Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...
Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...
Arkansas - Agricultural Communication Services - University of ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Arkansas</strong> Animal Science Department Report 2001<br />
(Table 3). Moreover, carcasses <strong>of</strong> Nn pigs had considerably<br />
less (P < 0.01) fat at the tenth rib (0.87 vs. 1.28 in.), and<br />
greater (P < 0.01) LM depth (2.35 vs. 2.00 in.) than carcasses<br />
from NN pigs.<br />
Eikelenboom et al. (1980) reported that carcasses from<br />
Nn pigs had less average backfat than carcasses from NN<br />
pigs. Other studies, however, have shown that carcasses from<br />
NN and Nn pigs had similar midline backfat measurements<br />
and tenth rib fat depths (Leach et al., 1996; Sather and Jones,<br />
1996). Moreover, Simpson and Webb (1989) and Jones et al.<br />
(1988) found that carcasses from Nn pigs were actually fatter<br />
than carcasses from NN pigs.<br />
As for carcass muscling, results from the present study<br />
are comparable to those <strong>of</strong> Sather and Jones (1996) and Jones<br />
et al. (1988), who reported that carcasses from Nn pigs had<br />
greater LM depth and a higher percentage muscle than carcasses<br />
from NN pigs. In contrast, Leach et al. (1996) failed<br />
to denote differences in LM area or depth and carcass muscle<br />
percentage among carcasses from NN and Nn pigs.<br />
Supplementation <strong>of</strong> swine diets with MM had no effect<br />
(P > 0.10) on midline backfat measurements, tenth rib fat<br />
depth, LM depth, or percentage muscle (Table 3). These<br />
results are consistent with those <strong>of</strong> Schaefer et al. (1993) and<br />
D’Souza et al. (1998; 1999), who failed to note an effect <strong>of</strong><br />
supplemental Mg on any fat or muscle measurement <strong>of</strong> pork<br />
carcasses; however, these authors fed Mg aspartate for a brief<br />
5-day period before harvest. In the first experiment, Apple et<br />
al. (2000) reported no effect <strong>of</strong> long-term supplementation <strong>of</strong><br />
MM on pork carcass composition, but, in the second experiment,<br />
they reported a 0.07 to 0.17 in. reduction in tenth rib fat<br />
depth, and a 0.89 to 1.44% increase in percentage muscle <strong>of</strong><br />
carcasses from pigs fed 2.50 and 1.25% MM, respectively.<br />
Although LM pH was not affected (P > 0.81) by<br />
halothane genotype, drip loss percentages were higher (P <<br />
0.01), and LM moisture content was lower (P < 0.01), in pork<br />
from Nn pigs compared to NN pigs (Table 4). The LM from<br />
Nn pigs received lower (P ≤ 0.02) marbling, firmness, and<br />
color scores than the LM from NN pigs. Moreover, pork<br />
from Nn pigs was lighter (P < 0.01), less (P < 0.01) red, and<br />
less (P < 0.01) yellow compared to that from NN pigs, and a<br />
higher proportion <strong>of</strong> carcasses from Nn pigs received<br />
American and Japanese color scores indicating PSE pork<br />
(Table 5).<br />
Our results are in agreement with those <strong>of</strong> Sather and<br />
Jones (1996) and Leach et al. (1996), who found that Nn pigs<br />
produced lighter, less desirable colored pork with greater drip<br />
loss than pork from NN pigs. Moreover, Simpson and Webb<br />
(1989) reported a higher percentage <strong>of</strong> pork carcasses from<br />
Nn pigs were PSE than carcasses from NN pigs, which is<br />
consistent with results from the present study.<br />
The pH <strong>of</strong> the LM was not affected (P > 0.10) by inclusion<br />
<strong>of</strong> MM in the diets <strong>of</strong> growing finishing pigs (Table 4).<br />
Moreover, dietary MM had no effect (P > 0.10) on drip loss<br />
percentages or moisture contents <strong>of</strong> the LM. Results <strong>of</strong> the<br />
present study confirm previously published information from<br />
our laboratory that long-term supplementation <strong>of</strong> swine diets<br />
with MM did not affect LM pH, drip loss, or moisture content.<br />
However, several authors have reported that feeding<br />
diets fortified with Mg shortly before harvest increased initial<br />
and/or ultimate muscle pH (D’Souza et al., 1999; 1998;<br />
Schaefer et al., 1993) and reduced drip loss percentages<br />
(D’Souza et al., 1999; 1998; Schaefer et al., 1993).<br />
Both subjective color scores and objective color measurements<br />
<strong>of</strong> the LM were similar (P > 0.10) among carcasses<br />
from pigs fed 0.0, 1.25 and 2.50% MM (Table 4). Moreover,<br />
dietary MM had no effect (P > 0.49) on the percentage <strong>of</strong> carcasses<br />
with color scores characteristic <strong>of</strong> PSE pork (Table 5).<br />
Neither O’Quinn et al. (2000) or D’Souza et al. (1999) found<br />
a difference in pork color among pigs fed diets containing<br />
supplemental Mg. On the other hand, D’Souza et al. (1998)<br />
reported lower L* values, and Schaefer et al. (1993) reported<br />
higher a* values, for LM chops from pigs supplemented with<br />
Mg aspartate 5 days before slaughter. Similarly, the percentage<br />
<strong>of</strong> PSE, or PSE-like, carcasses was greatly reduced by<br />
short-term (D’Souza et al., 1998) or long-term (Apple et al.,<br />
2000) Mg supplementation.<br />
Implications<br />
Results from this study indicated that homozygous negative<br />
pigs had greater growth rates and superior pork quality<br />
traits than their heterozygous contemporaries, yet carcasses<br />
<strong>of</strong> the homozygotes were lighter muscled and fatter than the<br />
heterozgyous pigs. Even though inclusion <strong>of</strong> magnesium<br />
mica in the diets <strong>of</strong> growing-finishing pigs had no effect on<br />
pork color or any other pork quality attribute, the economic<br />
benefits realized from enhanced feed efficiency and lower<br />
diet costs (Apple et al., 2000) makes magnesium mica supplementation<br />
an attractive management decision for today’s<br />
swine industry.<br />
Literature Cited<br />
Apple, J. K., et al. 2000. J. Anim. Sci. 78:2135.<br />
D’Souza, D. N., et al. 1998. J. Anim. Sci. 76:104.<br />
D’Souza, D. N., et al. 1999. Meat Sci. 51:221.<br />
Eikelenboom, G., et al. 1980. Livest. Prod. Sci. 7:317.<br />
Jones, S. D. M., et al. 1988. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 68:139.<br />
Leach, L. M., et al. 1996. J. Anim. Sci. 74:934.<br />
Nakai, H., et al. 1975. Bull. Natl. Inst. Anim. Industry (Chiba)<br />
29:69.<br />
NPPC. 1999. Official Color and Marbling Standards.<br />
National Pork Producers Council, Des Moines, IA.<br />
NPPC. 1991. Procedures to Evaluate Market Hogs (3rd<br />
Edition). National Pork Producers Council, Des<br />
Moines, IA.<br />
NRC. 1998. Nutrient Requirements <strong>of</strong> Swine (10th Edition).<br />
National Academy Press, Washington, DC.<br />
O’Quinn, P. R., et al. 2000. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 80:443.<br />
Sather, A. P., and S. D. M. Jones. 1996. Can. J. Anim. Sci.<br />
76:507.<br />
Schaefer, A. L., et al. 1993. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 73:231.<br />
Simpson, S. P., and A. J. Webb, A. J. 1989. Anim. Prod.<br />
49:503.<br />
24