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 Edwards, R. L. Articles by Carpenter, Z. L. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Edwards, R. L. Articles by Carpenter, Z. L.

Muscle to Bone Ratios in Pork Carcasses¹

Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, College Station 77843

Abstract

Three-hundred and fifty-nine pork carcasses varying widely in muscling fatness were selected from two commercial packing plants. Measurements were made of carcass length, fat depth (3/4 measure-10th rib), longissimus muscle area, average backfat thickness, USDA muscling score and carcass weight. These independent variables were considered to be easily obtainable on the ribbed (between the 10th and 11th ribs) but otherwise intact carcass. The four lean cuts were sequentially fabricated and processed into separable lean, fat and bone. Multiple regression equations were developed to predict percentage of lean in the four lean cuts (L4LC) and to predict muscle to bone ratio in the four lean cuts (M:B). Results indicated that: (1) M:B differed widely among pork carcasses (from 2.89 to 5.49) and was distributed normally; (2) M:B was important in predicting L4LC in a population of carcasses ranging in backfat from 2.29 to 3.28 cm but did not add significantly to predictive accuracy in a population of carcasses with a backfat range of 2.29 to 5.33 cm; (3) the best two-variable equation for predicting L4LC included fat depth and longissimus muscle area (R² = .87), and the best three-variable equation for predicting L4LC included M:B, fat depth and longissimus muscle area (R²=.89); (4) the best two-variable equation for predicting M:B included longissimus muscle area and USDA muscling score (R²=.54), and the best three-variable equation for predicting M:B included longissimus muscle area, USDA muscling score and carcass length (R² = .55); (5) USDA muscling scores and longissimus muscle area were significantly associated with M:B (r = .64 and .69, respectively); (6) no prediction equation could account for more than 60% of the observed variability in M:B, and (7) the addition of actual M:B to fat depth and longissimus muscle area increased the accuracy of estimating L4LC by only 2%, suggesting that the value of estimated M:B probably would not be sufficient to warrant its inclusion in prediction equations for estimating leanness of ribbed carcasses.

¹ T. A. 16789, Meats and Muscle Biol. Sec, Dept. of Anim. Sci., Texas Agr. Exp. Sta., College Station 77843.

² Present address: US Meat Animal Research Center, Clay Center, NE 68933.