HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Robbins, E. T. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Robbins, E. T.

What we are Doing About the Hog-Type Problem

University of Illinois

Abstract

Experiments were started at the University of Illinois in 1922 to determine the differences in feedlot performance and slaughter house results between different types of hogs. Chuffy, medium type, and rangy type pigs were used in the first test. In later experiments the types ranged from very chuffy through chuffy, medium type, rangy, and very rangy pigs. The experiments were conducted through several years and over 600 head of pigs were used.

In most cases very little difference in feedlot performance was noted with the exception that the rangier pigs required a longer time and larger weights before they got fat. In the first test the rangy pigs required 8% more feed and the chuffy pigs 3% more feed for each 100 pounds of gain than was required by pigs of the intermediate type. There was no marked difference in economy of gains between any of the types used in these experiments.

As a result of this work, judged by all of the factors involved, it has been concluded by Professor Sleeter Bull and Dr. W. E. Carroll, who had charge of this work at the finish, that the intermediate or meat-type hog most nearly meets the modern demand for small, lean, firm, finished cuts with a minimum of lard. Fortunately the rate and economy of gains of this type are as good as those of the other types studied.