1988
DOI: 10.1016/0301-6226(88)90036-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Growth and carcass quality of crossbred pigs sired by Duroc, Landrace and Large White boars

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

7
20
3
2

Year Published

1993
1993
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
7
20
3
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This indicates that sex may, to some extent, modulate the effect that some of the factors relative to the physical environment have on performance. Genotype also determines behaviour and performance of pigs, and the Duroc breed is known, amongst other things, for its elevated feed intake values (McGloughlin et al, 1988;Edwards et al, 1992). In the present study the Duroc, Duroc 3 Pietrain and Duroc 3 Hampshire crosses showed high percentages of total time spent eating, indicating that genetic differences in performance may, at least partly, be explained by behavioural differences.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 48%
“…This indicates that sex may, to some extent, modulate the effect that some of the factors relative to the physical environment have on performance. Genotype also determines behaviour and performance of pigs, and the Duroc breed is known, amongst other things, for its elevated feed intake values (McGloughlin et al, 1988;Edwards et al, 1992). In the present study the Duroc, Duroc 3 Pietrain and Duroc 3 Hampshire crosses showed high percentages of total time spent eating, indicating that genetic differences in performance may, at least partly, be explained by behavioural differences.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 48%
“…Sabbioni et al (2002) found that Duroc genes determined thicker backfat at shoulder level, but had no effect on the carcass composition. Instead, McGloughlin et al (1988) and Channon et al (2004) reported no differences in fat thickness, while for Affentranger et al (1996) and Enfält et al (1997) Duroc sire determined more fat in back and in ham than Large White or Yorksire ones. The variability of these results is confirmed in other researches that assessed the differences among Duroc genetic lines, as it regards carcass fatness (Cilla et al, 2006;Ramirez and Cava, 2007) and it must be reminded that Duroc breed employed in the present experiment is the line selected for the typical Italian heavy pig production, where no particular emphasis against the subcutaneous fat is applied (ANAS, 2010).…”
Section: Carcass Traitsmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…Comparisons for growth rate between Duroc and Large White, always tested in indoor rearing, are widely reported in literature with conflicting results. Better performance in progeny of Duroc boar than in that of LW boar was noted by McGloughlin et al (1988) and Franci et al (1994), up to 85 and 160 kg, respectively; Sabbioni et al (2002) found a negative effect of the contribution of Duroc genes on LW up to 120 kg but positive afterwards; Liu et al (1999) reported no significant differences in growth rate between Duroc and LW, both as pure-bred or crossbred. Table 2 reports carcass measurements and composition.…”
Section: Growth Performancementioning
confidence: 92%
“…No significant effect of the sire on muscle acidity was recorded either at 1 and 24 hours after slaughter. In many studies conducted in different countries it was shown that Duroc is one of the few breeds, which in matings with other breeds yield a marked effect of heterosis in the most significant productivity parameters [4,8]. We also need to stress the fact that even under inferior environmental conditions crosses with this breed exhibit better daily body weight gains and feed conversion rates than purebred animals, which may indicate their higher adaptability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%