Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T03:39:29.660Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of the carcass characteristics and meat quality of lambs produced from Texel and Rouge de l’Ouest ewes and their crosses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

L. E. R. Dawson ,
A. F. Carson ,
L. O. W. McClinton ,
D. J. Kilpatrick  and
B. W. Moss
L. E. R. Dawson*
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR, UK
A. F. Carson
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR, UK Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for Northern Ireland and The Queen’s University of Belfast, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT9 5PX, UK
L. O. W. McClinton
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Institute of Northern Ireland, Hillsborough, Co. Down BT26 6DR, UK
D. J. Kilpatrick
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for Northern Ireland and The Queen’s University of Belfast, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT9 5PX, UK
B. W. Moss
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for Northern Ireland and The Queen’s University of Belfast, Newforge Lane, Belfast BT9 5PX, UK
*
† E-mail : lynne.dawson@dardni.gov.uk
Get access

Abstract

An experiment was undertaken to compare the carcass characteristics and meat quality of lambs from crossbred ewes produced by crossing Texel sires with Rouge de l’Ouest dams and Rouge sires with Texel dams, relative to lambs from purebred Texel and Rouge ewes. The ewes were crossed with Texel or Rouge sires and the relative performance of the sires assessed in terms of lamb carcass quality. Ewe and ram genotype had a significant effect on conformation classification. Lambs from Texel ewes had a greater conformation classification (4·0) than lambs from Rouge ewes (3·4, s.e. 0·09) (P <0·001) and Texel-sired lambs had a greater conformation classification (4·0) than Rouge-sired lambs (3·6, s.e. 0·06) (P <0·001). Fat depth was significantly influenced by ewe genotype with lambs from Texel × Rouge ewes having greater fat depths compared with lambs from Texel ewes (longissimus dorsi 2·3 and 1·9 (s.e.0·12) mm respectively) (P <0·05). Chemical composition of the carcass and meat quality measurements were unaffected by ewe or ram genotype. Significant heterosis effects on lamb live-weight gain (21 g/day; 15%) (P <0·01) from birth to slaughter, age at slaughter (–37 days; –12%) (P <0·01), weight of perinephric and retroperitoneal fat (76 g; 38%) (P <0·01) and fat depth over the longissimus dorsi (0·3 mm; 16%) and gluteus medius (0·5 mm; 17%; P <0·05) were obtained. The results from this study demonstrate that significant heterosis effects, particularly in terms of lamb growth rate, can be achieved by crossing Rouge and Texel breeds. In addition lambs from hybrid ewes have similar conformation characteristics to the Texel breed which has been intensively selected for carcass characteristics.

Keywords

carcass compositionheterosismeat qualityRouge de l'OuestTexel
Type
Growth, development and meat science
Information
Animal Science , Volume 77 , Issue 1 , August 2003 , pp. 57 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 2003

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.)

References

Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1996. Official methods of analysis, 16th edition. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA. Google Scholar
Bligh, E.G. and Dyer, W. J. 1959. A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Canadian Journal of Biochemistry and Physiology 37: 911–917.Google Scholar
Brown, A.J. and Williams, D.R. 1979. Sheep carcass evaluation – measurement of composition using a standardised butchery method. Memorandum no. 36, Meat Research Institute, Langford, Bristol.Google Scholar
Cameron, N.D. and Drury, D.J. 1985. Comparison of terminal sire breeds for growth and carcass traits in crossbred lambs. Animal Production 40: 315–322.Google Scholar
Carson, A.F., McClinton, L. W. and R.W.J., Steen 1999a. Effects of Texel or Rouge de l’Ouest genes in lowland ewes and rams on ewe prolificacy, lamb viability and weaned lamb output. Animal Science 68: 69–78.Google Scholar
Carson, A.F., Moss, B. W., L.E.R., Dawson and Kilpatrick, D.J. 2001. Effects of genotype and dietary forage to concentrate ratio during the finishing period on carcass characteristics and meat quality of lambs from hill sheep systems. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 137: 205–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, A.F., Moss, B. W., R.W.J., Steen and Kilpatrick, D.J. 1999b. Effects of the percentage of Texel or Rouge de l’Ouest genes in lambs on carcass characteristics and meat quality. Animal Science 69: 81–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conington, J., Bishop, S. C., Waterhouse, A. and Simm, G. 1998. A comparison of growth and carcass traits in Scottish Blackface lambs sired by genetically lean or fat rams. Animal Science 67: 299–309.Google Scholar
Cundiff, L.V. 1970. Experimental results on crossbreeding cattle for beef production. Journal of Animal Science 30: 694–705.Google Scholar
Dawson, L.E.R. and Carson, A.F. 2002a. Effects of crossbred ewe genotype and ram genotype on lamb carcass characteristics from the lowland sheep flock. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 139: 183–194.Google Scholar
Dawson, L.E.R., Carson, A. F. and L.O.W., McClinton 2002b. Comparison of the productivity of Texel and Rouge de l’Ouest ewes and their crosses. Animal Science 75: 459–468.Google Scholar
Dawson, L.E.R., Carson, A.F. and Moss, B.W. 2002c. Effects of crossbred ewe genotype and ram genotype on lamb meat quality from the lowland sheep flock. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 183: 195–204.Google Scholar
Ellis, M., , Webster, G.M., Merrell, B.G. and Brown, I. 1997. The influence of terminal sire breed on carcass composition and eating quality of crossbred lambs. Animal Science 64: 77–86.Google Scholar
Farid, A. 1989. Direct, maternal and heterosis effects for slaughter and carcass characteristics in three breeds of fat tailed sheep. Livestock Production Science 23: 137–162.Google Scholar
Jacubek, V. 1977. Productivity of crosses based on prolific breeds of sheep. Livestock Production Science 4: 379–392.Google Scholar
Kempster, A.J., Croston, D., Guy, D. R. and Jones, D.W. 1987. Growth and carcass characteristics of crossbred lambs by ten sire breeds, compared at the same estimated carcass subcutaneous fat proportion. Animal Production 44: 83–98.Google Scholar
Latif, M.G.A. and Owen, E. 1979. A note on the growth performance and carcass composition of Texel- and Suffolk-sired lambs in an intensive feeding system. Animal Production 30: 311–314.Google Scholar
Long, C.R. and Gregory, K.E. 1975. Heterosis and management effects in carcass characters of Angus, Hereford and reciprocal cross cattle. Journal of Animal Science 41: 1572–1580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meat and Livestock Commission. 2001. Sheep yearbook. Meat and Livestock Commission, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
Millar, S.J., Moss, B.W., MacDougall, D.B. and Stevenson, M.H. 1995. The effect of ionising radiation on the CIELAB colour co-ordinates of chicken breast as measured by different instruments. International Journal of Food Science and Technology 30: 663–974.Google Scholar
Moss, B.W., Gault, N.F.S., McCaughey, W. J., McLaughlan, W. and Kilpatrick, D.J. 1993. Effect of surgical and immunocastration of beef cattle on carcass quality. In Safety and quality of food from animals (ed. J. D. Wood, and Lawrence, T. L. J.), British Society of Animal Production occasional publication no. 17, pp. 87–92.Google Scholar
Numerical Algorithms Group. 1994. Genstat 5 release 3 reference manual. Oxford Scientific Publications, Claredon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Wiener, G. and Hayter, S. 1974. Body size and conformation in sheep from birth to maturity as affected by breed, crossbreeding, maternal and other factors. Animal Production 19: 47–65.Google Scholar
Wolf, B.T., Smith, C. and Sales, D.I. 1980. Growth and carcass composition in the crossbred progeny of six terminal sire breeds of sheep. Animal Production 31: 307–313.Google Scholar