Accuracy of Ultrasound Measures Relative to Carcass Measures of Body Composition in Sheep

Market lambs from the state fair of Virginia (n = 172) were ultrasonically evaluated by 4 scan technicians and 3 image interpreters to determine accuracy of ultrasonic estimates of loin muscle area (ULMA), backfat thickness (UBF), and body wall thickness (UBW). Lambs were initially scanned at the preferred magnification setting of each technician; 2 chose 1.5× and 2 chose 2.0×. Lambs were then scanned a second time for ULMA and UBF with machine magnification settings changed from 1.5 to 2.0×, or vice versa, midway through the second scan. Lambs were then slaughtered, and analogous measurements [carcass loin muscle area, carcass backfat thickness, and carcass body wall thickness (CBW)] were recorded on chilled carcasses. Pooled, residual correlation coefficients within technicians and interpreters between ultrasonic measurements from the first scan and carcass measurements were 0.66 for loin muscle area, 0.78 for backfat thickness, and 0.73 for body wall thickness, but were reduced to 0.43, 0.69, and 0.50, respectively, by inclusion of linear effects of carcass weight in the model. Mean bias for technicians and interpreters ranged from −1.30 to −2.66 cm 2 for loin muscle area, −0.12 to −0.17 cm for backfat thickness, and 0.14 to −0.03 cm for body wall thickness; prediction errors ranged from 1.86 to 2.22 cm 2 , 0.12 to 0.14 cm, and 0.35 to 0.38 cm, respectively. Pooled correlations between repeated measures were 0.67 for ULMA, 0.79 for UBF, and 0.68 for UBW at the same magnification and 0.73 for ULMA and 0.76 for UBF across different magnification settings. Mean differences between repeated measures were more variable among technicians and interpreters than statistics comparing ultrasound to carcass measures. Standard errors of repeatability ranged from 1.61 to 2.45 cm 2 for ULMA, 0.07 to 0.11 cm for UBF, and 0.36 to 0.42 cm for UBW. The effect of changing magnification setting on technician and interpreter repeatability was small for UBF and ULMA. The accuracy of prediction of CBW from UBW was similar to that achieved for backfat thickness; further assessment of the value of ultrasonic measurements of body wall thickness in lambs is warranted. These results indicate that ultrasound scanning can reliably predict carcass loin muscle area and backfat thickness in live lambs and, accordingly, has value in selection programs to improve composition. Development of certification standards for US lamb ultrasound technicians based on results of this study and others is proposed.

Section: Bias and Prediction Errorcontrasting

confidence: 93%

Section: Bias and Prediction Errormentioning

confidence: 75%

Section: Bias and Prediction Errormentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Validation of live animal ultrasonic measurements of body composition in market lambs

Emenheiser

Greiner

Lewis

et al. 2010

“…Means for LMA for these rams were likewise similar to those for 2007 rams at the first and second scan but were an average of 1.8 ± 0.7 cm 2 larger at the third scan (P < 0.02). Scan technician bias (the consistent over-or underestimation of actual carcass measurements with ultrasound) is known to exist (Tait et al, 2005;Leeds et al, 2008;Emenheiser et al, 2009) and may contribute to this difference.…”

Section: Validation Of Predictive Equationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Longitudinal changes in ultrasonic measurements of body composition during growth in Suffolk ram lambs and evaluation of alternative adjustment strategies for ultrasonic scan data

Emenheiser

Greiner

Lewis

et al. 2010

Four equations were used to compare alternative procedures to adjust ultrasonic estimates (y) of backfat thickness (BF) and LM area (LMA) for BW using data from a series of 7 scans on 24 Suffolk ram lambs born in 2007. Equations were linear, linear + quadratic, allometric (y = αBW β ), and allometric + BW (ABW; y = αBW β e γW ). Goodness of fit was very similar between equations over the range of the data. Resulting adjustment equations were tested using 3 serial scans on winter-born Suffolk (n = 150), Hampshire (n = 36), and Dorset (n = 43) rams and 52 fall-born Dorset rams tested at the Virginia Ram Test in 1999 through 2002. Partial correlations (accounting for the effect of year) between predicted and actual measures ranged from 0.78 to 0.87 for BF and 0.66 to 0.93 for LMA in winter-born rams and from 0.70 to 0.71 for BF and 0.72 to 0.78 for LMA in fall-born rams. No significant differences in predictive ability existed between equations for BF or LMA (P > 0.05), and there was no indication that the allometric equation was a better predictor than linear within the range of the data. Adjustment equations were also tested using serial scan data from 37 Suffolk ewe lambs born in the same contemporary group as the rams used to derive the prediction equations but fed for a substantially slower rate of BW gain. Correlations between predicted and actual values of BF and LMA indicated lambs were too young and small at the first scan (77 d, 32.4 kg) to reliably predict carcass measures at typical slaughter weights. For prediction using data from the 2 subsequent scans, at mean ages >96 d and mean BW >39 kg, correlations between predicted and actual values were 0.72 to 0.74 for BF and 0.54 to 0.76 for LMA. Little difference existed between equations for predicting BF. For LMA, the ABW form was a weaker predictor than the others, and the linear equation was slightly superior to allometric. Therefore, it appears the linear and allometric forms are both suitable for use in central ram test and performance-tested farm flocks.

B-mode, real-time ultrasound for estimating carcass measures in live sheep: Accuracy of ultrasound measures and their relationships with carcass yield and value1,2

Leeds

Mousel

Notter

et al. 2008

Accuracy and repeatability of live-animal ultrasound measures, and the relationships of these measures with subprimal yields and carcass value, were investigated using data from 172 wethers. Wethers were F(1) progeny from the mating of 4 terminal sire breeds to Rambouillet ewes and were finished in a feedlot to a mean BW of 62.9 kg (SD = 9.5 kg). Before transport to slaughter, LM area, LM depth, and backfat thickness were measured from transverse ultrasound images taken between the 12th and 13th ribs. After slaughter, these measures were taken on each carcass. Carcasses were fabricated into subprimal cuts, and weights were recorded. Ultrasound accuracy and repeatability were assessed using bias, SE of prediction, SE of repeatability, and simple correlations. Relationships among ultrasound and carcass measures, and between these measures and carcass yield and value, were evaluated using residual correlations and linear prediction models. Ultrasound bias approached 0 for LM area, and backfat thickness was overestimated by only 0.69 mm. The SE of prediction and r were 1.55 cm(2) and 0.75 for LM area, and 1.4 mm and 0.81 for backfat thickness, respectively. The SE of repeatability was 1.31 cm(2) and 0.75 mm for LM area and backfat thickness, respectively. At a standardized BW and backfat thickness, wethers with larger LM area and LM depth yielded larger and more valuable carcasses, and these relationships were detectable with ultrasound. For each SD increase in carcass LM area, dressing percentage increased 1.57 percentage points, gross carcass value increased US$5.12, and boxed carcass value increased US$6.84 (P < 0.001). For each SD increase in ultrasound LM area, dressing percentage increased 0.95 percentage points, gross carcass value increased US$3.15, and boxed carcass value increased US$3.86 (P < 0.001). When LM area effects were adjusted for carcass weight, the response in boxed carcass value attributed to disproportionate increases in high-value subprimal cut weights was small. Associations of dressing percentage and carcass value with ultrasound and carcass LM depth were significant (P < 0.01) but smaller than corresponding associations with LM area. These data indicate biological and economical incentives for increasing LM area in wethers, and live-animal ultrasound can provide reliable estimates of carcass measures. These results are applicable to terminal sire breeders and producers who market sheep using carcass-merit pricing systems.