourths location at the 10th rib were included as independent variables. Other important variables were hot carcass weight in the three equations predicting weight for FSL, age in the equation for FSL produced/ day of age, and initial weight on test and days on test for the prediction of FSL gained/day on test. Less accuracy was found when other back-fat thickness measurements or subjective scores of muscling or fatness were used as independent variables. RightsWorks produced by employees of the U.S. Government as part of their official duties are not copyrighted within the U.S. The content of this document is not copyrighted. SummaryCarcass measurements for 185 market hogs representing two sexes and four body types, slaughtered at 91 to 132 kg, were examined as predictors of carcass composition. Dependent variables included weight of fat-standardized lean (FSL), percentage FSL in the standardized side, weight of FSL gained/day on test, and weight of FSL produced/day of age. The greatest degree of predictive accuracy in each equation occurred when longissimus muscle area and fat depth at the three-fourths location at the 10th rib were included as independent variables. Other important variables were hot carcass weight in the three equations predicting weight for FSL, age in the equation for FSL produced/ day of age, and initial weight on test and days on test for the prediction of FSL gained/day on test. Less accuracy was found when other backfat thickness measurements or subjective scores of muscling or fatness were used as independent variables.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%