Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-k7p5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T11:38:12.814Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A note on the ability of three portable ultrasonic probes to predict backfat thickness in cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

C. S. Eveleigh ,
C. J. Thwaites ,
P. B. Hassab ,
D. G. Paton ,
R. J. Smith  and
W. H. Upton
C. S. Eveleigh
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
C. J. Thwaites
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia
P. B. Hassab
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, NSW, Australia
D. G. Paton
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, NSW, Australia
R. J. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, NSW, Australia
W. H. Upton
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, NSW, Australia
Get access

Abstract

Three portable ultrasonic probes (Scanoprobe, Meritronics and Krautkramer), each used by the one experienced operator, were found to be superior to the visual and tactile assessments of two experienced judges in predicting carcass backfat depth (range 4 to 20 mm) in 132 live steers. Residual standard deviations for the three probe/operator combinations were 2·01, 2·16 and 2·77 mm respectively; those for the judges were 2·96 and 3·09 mm. Combining ultrasonic estimates by multiple regression improved slightly the accuracy of prediction (residual s.d. = 1·87 mm), the level of which was comparable to that previously reported for scanning ultrasonic instruments used on pigs.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , October 1985 , pp. 247 - 248
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1985

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

Alliston, J. C., Kempster, A. J., Owen, M. G. and Ellis, M. 1982. An evaluation of three ultrasonic machines for predicting the body composition of live pigs of the same breed, sex and live weight. Anim. Prod. 35: 165–169.Google Scholar
Bass, J. J. 1981. Cattle overfatness can be overcome. N.Z. Jl Agric. 142: 29–30.Google Scholar
Fortin, A. 1980. Fat thickness measured with three ultrasonic instruments on live ram lambs as predictors of cutability. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 60: 857–867.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Arnall, D., Alliston, J. C. and Barker, J. D. 1982. An evaluation of two ultrasonic machines (Scanogram and Danscanner) for predicting the body composition of live sheep. Anim. Prod. 34: 249–255.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cuthbertson, A., Owen, M. G. and Alliston, J. C. 1979. A comparison of four ultrasonic machines (Sonatest, Scanogram, His Observer and Danscanner) for predicting the body composition of live pigs. Anim. Prod. 29: 175–181.Google Scholar
Upton, W. H., Ryan, D. M., Mansfield, B. W. and Sundstrom, B. 1984. An evaluation of the Scanoprobe for measuring fat depth of beef cattle. Proc. Ami. Soc. Anim. Prod. 15: 764 (Abstr.).Google Scholar