Influence of Feeding Growing-Finishing Pigs Triticale, Wheat or Maize Based Diets on Resulting Carcass Composition, and on Taste and Quality Characteristics of Pork

  • Joel H. Brendemuhl
  • Robert O. Myer
  • Dwain D. Johnson
Part of the Developments in Plant Breeding book series (DIPB, volume 5)

Abstract

A study was conducted to determine the effect of feeding triticale (X Triticosecale Wittmack), soft red winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) or maize (Zea mays L.) based diets to growing-finishing pigs (25 to 100 kg) on resulting carcass composition, and on taste and quality of pork. Dietary grain source did not influence (P >.05) carcass lean content or quality characteristics of the longissimus muscle, such as amount of marbling, muscle texture, firmness or color. Slightly lower levels of total (P <.05) polyunsaturated fatty acids were noted in the backfat from pigs fed triticale or wheat based diets compared to that from pigs fed the maize based diets. Juiciness, flavor and tenderness of broiled loin chops did not differ (P >.10) due to dimly grain source. The feeding of triticale based diets resulted in small changes in carcass fat composition, however, there was no evidence that the taste of broiled loin chops was different from the taste of broiled loin chops from pigs fed maize based diets.

Keywords

Cooking Loss Taste Panel Backfat Thickness Longissimus Muscle Carcass Characteristic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Melton SL. Effects of feeds on flavor of red meat: A review. J Anim Sci 1990;68:4421–4435.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Myer RO, Brendemuhl JH, Barnett RD. Synthetic amino acid supplementation of triticale and wheat based diets for growing-finishing pigs. Proceedings of the Third International Triticale Symposium; 1994 June 13–17; Lisbon.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    National Pork Producers Council (NPPC). Procedures to evaluate market hog performance. 3rd rev. ed. Des Moines: NPPC, 1991: 16.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Myer RO, West RL, Gorbet DW, Knauft DA, Young CT. Performance and carcass characteristics of swine as affected by the consumption of peanuts remaining in the field after harvest. J Anim Sci 1985;61:1378–1386.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    American Meat Science Association (AMSA). Guidelines for cooking and sensory evaluation of meat. Chicago: AMSA, 1978.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    SAS. SAS User’s Guide: Statistics. Cary: SAS Institute Inc., 1985.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Savage TF, Holmes ZA, Nilpour AH, Nakaue HS. Evaluation of cooked breast meat from male breeder turkeys fed diets containing varying amounts of triticale, variety flora. Poul Sci 1987;66:450–452.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joel H. Brendemuhl
    • 1
  • Robert O. Myer
    • 1
  • Dwain D. Johnson
    • 1
  1. 1.Animal Science DepartmentUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations