2004
DOI: 10.2527/2004.82123482x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

National Pork Producers Council Maternal Line Genetic Evaluation: A comparison of growth and carcass traits in terminal progeny1

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

5
7
0
5

Year Published

2006
2006
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
5
7
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…The 100% ZS and 50% ZS genetic groups of barrows were characterised by a lower lean meat content in the carcass than the analogous groups of gilts (100% ZS 39.02 vs. 44.64%, 50% ZS 43.52 vs. 47.59%). This result is consistent with the earlier studies by other authors (Cassady et al, 2004;Bahelka et al, 2007). In their study Bahelka et al (2007) recorded lean meat content in barrows to be 52.77%, while for gilts it was 57.69%.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 93%
“…The 100% ZS and 50% ZS genetic groups of barrows were characterised by a lower lean meat content in the carcass than the analogous groups of gilts (100% ZS 39.02 vs. 44.64%, 50% ZS 43.52 vs. 47.59%). This result is consistent with the earlier studies by other authors (Cassady et al, 2004;Bahelka et al, 2007). In their study Bahelka et al (2007) recorded lean meat content in barrows to be 52.77%, while for gilts it was 57.69%.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Average BF, FAT and PFAT of castrates were significantly higher than those of gilts (29.01 vs. 25.56 mm, 9.57 vs. 7.55 kg and 21.79 vs. 17.43%, respectively). The results are in agreement with previous reports on sex differences (Larzul et al, 1997;Tischendorf et al, 2002;Cassady et al, 2004). However, Mohrmann et al (2006) did not find any significant differences between the sexes (gilts and barrows), but gilts tended to have higher lean meat content.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 83%
“…These possible explanations are in agreement with unfavorable genetic associations that were found between backfat thickness and longevity in the Finnish Large White population (Serenius and Stalder, 2004). Moreover, Cassady et al (2004) found that offspring of GPK347 sows grew slower and had poorer carcass composition than offspring from the other 5 lines studied. In other words, because the GPK347 line has not been highly selected for meat production and growth traits, the unfavorable genetic correlations had not negatively impacted the genetic gain obtained in prolificacy and longevity.…”
Section: Line Comparisonsupporting
confidence: 77%
“…Because pigs produced by GPK347 sows grew slower and had poorer carcass composition (Cassady, et al, 2004), the total economic impact on pork production must be considered when commercial pork producers are evaluating the use of these females in their operations. Thus, although there is now information available comparing the production prolificacy and sow longevity of different genetic lines, pork producers need to evaluate the results on an individual basis.…”
Section: Line Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 99%