Johnson R K, Berg E P, Goodwin R, Mabry J W, Miller R K, Robison O W, Sellers H, Tokach M D
Animal Science Department, University of Nebraska, Lincoln 68581-0908, USA.
J Anim Sci. 2004 Aug;82(8):2428-41. doi: 10.2527/2004.8282428x.
The objectives were to develop equations for predicting fat-free lean in swine carcasses and to estimate the prediction bias that was due to genetic group, sex, and dietary lysine level. Barrows and gilts (n = 1,024) from four projects conducted by the National Pork Board were evaluated by six procedures, and their carcass fat-free lean was determined. Pigs of 16 genetic groups were fed within weight groups one of four dietary regimens that differed by 0.45% in lysine content and slaughtered at weights between 89 and 163 kg. Variables in equations included carcass weight and measures of backfat depth and LM. Fat-free lean was predicted from measures of fat and muscle depth measured with the Fat-O-Meater (FOM), Automated Ultrasonic System (AUS), and Ultrafom (UFOM) instruments, carcass 10th-rib backfat and LM area (C10R), carcass last-rib backfat (CLR), and live animal scan of backfat depth and LM area with an Aloka 500 instrument (SCAN). Equations for C10R (residual standard deviation, RSD = 2.93 kg) and SCAN (RSD = 3.06 kg) were the most precise. The RSD for AUS, FOM, and UFOM equations were 3.46, 3.57, and 3.62 kg, respectively. The least precise equation was CLR, for which the RSD was 4.04 kg. All procedures produced biased predictions for some genetic groups (P < 0.01). Fat-free lean tended to be overestimated in fatter groups and underestimated in leaner ones. The CLR, FOM, and AUS procedures overestimated fat-free lean in barrows and underestimated it in gilts (P < 0.01), but other procedures were not biased by sex. Bias due to dietary lysine level was assessed for the C10R, CLR, FOM, and SCAN procedures, and fat-free lean in pigs fed the lowlysine dietary regimen was overestimated by CLR, FOM, and SCAN (P < 0.05). Positive regressions of residuals (measured fat-free lean minus predicted fat-free lean) on measured fat-free lean were found for each procedure, ranging from 0.204+/-0.013 kg/kg for C10R to 0.605+/-0.049 kg/kg for UFOM, indicating that all procedures overestimated fat-free lean in fat pigs and underestimated it in lean pigs. The pigs evaluated represent the range of variation in pigs delivered to packing plants, and thus the prediction equations should have broad application within the industry. Buying systems that base fat-free lean predictions on measures of carcass fat depth and muscle depth or area will overvalue fat pigs and undervalue lean pigs.
目标是开发预测猪胴体无脂瘦肉量的方程,并估计由遗传群体、性别和日粮赖氨酸水平导致的预测偏差。对美国国家猪肉委员会开展的四个项目中的公猪和母猪(n = 1,024)采用六种方法进行评估,并测定其胴体无脂瘦肉量。16个遗传群体的猪按体重分组,饲喂赖氨酸含量相差0.45%的四种日粮方案之一,并在89至163千克体重时屠宰。方程中的变量包括胴体重以及背膘厚度和腰大肌的测量值。利用脂肪测量仪(FOM)、自动超声系统(AUS)和超脂肪测量仪(UFOM)仪器测量的脂肪和肌肉深度、胴体第10肋背膘和腰大肌面积(C10R)、胴体最后肋背膘(CLR)以及使用阿洛卡500仪器对活体动物背膘厚度和腰大肌面积进行扫描(SCAN)来预测无脂瘦肉量。C10R(剩余标准差,RSD = 2.93千克)和SCAN(RSD = 3.06千克)的方程最为精确。AUS、FOM和UFOM方程的RSD分别为3.46、3.57和3.62千克。最不精确的方程是CLR,其RSD为4.04千克。所有方法对某些遗传群体的预测都存在偏差(P < 0.01)。在较肥的群体中,无脂瘦肉量往往被高估,而在较瘦的群体中则被低估。CLR、FOM和AUS方法高估了公猪的无脂瘦肉量,而低估了母猪的无脂瘦肉量(P < 0.01),但其他方法不存在性别偏差。对C10R、CLR、FOM和SCAN方法评估了日粮赖氨酸水平导致的偏差,饲喂低赖氨酸日粮方案的猪的无脂瘦肉量被CLR、FOM和SCAN高估(P < 0.05)。每种方法都发现残差(实测无脂瘦肉量减去预测无脂瘦肉量)与实测无脂瘦肉量呈正相关,范围从C10R的0.204±0.013千克/千克到UFOM的0.605±0.049千克/千克,这表明所有方法在肥猪中高估了无脂瘦肉量,而在瘦猪中低估了无脂瘦肉量。所评估的猪代表了送到屠宰厂的猪的变异范围,因此这些预测方程在该行业内应具有广泛的应用。基于胴体脂肪深度和肌肉深度或面积测量来预测无脂瘦肉量的采购系统会高估肥猪价值而低估瘦猪价值。