Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2012.12622

Comparison and Correlation Analysis of Different Swine Breeds Meat Quality  

Li, Yunxiao (Department of Animal Science and Technology, Sunchon National University)
Cabling, Meriam M. (Department of Animal Science and Technology, Sunchon National University)
Kang, H.S. (Department of Animal Science and Technology, Sunchon National University)
Kim, T.S. (Department of Animal Science and Technology, Sunchon National University)
Yeom, S.C. (Department of Animal Science and Technology, Sunchon National University)
Sohn, Y.G. (GRRC, HanKyoung National University)
Kim, S.H. (GRRC, HanKyoung National University)
Nam, K.C. (Department of Animal Science and Technology, Sunchon National University)
Seo, K.S. (Department of Animal Science and Technology, Sunchon National University)
Publication Information
Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences / v.26, no.7, 2013 , pp. 905-910 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study was performed to determine the influence of pig breed and gender on the ultimate pH and physicochemical properties of pork. The correlations between pH and pork quality traits directly related to carcass grade, and consumer's preference were also evaluated. The pH and meat grading scores for cold carcasses of 215 purebred pigs (Duroc, Landrace, and Yorkshire) from four different farms were obtained. Meat quality parameters of the pork loin were analyzed. Duroc and female animals were more affected compared to other breeds and male pigs. Duroc animals had the highest ultimate pH, carcass back fat thickness, marbling scores, yellowness, and fat content (p<0.05). Landrace pigs had the highest color lightness and cooking loss values (p<0.05). Among all trait parameters, marbling scores showed the highest significant differences when evaluating the impact of breed and gender on meat quality characteristics (p<0.001). Ultimate pH was positively correlated with carcass weight (0.20), back fat thickness (0.19), marbling score (0.17), and color score (0.16) while negatively correlated with cooking loss (-0.24) and shear force (-0.20). Therefore, pork samples with lower ultimate pH had lower cooking loss, higher lightness, and higher shear force values irrespective of breed.
Keywords
Pork; Meat Quality; pH; Pure Breed; Correlation; Carcass Grade;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Vaz, F. N., J. Restle, A. Quadros, L. L. Pascoal, L. M. B. Sanchez, J. R. P. Rosa, and L. Meneses. 2002. Caracteristicas da carcaca e da carne de novilhos e de vacas de descarte Hereford, terminados em confinamento. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia 31:1501-1510.   DOI
2 Vaz, F. N., J. Restle, M. Z. Arboite, L. L. Pascoal, D. C. Alves, Filho, and R. F. Pacheco. 2010. Caracteristicas de carcaca e da carne de novilhos e novilhas superjovens, terminados com suplementacao em pastagem cultivada. Ciencia Animal Brasileira (Brazilian Animal Science) 11:42-52.
3 Berg, E., E. McFadin, K. Maddock, R. Goodwin, T. Baas, and D. Keisler. 2003. Serum concentrations of leptin in six genetic lines of swine and relationship with growth and carcass characteristics. J. Anim. Sci. 81:167-171.
4 Bidner, B. S., M. Ellis, K. D. Miller, M. Hemann, D. Campion, and F. K. McKeith. 1999. Effect of the RN gene and feed withdrawal prior to slaughter on fiesh longissimus quality and sensory characteristics. J. Anim. Sci. 77(Suppl. l):49 (Abstract).
5 Bidner, B., M. Ellis, M. Brewer, D. Campion, E. Wilson, and F. McKeith. 2004. Effect of ultimate pH on the quality characteristics of pork. J. Muscle Foods 15:139-154.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Cameron, N. 1990. Genetic and phenotypic parameters for carcass traits, meat and eating quality traits in pigs. Livest. Prod. Sci. 26:119-135.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 DeVol, D., F. McKeith, P. J. Bechtel, J. Novakofski, R. Shanks, and T. Carr. 1988. Variation in composition and palatability traits and relationships between muscle characteristics and palatability in a random sample of pork carcasses. J. Anim. Sci. 66:385-395.
8 Eikelenboom, G., A. Hoving-Bolink, and. P. Van der Wal. 1996. The eating quality of pork. 1. The influence of ultimate pH. Fleischwirtschaft 76:405-406.
9 Fernandez, X., G. Monin, A. Talmant, J. Mourot, and B. Lebret. 1999. Influence of intramuscular fat content on the quality of pig meat 1. Composition of the lipid fraction and sensory characteristics of m. longissimus lumborum. Meat Sci. 53:59-65.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Gjerlaug-Enger, E., L. Aass, J. Odegard, and O. Vangen. 2010. Genetic parameters of meat quality traits in two pig breeds measured by rapid methods. J. Anim. Sci. 4:1832-1843.
11 Holmer, S., R. McKeith, D. Boler, A. Dilger, J. Eggert, D. Petry, F. McKeith, K. Jones, and J. Killefer. 2009. The effect of pH on shelf-life of pork during aging and simulated retail display. Meat Sci. 82:86-93.   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Hansen, E., D. Juncher, P. Henckel, A. Karlsson, G. Bertelsen, and L. H. Skibsted. 2004. Oxidative stability of chilled pork chopsfollowing long term freeze storage. Meat Sci. 68:479-484.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Herring, H., J. Haggard, and L. Hansen. 1971. Studies on chemical and physical properties of pork in relation to quality. J. Anim. Sci. 33:578-586.
14 Hicks, C., A. Schinckel, J. Forrest, J. Akridge, J. Wagner, and W. Chen. 1998. Biases associated with genotype and sex in prediction of fat-free lean mass and carcass value in hogs. J. Anim. Sci. 76:2221-2234.
15 Huff-Lonergan, E., and S. M. Lonergan. 2005. Mechanisms of water-holding capacity of meat: The role of postmortem biochemical and structural changes. Meat Sci. 71:194-204.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Jeleníková, J., P. Pipek, and M. Miyahara. 2008. The effects of breed, sex, intramuscular fat and ultimate pH on pork tenderness. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 227:989-994.   DOI
17 Latorre, M., R. Lazaro, M. Gracia, M. Nieto, and G. Mateos. 2003. Effect of sex and terminal sire genotype on performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality of pigs slaughtered at 117 kg body weight. Meat Sci. 65:1369-1377.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Lundstrom, K., A. C. Enfält, E. Tornberg, and H. Agerhem. 1998. Sensory and technological meat quality in carriers and non-carriers of the $RN^-^ allele in Hampshire crosses and in purebred Yorkshire pigs. Meat Sci. 48:115-124.   DOI   ScienceOn
19 MalauAduli, A., M. Edriss, B. Siebert, C. Bottema, and W. Pitchford. 2000. Breed differences and genetic parameters for melting point, marbling score and fatty acid composition of lot‐fed cattle. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 83:95-105.   DOI
20 Mears, G., P. Mir, D. Bailey, and S. Jones. 2001. Effect of Wagyu genetics on marbling, backfat and circulating hormones in cattle. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 81:65-73.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Offer, G. 1991. Modeling of the formation of pale, soft and exudative meat: effects of chilling regime and extent of glycolysis. Meat Sci. 30:157-184.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Price, J. F., and B. S. Schweigert. 1987. The science of meat and meat products, 3rd Ed., Food & Nutrition Press, Trumbull, Conn.
23 Purchas, R. W. 1990. An assessment of the role of pH differences in determining the relative tenderness of meat from bulls and steer. Meat Sci. 27:129-140.   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Risvik, E. 1994. Sensory properties and preferences. Meat Sci. 36: 67-77.   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Savell, J., S. Mueller, and B. Baird. 2005. The chilling of carcasses. Meat Sci. 70:449-459.   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Sosnicki, A., S. Pommier, R. E. Klont, S. Newman, and G. Plastow. 2003. Best-cost production of high quality pork: bridging the gap between pig genetics, muscle biology/meat science and consumer trends. pp. 9-31.
27 Smulders, F. J. M., and H. L. J. M. van. Laack. 1992. Accelerated processing to improve the ageing response of meat. In: New technologies for meat and meat products. ECCEAMST/Audet, Nijmegen, pp. 181-208.
28 Suzuki, K., Y. Shimizu, H. Abe, K. Tonai, and A. Suzuki. 2001. Comparison of meat quality between breeds, sex and site of longissimus thoracis muscle in pigs. Anim. Sci. J. 72:J215-J223.
29 Szyndler-Nedza M., and M. Rozycki. 2004. Relationships between backfat thickness and loin muscle measurements and carcass muscling in boars. Anim. Sci. Pap. Rep. 22:561-567.