Indian Journal of Animal Research
Chief EditorK.M.L. Pathak
Print ISSN 0367-6722
Online ISSN 0976-0555
NAAS Rating 6.50
SJR 0.263
Impact Factor 0.4 (2024)
Chief EditorK.M.L. Pathak
Print ISSN 0367-6722
Online ISSN 0976-0555
NAAS Rating 6.50
SJR 0.263
Impact Factor 0.4 (2024)
Carcass and pork quality traits of indigenous pure breeds (Mangalitsa, Moravka) and their crossbreads
Submitted23-09-2015|
Accepted16-12-2015|
First Online 31-12-2015|
Objective of this paper was to evaluate phenotypic variability of carcass side and pork quality traits of fatteners (male castrated and female heads). Investigation included 12 pigs per group of Mangalitsa (Genotype 1), Moravka (Genotype 2), cross-breed Mangalitsa with Moravka (Genotype 3) and cross-breed Moravka with Duroc boar (Genotype 4). Results show that Mangalitsa had lower daily gain (268 g) than other genotypes (p<0.001). The greatest difference for fat thickness was determined between Genotype 1 and Genotype 4. As expected, the thinnest fat and maximum value for gain and depth of Musculus longissimus (ML) had the Genotype 4. The highest value for the ML surface was found in Genotype 4(47.52 cm2) whereas for the same trait in Mangalitsa the lowest value was observed (24.16 cm2). Mangalitsa had significantly lower L*, a* and b* values of ML compared with all other groups (p<0.001). Considering the low production performance of indigenous pig breeds, crossbreeding with the Duroc breed will contribute a improvement of growth and carcass traits.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.