Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-42vt5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-19T01:39:00.805Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of severe food restriction on growth rate, muscle distribution and muscle: bone ratio in pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

P. R. Goenaga  and
A. B. Carden
P. R. Goenaga
Affiliation:
Pergamino Agricultural Experiment Station (I.N.T.A.), 2700 Pergamino, B.A., Argentina
A. B. Carden
Affiliation:
Pergamino Agricultural Experiment Station (I.N.T.A.), 2700 Pergamino, B.A., Argentina
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a previous experiment we investigated the effects of a restricted intake of dietary energy, protein or both on carcass anatomy in pigs (Carden & Goenaga, 1977). Contrary to results of Elsley, McDonald & Fowler (1964) and of Richmond & Berg (1971) we found several changes in muscle distribution, which gave rise to differences in the proportion of the commercially valuable muscles in the carcasses. The treatments had no effect on an important trait, the muscle: bone ratio.

Information

Type
Short Note
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 90 , Issue 3 , June 1978 , pp. 633 - 636
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Butterfield, R. M. (1963). Estimation of carcass composition: the anatomical approach. In Symposium on Carcass Composition and Appraisal of Meat Animals (ed. Tribe, D. E.), 4–1 to 4–13. Melbourne, Australia: C.S.I.R.O.Google Scholar
Carden, A. E. & Goenaga, P. R. (1977). Effects of restrictions of energy, protein or both on growth and body composition of pigs. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 89, 687–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H., McDonald, I. & Fowler, V. R. (1964). The effect of plane of nutrition on the carcasses of pigs and lambs when variations in fat content are excluded. Animal Production 6, 141–53.Google Scholar
Fowler, V. R. (1968). Body development and some problems of its evaluation. In Growth and Development of Mammals, pp. 195–211. London: Butterworth.Google Scholar
Huxley, J. S. (1932). Problems of Relative Growth. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Murray, D. M., Tulloh, N. M. & Winter, W. M. (1974). Effects of three different growth rates on empty body weight, carcass weight and dissected carcass composition of cattle. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 82, 537–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, D. M. & Slezacek, O. (1975). The effect of growth rate on muscle distribution in sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 85, 189–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council (1968). Nutrient Requirements of Sunnc. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Pomeroy, R. W. (1941). The effect of a sub-maintenance diet on the composition of the pig. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 31, 50–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richmond, R. J. & Berg, R. T. (1971). Muscle growth and distribution in swine as influenced by live weight, breed, sex and ration. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 51, 523–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar