Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T02:11:48.526Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth performance, carcass characteristics and meat quality of group-penned surgically castrated, immunocastrated (Improvac®) and entire male pigs and individually penned entire male pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2009

C. Pauly ,
P. Spring ,
J. V. O’Doherty ,
S. Ampuero Kragten  and
G. Bee
C. Pauly
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Swiss College of Agriculture, Zollikofen 3052, Switzerland School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland
P. Spring
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Swiss College of Agriculture, Zollikofen 3052, Switzerland
J. V. O’Doherty
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food Science and Veterinary Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland
S. Ampuero Kragten
Affiliation:
Agroscope Liebefeld-Posieux, Research Station ALP, La Tioleyre 4, Posieux 1725, Switzerland
G. Bee*
Affiliation:
Agroscope Liebefeld-Posieux, Research Station ALP, La Tioleyre 4, Posieux 1725, Switzerland
*
*E-mail: Giuseppe.Bee@alp.admin.ch
Get access

Abstract

The objective of the study was to compare growth performance, carcass characteristics, meat quality and fatty acid composition of the adipose tissue of group-penned barrows, immunocastrated boars and entire males. Furthermore, the effect of housing of entire males on the aforementioned parameters was evaluated. At 55.2 days of age, 52 Swiss Large White pigs were blocked by litter and assigned by BW to four experimental groups: barrows (C), immunocastrated boars (IC), entire males (EMG) reared in group pens and entire males (EMP) reared in individual pens. In experiment 1, the effects of the method of castration were investigated (experimental groups C, IC and EMG). In experiment 2, the effects of housing on entire male pigs were evaluated (experimental groups EMG and EMP). All pigs had ad libitum access to standard diets from weaning to 107 kg BW. The two vaccinations (Improvac®) were applied to the IC pigs at an average BW of 22.6 and 73.0 kg. In experiment 1, average daily gain (ADG) did not (P > 0.05) differ among the experimental groups. However, EMG consumed less feed and had a better feed-conversion ratio than C (P < 0.001 for each). For IC, intermediate values were observed, which differed (P < 0.001) from EMG and C. Lean meat percentage decreased (P < 0.05) from EMG to IC, and from IC to C. The androstenone and skatole levels were higher (P < 0.05) in the adipose tissue of EMG than IC and C. Shear force values were higher (P < 0.01) in the longissimus muscle of C and EMG, compared to IC. The concentration of saturated fatty acid in the adipose tissue increased (P < 0.001) from EMG to IC, and from IC to C pigs, and that of polyunsaturated fatty acid decreased (P < 0.001). In experiment 2, ADG did not (P > 0.05) differ between EMP and EMG. However, EMP pigs consumed more feed than EMG pigs and had a poorer feed efficiency (P < 0.01 for each). In conclusion, EMG pigs had a better feed efficiency than IC pigs and their carcasses were leaner, but the risk of boar tainted pork was elevated. Group-housing negatively affected average daily feed intake but not ADG of entire males. At the moment, immunocastration offers a good approach to avoid castration and minimize the risk of boar taint.

Keywords

carcass and pork qualityentire male pigshousingimmunocastrationperformance
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 3 , Issue 7 , July 2009 , pp. 1057 - 1066
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

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

ALP 2005. Apports alimentaires et tables de la valeur nutritive des aliments pour porcs. LmZ, Zollikofen.Google Scholar
Barton-Gade, PA 1987. Meat and fat quality in boars, castrates and gilts. Livestock Production Science 16, 187–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bee, G 2001. Dietary conjugated linoleic acids affect tissue lipid composition but not de novo lipogenesis in finishing pigs. Animal Research 50, 383–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bee, G, Biolley, C, Guex, G, Herzog, W, Lonergan, SM, Huff-Lonergan, E 2006. Effects of available dietary carbohydrate and preslaughter treatment on glycolytic potential, protein degradation, and quality traits of pig muscles. Journal of Animal Science 84, 191–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bee, G, Calderini, M, Biolley, C, Guex, G, Herzog, W, Lindemann, MD 2007. Changes in the histochemical properties and meat quality traits of porcine muscles during the growing–finishing period as affected by feed restriction, slaughter age, or slaughter weight. Journal of Animal Science 85, 1030–1045.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bee, G, Jacot, S, Guex, G, Biolley, C 2008. Effects of two supplementation levels of linseed combined with CLA or tallow on meat quality traits and fatty acid profile of adipose and different muscle tissues in slaughter pigs. Animal 2, 800–811.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bonneau, M, Dufour, R, Chouvet, C, Roulet, C, Meadus, W, Squires, EJ 1994. The effects of immunization against luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone on performance, sexual development, and levels of boar taint-related compounds in intact male pigs. Journal of Animal Science 72, 14–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, RG, Steele, NC, Caperna, TJ, McMurtry, JP, Solomon, MB, Mitchell, AD 1989. Interrelationships between sex and exogenous growth hormone administration on performance, body composition and protein and fat accretion of growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 67, 177–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Claus, R, Weiler, U 1987. Umwelteinflüsse auf das geschlechtsspezifische Wachstumsvermögen. Übersichten zur Tierernährung 15, 301–316.Google Scholar
Claus, R, Weiler, U, Herzog, A 1994. Physiological aspects of androstenone and skatole formation in the boar: review with experimental data. Meat Science 38, 289–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Claus, R, Lacorn, M, Danowski, K, Pearce, MC, Bauer, A 2007. Short-term endocrine and metabolic reactions before and after second immunization against GnRH in boars. Vaccine 25, 4689–4696.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cronin, GM, Dunshea, FR, Butler, KL, McCauley, I, Barnett, JL, Hemsworth, PH 2003. The effects of immuno- and surgical-castration on the behaviour and consequently growth of group-housed, male finisher pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 81, 111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D’Souza, DN, Mullan, BP 2003. The effect of genotype and castration method on the eating quality characteristics of pork from male pigs. Animal Science 77, 67–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Haer, LCM 1992. Relevance of eating pattern for selection of growing pigs. PhD thesis, Wageningen University and Research Centre, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Dunshea, FR, King, RH, Campbell, RG, Sainz, RD, Kim, YS 1993. Interrelationships between sex and ractopamine on protein and lipid deposition in rapidly growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 71, 2913–2930.Google ScholarPubMed
Dunshea, FR, Colantoni, C, Howard, K, McCauley, I, Jackson, P, Long, KA, Lopaticki, S, Nugent, EA, Simons, JA, Walker, J, Hennessy, DP 2001. Vaccination of boars with a GnRH vaccine (Improvac) eliminates boar taint and increases growth performance. Journal of Animal Science 79, 2524–2535.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare on a request from the Commission related to welfare aspects of the castration of piglets. The EFSA Journal 91, 1–18.Google Scholar
Giersing, M, Lundström, K, Andersson, A 2000. Social effects and boar taint: significance for production of slaughter boars (Sus scrofa). Journal of Animal Science 78, 296–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hansen, LL, Larsen, AE, Jensen, BB, Hansen-Møller, J, Barton-Gade, PA 1994. Influence of stocking rate and faeces deposition in the pen at different temperatures on skatole concentration (boar taint) in subcutaneous fat. Animal Production 59, 99–110.Google Scholar
Honikel, KO 1998. Reference methods for the assessment of physical characteristics of meat. Meat Science 49, 447–457.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jaros, P, Bürgi, E, Stärk, KDC, Claus, R, Hennessy, D, Thun, R 2005. Effect of active immunization against GnRH on androstenone concentration, growth performance and carcass quality in intact male pigs. Livestock Production Science 92, 31–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klingenberg, IL, Knabe, DA, Smith, SB 1995. Lipid metabolism in pigs fed beef tallow or high-oleic acid sunflower oil. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology. Part B: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 110, 183–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kouba, M, Mourot, J 1998. Effect of a high linoleic acid diet on Δ9-desaturase activity, lipogenesis and lipid composition of pig subcutaneous adipose tissue. Reproduction Nutrition Development 38, 31–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kouba, M, Mourot, J, Peiniau, P 1997. Stearoyl-CoA desaturase activity in adipose tissues and liver of growing Large White and Meishan pigs. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology. Part B: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 118, 509–514.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kristensen, L, Therkildsen, M, Riis, B, Sorensen, MT, Oksbjerg, N, Purslow, PP, Ertbjerg, P 2002. Dietary-induced changes of muscle growth rate in pigs: effects on in vivo and postmortem muscle proteolysis and meat quality. Journal of Animal Science 80, 2862–2871.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lawlor, P, Mullane, J, Lynch, PB, Kerry, J, Allen, P 2003. Effect of sex and slaughter weight on production efficiency. In EAAP Working Group on Production and Utilisation of Meat from Entire Male Pigs, Teagasc, National Food Centre, Ashtown, Dublin 15, Ireland.Google Scholar
Metz, C, Claus, R 2003. Active immunization of boars against GnRH does not affect growth hormone but lowers IGF-I in plasma. Livestock Production Science 81, 129–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metz, C, Hohl, K, Waidelich, S, Drochner, W, Claus, R 2002. Active immunization of boars against GnRH at an early age: consequences for testicular function, boar taint accumulation and N-retention. Livestock Production Science 74, 147–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, BL, Lawrence, AB, Whittemore, CT 1996. Effect of individual housing on the feeding behaviour of previously group housed growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 47, 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noblet, J, Shi, XS, Dubois, S 1993. Energy cost of standing activity in sows. Livestock Production Science 34, 127–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Connell, MK, Lynch, PB, Lawlor, PG, O’Doherty, JV 2006. A study of protein and amino nutrition of growing pigs. Pig News and Information 27, 23N–29N.Google Scholar
Oliver, WT, McCauley, I, Harrell, RJ, Suster, D, Kerton, DJ, Dunshea, FR 2003. A gonadotropin-releasing factor vaccine (Improvac) and porcine somatotropin have synergistic and additive effects on growth performance in group-housed boars and gilts. Journal of Animal Science 81, 1959–1966.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pauly, C, Spring, P, O’Doherty, JV, Ampuero Kragten, S, Bee, G 2008. Performances, meat quality and boar taint of castrates and entire male pigs fed a standard and a raw potato starch-enriched diet. Animal 2, 1707–1715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prunier, A, Bonneau, M, Etienne, M 1987. Effects of age and live weight on the sexual development of gilts and boars fed two planes of nutrition. Reproduction Nutrition Development 27, 689–700.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richmond, RJ, Berg, RT 1982. Relative growth patterns of individual muscles in the pig. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 62, 575–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TSchV 2008. SR 455.1. Retrieved July 22, 2008 from http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/c455_1.htmlGoogle Scholar
Turkstra, JA, Zeng, XY, van Diepen, JTM, Jongbloed, AW, Oonk, HB, van de Wiel, DFM, Meloen, RH 2002. Performance of male pigs immunized against GnRH is related to the time of onset of biological response. Journal of Animal Science 80, 2953–2959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velarde, A, Gispert, M, Font i Furnols, M, Dalmau, A, Soler, J, Tibau, J, Fàbrega, E 2008. The effect of immunocastration on the behaviour of pigs. In EAAP Working group ‘Production and Utilisation of Meat from Entire Male Pigs’, Monells (Girona).Google Scholar
Walstra, P, Claudi-Magnussen, C, Chevillon, P, von Seth, G, Diestre, A, Matthews, KR, Homer, DB, Bonneau, M 1999. An international study on the importance of androstenone and skatole for boar taint: levels of androstenone and skatole by country and season. Livestock Production Science 62, 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, JD, Enser, M 1982. Comparison of boars and castrates for bacon production. 2. Composition of muscle and subcutaneous fat, and changes in side weight during curing. Animal Production 35, 65–74.Google Scholar
Wood, JD, Buxton, PJ, Whittington, FM, Enser, M 1986. The chemical composition of fat tissues in the pig: effects of castration and feeding treatment. Livestock Production Science 15, 73–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xue, J, Dial, GD, Pettigrew, JE 1997. Performance, carcass, and meat quality advantages of boars over barrows: a literature review. Journal of Swine Health and Production 5, 21–28.Google Scholar
Zamaratskaia, G, Andersson, HK, Chen, G, Andersson, K, Madej, A, Lundström, K 2008. Effect of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone vaccine (Improvac™) on steroid hormones, boar taint compounds and performance in entire male pigs. Reproduction in Domestic Animals 43, 351–359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zamaratskaia, G, Rydhmer, L, Andersson, HK, Chen, G, Lowagie, S, Andersson, K, Lundström, K (2008). Long-term effect of vaccination against gonadotropin-releasing hormone, using Improvac™, on hormonal profile and behaviour of male pigs. Animal Reproduction Science 108, 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, XY, Turkstra, JA, Jongbloed, AW, van Diepen, JTM, Meloen, RH, Oonk, HB, Guo, DZ, van de Wiel, DFM 2002. Performance and hormone levels of immunocastrated, surgically castrated and intact male pigs fed ad libitum high-and low-energy diets. Livestock Production Science 77, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar