Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-q6k6v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-15T15:51:11.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Muscle: bone ratio and fat percentage as measures of beef carcass composition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. T. Berg  and
R. M. Butterfield
R. T. Berg
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
R. M. Butterfield
Affiliation:
School of Veterinary Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
Get access

Extract

1. Total anatomical dissection data from 62 half carcasses of steers representing 6 breed groups differing in age and nutritional history, were examined with a view to establishing a basis for comparison of carcass composition of breed groups or of cattle from various treatments.

2. The results indicate that total muscular tissue might be used for comparative purposes in certain instances. Muscle weight differences could be examined independently of general size by adjusting to common muscle plus bone weights.

3. It is proposed that relative carcass composition is best assessed by use of two measures: muscle: bone ratio and percentage fat tissue in the carcass.

4. Muscle: bone ratio was shown to increase with carcass weight and after the effects of carcass weight had been statistically removed the influence of percentage fat on this ratio was negligible. The required adjustment to muscle: bone ratio for differences in carcass weight was estimated at 0·03 per 10 kg. increase in carcass weight.

5. Percentage fat in a carcass is proposed as an index of acceptability. The requirements of different markets in terms of this index would need to be established. Adjustment factors for percentage fat based on carcass weight would need to be established on a within group basis.

6. Relative growth coefficients for muscle, bone and fat, based on a logarithmic relationship with total muscle plus bone, are presented and were found to agree closely with those for swine and sheep. The magnitude of differential growth in body tissues indicated by the growth coefficients accentuates the necessity of making carcass composition comparisons at standard weights or following suitable statistical adjustments.

7. The implications of carcass composition assessment in beef breeding programmes are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , February 1966 , pp. 1 - 11
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1966

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

Butterfield, R. M., 1963a. Estimation of carcase composition: the anatomical approach. In symposium on carcase composition and appraisal of meat animals. (Ed. Tribe, D. E.). 4-1-4-13. C.S.I.R.O., Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
Butterfield, R. M., 1963b. Relative growth of the musculature of the ox. In symposium on carcase composition and appraisal of meat animals. (Ed. Tribe, D. E.). 7-1. C.S.I.R.O., Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
Butterfield, R. M., 1965a. The relationship of carcase measurements and dissection data to beef carcase composition. Res. vet. Sci., 6: 24–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butterfield, R. M., 1965b. The effect of nutritional stress and recovery on the body composition of cattle. Res. vet. Sci. (in press).Google Scholar
Butterfield, R. M., & May, N. D. S., 1965. Muscles of the Ox. University of Queensland Press. Brisbane, Australia (in press).Google Scholar
Callow, E. H., 1961. Comparative studies of meat. VII. Acomparison between Hereford, Dairy Shorthorn and Friesian steers on four levels of nutrition. J. agric. Sci., 56: 265–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callow, E. H., 1962. The relationship between the weight of a tissue in a single joint and the total weight of tissue in a side of beef. Anim. Prod., 4: 37–46.Google Scholar
Carroll, F. D., Clegg, M. T., & Kroger, D., 1964. Carcass characteristics of Holstein and Hereford steers. J. agric. Sci., 62: 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, K. W., Dudzinski, M. L., Butterfield, R. M., & Bennett, D., 1964. The muscle, fat and bone content of Angus steer carcasses as affected by stocking rates. Aust. J. agric. Res., 15: 858–867.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsley, F. W. H., McDonald, I., & Fowler, V. R., 1964. The effect of plane of nutrition on the carcasses of pigs and lambs when variations in fat content are excluded. Anim. Prod., 6: 141–154.Google Scholar
Hankins, O. G., Knapp, B. Jr., & Phillips, R. W., 1943. The muscle-bone ratio as an index of merit in beef and dual-purpose cattle. J. anim. Sci., 2: 42–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrington, G., & King, J. W. B., 1963. A note on the prediction of muscular tissue weight in sides of beef. Anim. Prod., 5: 327–328.Google Scholar
Huxley, J., 1932. Problems of Relative Growth. Methuen, London.Google Scholar
Lawrence, T. L. J., & Pearce, J., 1964. Some effect of wintering yearling beef cattle on different planes of nutrition. I, II. J. agric. Sci., 63: 5–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luitingh, H. C., 1962. Developmental changes in beef steers as influenced by fattening, age and type of ration. J. agric. Sci., 58: 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMeekan, C. P., 1940. Growth and development in the pig, with special reference to carcass quality characters. I, II, III. J. agric. Sci., 30: 276–343, 387–436, 511–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pálsson, H., & Verges, J. B., 1952. Effects of plane of nutrition on growth and development of carcass quality in lambs. Parts I and II. J. agric. Sci., 42: 1–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. W., 1956. Statistical Methods. 5th ed.Iowa State College Press, Ames, la.Google Scholar
Tayler, J. C., 1964. The relationship between growth and carcass quality in cattle and sheep. A review. Empire J. expt. Agric., 32: 191–204.Google Scholar
Tulloh, N. M., 1964. The carcase compositions of sheep, cattle, and pigs as functions of body weight. In Symposium on carcase composition and appraisal of meat animals. (Ed. Tribe, D. E.). 5-1-5-16. C.S.I.R.O., Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
Winchester, C. F., & Ellis, N. R., 1956. Delayed growth of beef cattle. U.S.D.A. Tech. Bull.no. 1159.Google Scholar
Winchester, C. F., & Howe, P. E., 1955. Relative effects of continuous and interrupted growth on beef steers. U.S.D.A. Tech. Bull. no. 1108.Google Scholar
Yeates, N. T. M., 1964. Starvation changes and subsequent recovery of adult beef muscle. J. agric. Sci., 62: 267–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar