Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-fv566 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T14:32:24.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Changes in body composition relative to weight and maturity in large and small strains of Australian Merino rams 3. Body organs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. M. Butterfield
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Anatomy, University of Sydney, N.S.W. 2006, Australia
J. Zamora
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Anatomy, University of Sydney, N.S.W. 2006, Australia
A. M. James
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Anatomy, University of Sydney, N.S.W. 2006, Australia
J. M. Thompson
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Anatomy, University of Sydney, N.S.W. 2006, Australia
K. J. Reddacliff
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Anatomy, University of Sydney, N.S.W. 2006, Australia
Get access

Abstract

Maturing patterns are established for 26 body organs using data from 35 rams of two strains of Merinos of different mature size (97 and 120 kg).

The proportion of shorn full live weight represented by each structure at maturity was very similar for all organs except the head, hide and distal limbs which were relatively heavier in the small strain. and small intestine and blood which were relatively heavier in the large strain.

All organs were early maturing relative to shorn full live weight except the hide and the penis plus bladder, which matured at the same rate as live weight. The maturity coefficients differed between strains only for the head, thyroid and omasum.

Differences in the proportion of live weight comprised by each organ in the two strains were compared at the same shorn full live weight and at the same proportion of mature shorn full live weight. Differences in the various portions of the alimentary tract and other internal organs, with the exception of the kidneys, which were evident in comparisons at the same weight, were reduced when compared at the same proportion of maturity. The difference between strains for head, hide and distal limbs was greater at equal maturity than at equal weight suggesting a functional relationship to body weight rather than to ultimate mature body size.

It was concluded in genetic comparisons of animals of different mature size, the most appropriate basis of comparison of relative organ weight will be at the same proportion of mature live weight.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1983

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

REFERENCES

Baldwin, R. L. and Black, J. L. 1979. Simulation of the effects of nutritional and physiological status on the growth of mammalian tissues. Description and evaluation of a computer program. CSIRO Anim. Res. Lab. Tech. Pap. No. 6.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Fowler, V. R. and Gill, J. C. 1982. A study of the growth of sheep to maturity. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 98: 405420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brody, S. 1945. Bioenergetics and Growth. Reinhold, New York.Google Scholar
Butterfield, R. M., Griffiths, D. A., Thompson, J. M., Zamora, J. and James, A. M. 1983a. Changes in body composition relative to weight and maturity in large and small strains of Australian Merino rams. 1. Muscle, bone and fat. Anim. Prod. 36: 2937.Google Scholar
Butterfield, R. M., Zamora, J., James, A. M., Thompson, J. M. and Williams, J. 1983b. Changes in body composition relative to weight and maturity in large and small strains of Australian Merino rams. 2. Muscles and muscle groups. Anim. Prod. 36: 165174.Google Scholar
Doornenbal, H. and Tong, A. K. W. 1981. Growth development and chemical composition of the pig. IV. Relative growth of visceral organs. Growth 45: 279285.Google ScholarPubMed
Gaili, E. S. E. and Nour, A. F. Y. M. 1980. Development of body components in Kenana cattle. I. Development of carcass and non-carcass components of the body. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 94: 257262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geay, Y. 1978. Dressing percentage in relation to weight, sex and breed. In Patterns of Growth and Development in Cattle, Current Topics in Veterinary Medicine, Vol. 2 (ed. Boer, H. De and Martin, J.), pp. 3546. Nijhoff, The Hague.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, J. 1932. Growth and the Development of Mutton Qualities in the Sheep. Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Johnson, E. R. 1979. The use of non-carcass parts in the prediction of beef carcass composition on the slaughter floor. Aust. J. agric. Res. 30: 751765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirton, A. H. 1957. Meat studies in the Romney ewe. M. Agr. Sc. Thesis, Massey University.Google Scholar
Kirton, A. H., Fourie, P. D. and Jury, K. E. 1972. Growth and development of sheep. III. Growth of the carcass and non-carcass components of the Southdown and Romney and their cross and some relationships with composition. N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 15: 214227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraybill, H. F., Hiner, R. L. and Farnworth, V. M. 1954. The relation of organ weights to lean body mass and empty body weight in cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 13: 548555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, P. H. and Butterfield, R. M. 1981. Thehorns of the Merino ram: their morphology and growth. Growth 45: 351361.Google Scholar
Pálsson, H. 1955. Conformation and body composition. In Progress in the Physiology of Farm Animals (ed. Hammond, J.), Vol. 2, pp. 430542. Butterworth, London.Google Scholar
Pálsson, H. and Vergés, J. B. 1952. Effects of the plane of nutrition on growth and the development of carcass quality in lambs. Part I. The effects of high and low planes of nutrition at different ages. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 42: 193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prothero, J. 1979. Heart weight as a function of body weight in mammals. Growth 43: 139150.Google ScholarPubMed
Thompson, J. M. and Parks, J. R. 1983. Feed intake, growth and mature size in Merino and Dorset Horn sheep. Anim. Prod. 36: 471479.Google Scholar
Wallace, L. R. 1948. The growth of lambs before and after birth in relation to the level of nutrition. Parts II and III. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 38: 243302, 367–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar