Relationship Between Certain Body Measurements and Carcass Characteristics in Swine

Relations between Some Body Measurements and Certain Performance Characters in Milking Shorthorn Steers

“…For 52 animals the average of 2 repetitions of each measurement was obtained, while for the rest the average of 3 repetitions was available. This average of more than one repetition of the measurements was considered to be more reliable than only one repetition, according to the findings of Hetzer et al (1950). The position on the animal where each measurement was taken is shown in figure 1.…”

A genome-wide scan for quantitative trait loci affecting limb bone lengths and areal bone mineral density of the distal femur in a White Duroc × Erhualian F2 population

“…Individuals with longer limb bones usually have taller body heights or heights at shoulder. It has been shown that the body height or height at shoulder is negatively correlated with backfat thickness, and the height at shoulder is an important item in determining the yield of ham, loin, picnic shoulder and shoulder butt [ 2 , 3 ]. Visual selection for moderate length of the leg combined with appropriate body length can improve structural soundness and decrease the economic loss resulted from structural unsoundness for producers in pigs [ 4 ].…”

Live and Carcass Measurements as Indicators of Lean Cut Yield in Swine

“…Most studies involving live measurements for predicting yield of lean cuts in swine have not been satisfactory. Hetzer et al (1950) took eight different measurements on live hogs only to find that the correlations with carcass traits were very low and essentially useless in predicting meatiness. Thus it is obvious that more.desirable measurements of the live animal are needed before muscling can accurately be predicted in swine.…”

“…These live measurement techniques are only moderately correlated with carcass backfat (Table I), but have often been considered more precise than carcass backfat when used as indicators of carcass leanness Kline, 1952, 1959;Hetzer et al, 1956;Holland and Hazel, 1958;Pearson et al, 1957;Pearson, Bratzler and Magee, 1958;Price et al, 1960b;Omtvedt et al, 1967;and Arganosa, 1968). In a few investigations carcass backfat has shown an advantage over the probe (DePape and Whatley, 1956;Anderson and Wahlstrom, 1969;Hazel and Kline, 1953;and Hetzer et al, 1950). Single probe measures have varied greatly and thus the necessity of taking .at least three or four readings has been established by Hazel and Kline, 1953;Holland and Hazel, 1959;and Price et aL, 1960b.…”