1996
DOI: 10.1016/0377-8401(95)00920-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Replacing soya bean meal with heat-treated, low-glucosinolate rapeseed meal does not affect the performance of growing-finishing pigs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
21
0
1

Year Published

2003
2003
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
3
21
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…19 The chemical composition of the experimental diets indicates that the diets were well-balanced and in line with the planned values ( Table 3). The performance results are given in Tables 4 and 5.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…19 The chemical composition of the experimental diets indicates that the diets were well-balanced and in line with the planned values ( Table 3). The performance results are given in Tables 4 and 5.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…This is in accordance with the results of Castell and Cliplef (1993), who reported no differences in the organoleptic meat quality of pigs offered barley-soya bean meal diets or barley-rapeseed meal diets in which rapeseed meal was gradually replaced with peas. Siljander-Rasi et al (1996) reported no differences in organoleptic meat quality in pigs offered diets in which soya bean meal was gradually replaced with rapeseed meal. In our study, no relationship was found between organoleptic meat quality and carcass lean percentage or fat thickness, which is in accordance with the results of Blanchard et al (2000).…”
Section: Vol 12 (2003): 35-47mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Samples were taken from the longissimus dorsi muscle before the last rib from 37 and 60 randomly selected carcasses in Experiments 2 and 3 (one pig per pen), respectively, for the determination of organoleptic quality. The frozen samples were thawed and prepared for sensory evaluation as described by Siljander-Rasi et al (1996). A trained, seven-member test panel graded the fried samples for tenderness, juiciness, and taste using a 7-point rating scale (1 = very tough, very dry, weak pork flavour; 7 = very tender, very juicy, strong pork flavour).…”
Section: Carcass and Meat Quality Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%