Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-swr86 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T16:51:27.039Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prediction of the lean content of lamb carcasses of different breed types

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. J. Kempster ,
P. R. D Avis ,
A. Cuthbertson  and
G. Harrington
A. J. Kempster
Affiliation:
Meat and Livestock Commission, P.O. Box 44, Queensway House, Bletchley, Milton Keynes, MK2 2EF
P. R. D Avis
Affiliation:
Meat and Livestock Commission, P.O. Box 44, Queensway House, Bletchley, Milton Keynes, MK2 2EF
A. Cuthbertson
Affiliation:
Meat and Livestock Commission, P.O. Box 44, Queensway House, Bletchley, Milton Keynes, MK2 2EF
G. Harrington
Affiliation:
Meat and Livestock Commission, P.O. Box 44, Queensway House, Bletchley, Milton Keynes, MK2 2EF
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Carcass data for 424 castrated male lambs, comprising seven breed-type groups, were used toevaluate a series of linear measurements, subjective scores and the lean content of sample joints as predictors of percentage lean in carcass. The groups represented the main types of British lamb and mean carcass weights ranged from 12·8 kg (Welsh Mountain) to 20·8 kg (Lowland Longwool). Lambswere selected from commercial abattoirs to cover the ranges of fatness and conformation normally found in practice within each group. The pooled within-group S.D. for percentage lean was 3·70 and theoverall S.D. (ignoring groups) was 3·96.

Predictors were compared in terms of precision and the stability of their prediction equations. Of the characteristics measured on the intact carcass, subjective scoring of external fatness gave the most precise prediction both within groups and overall (R.S.D.within = 2·82, B.S.D.overall = 3·17). Fat thickness over the eye muscle (0) was the best predictor among those taken on the quartered carcass (R.S.D.within = 2·76, R.S.D.overall =3·00). The most precise individual predictors were percentage lean in the best end neck and shoulder joints (R.S.D.within = 1·51 and 1·59 respectively). Among pairs of predictors not involving dissection, the combination of C and percentage kidney knob and channel fat in the side gave the most precise prediction (R.S.D.within = 2.51, R.S.D.overall = 2·68). The stability of the prediction equations between groups tended to increase with the precision of the predictors. Among the more precise predictors, the equation for percentage lean in the leg was a notable exception, being particularly variable from one group to another.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 86 , Issue 1 , February 1976 , pp. 23 - 34
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1976

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

Carpenter, Z. L., King, G. T., Shelton, M. & Butler, O. D. (1969). Indices for estimating outability of wether, ram and ewe lamb carcasses. Journal of Animal Science 28, 180–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conniffe, D. & Moran, M. A. (1972). Double sampling with regression in comparative studies of carcass composition. Biometrics 28, 1011–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuthbertson, A., Harrington, G. & Smith, R. J. (1972). Tissueseparation-to assess beef and lamb variation. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production 1, 113–22.Google Scholar
Field, R. A., Kemp, J. D. & Varney, W. Y. (1963). Indices of lamb carcass composition. Journal of Animal Science 22, 218–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hankins, O. G. (1947). Estimation of the composition of lamb carcasses and cuts. U.S.D.A. Technical Bulletin 944.Google Scholar
Harrington, G. (1963). The separation of technical errors and biological variation and other statistical problems arising in body composition studies. Annals of the New York Academy of Science 110, 642–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackson, T. H. & Mansour, Y. A. (1974). Differences between groups of lamb carcasses chosen for good and poor conformation. Animal Production 19, 93–105.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Avis, P.R.D., Cuthbertson, A. & Smith, R. J. (1974). Prediction of beef carcass composition by sample joint dissection. Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Production 3, 85–6.(Abstr.)Google Scholar
Kirton, A. H. (1964). Breeding dual purpose sheephow important is conformation? Proceedings of the Ruakura Farmers' Conference Week, pp. 11–24.Google Scholar
Kirton, A. H. & Barton, R. A. (1962). Study of indices of the chemical composition of lamb carcasses. Journal of Animal Science 21, 553–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirton, A. H. & Pickering, P. S. (1967). Factors associated with differences in carcass conformation in lamb. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 10, 183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, W. M., Carpenter, Z. L., King, G. T. & Shelton, M. (1968). Predicting cutability of lamb carcasses from carcass weights and measures. Journal of Animal Science 27, 1254–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, M. L. & Field, R. A. (1969). Predicting carcass composition of ewe, wether and ram lambs. Journal of Animal Science 29, 567–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ringkob, T. P., Zobrisky, S. E., Ross, C. V. & Naumann, H. D. (1964). Measurement of muscle and retail cuts of lamb. Research Bulletin University of Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station, No. 876.Google Scholar
Timon, V. M. & Bichard, M. (1965a). Quantitative estimates of lamb carcass composition. 1. Sample joints. Animal Production 7, 173–82.Google Scholar
Timon, V. M. & Bichard, M. (1965b). Quantitative estimates of lamb carcass composition. 3. Carcass measurements and a comparison of the predictive efficiency of sample joint composition, carcass specific gravity determinations and carcass measurements Animal Production 7, 189–201.Google Scholar