2009
DOI: 10.5187/jast.2009.51.2.135
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relationships of the Slaughter Weight to Growth Performance and Meat Quality Traits in Finishing Pigs Fed A Low-energy Diet

Abstract: The present study was undertaken to investigate the effects of slaughter weight (SW) of finishing pigs fed a low-energy diet on growth efficiency and carcass quality and thereby to assess the optimal SW. (Yorkshire × Landrace) × Duroc-crossbred gilts and barrows were fed a diet containing 3,060 kcal DE/kg from 80-kg BW and slaughtered at 110, 125, or 135 kg, after which the belly, the most preferred cut in Korea, as well as the least preferred cuts ham and loin were subjected to physicochemical and sensory ana… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
22
2

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
4
22
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The gain:feed ratio of gilts was superior to that of barrows in the studies of Leach et al (1996) and Latorre et al (2004 Table 3), but in Latorre et al (2009) and others (Table 2), it did not differ between the two sexes. Moreover, the gain:feed ratio decreased slightly with increasing SW between 110 and 140 kg in some studies (Latorre et al, 2004, presented in Table 3; Piao et al, 2004;Park et al, 2009a), whereas in others (Cisneros et al, 1996;Leach et al, 1996;Park et al, 2007Park et al, , 2009b, it was not influenced by SW within the similar range of SW. Dressing percentage usually neither differs between the barrow and gilt nor changes with increasing SW (Piao et al, 2004;Lee et al, 2006;Park et al, 2009a,b). However, sometimes, it is slightly greater in gilts than in barrows (Latorre et al, 2004;Lee et al, 2007;Park et al, 2007) and also slightly increases with the increase of SW (Cisneros et al, 1996;Latorre et al, 2008).…”
Section: Growth Efficiencymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…The gain:feed ratio of gilts was superior to that of barrows in the studies of Leach et al (1996) and Latorre et al (2004 Table 3), but in Latorre et al (2009) and others (Table 2), it did not differ between the two sexes. Moreover, the gain:feed ratio decreased slightly with increasing SW between 110 and 140 kg in some studies (Latorre et al, 2004, presented in Table 3; Piao et al, 2004;Park et al, 2009a), whereas in others (Cisneros et al, 1996;Leach et al, 1996;Park et al, 2007Park et al, , 2009b, it was not influenced by SW within the similar range of SW. Dressing percentage usually neither differs between the barrow and gilt nor changes with increasing SW (Piao et al, 2004;Lee et al, 2006;Park et al, 2009a,b). However, sometimes, it is slightly greater in gilts than in barrows (Latorre et al, 2004;Lee et al, 2007;Park et al, 2007) and also slightly increases with the increase of SW (Cisneros et al, 1996;Latorre et al, 2008).…”
Section: Growth Efficiencymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The 24-h muscular pH does not change or slightly decreases with the increase of SW (Corino et al, 2008;Park et al, 2009a,b), with an exception of a slight increase of loin pH with the increase of SW in Park et al (2009a). However, the change in pH unit associated with the increase of SW within a practical range is not large enough to increase the incidence of PSE (pale, soft, and exudative) which can be caused by low postmortem muscular pH (Cisneros et al, 1996).…”
Section: Physical Attributesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In the Korean pig industry where guidelines for pre-, peri-, and post-slaughter procedures are not standardized, there are presumably many extrinsic factors that could affect ultimate pH including feeding scheme, slaughter weight and post-slaughter process (Park et al, 2009), as well as genetic factors (Hwang et al, 2004). For example, if the glycogen concentration of the muscle tissue is decreased due to feed restriction and stress prior to slaughter, the ultimate pH is higher than 5.5.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%