J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Matthews, J. O.
Right arrow Articles by Bidner, T. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Matthews, J. O.
Right arrow Articles by Bidner, T. D.
J. Anim. Sci. 2005. 83:858-862
© 2005 American Society of Animal Science

ANIMAL NUTRITION

Effects of chromium propionate on growth, carcass traits, and pork quality of growing-finishing pigs1,2

J. O. Matthews3, A. C. Guzik4, F. M. LeMieux, L. L. Southern5 and T. D. Bidner

Department of Animal Sciences, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge 70803


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Literature Cited
 
An experiment was conducted to determine the effect of dietary Cr propionate (CrProp) on growth, carcass traits, and pork quality of crossbred finishing gilts. Dietary treatments were 0 or 200 ppb Cr (as CrProp; as-fed basis), and each treatment was replicated four times with five gilts per replicate pen. Gilts were fed diets containing 0.82% lysine from 73 to 80 kg BW and 0.64% lysine from 80 to 115 kg BW. At the end of the trial, carcass and pork quality data were collected from four gilts per replicate. Average daily gain, ADFI, and G:F were not affected (P = 0.76 to 0.96) by CrProp. Before delivery at the abattoir, shrink loss was determined after an 18-h fast (fasting shrink) and after hauling (shipping shrink) pigs for 2.66 h (209.2 km). Fasting, shipping, and overall shrink were not affected (P = 0.14 to 0.39) by CrProp. Carcass length was increased (P = 0.03) in pigs fed CrProp. Loin muscle area, 10th-rib backfat thickness, average backfat thickness, dressing percent, muscle score, fat-free lean, and percent lean were not affected (P = 0.18 to 0.95) by CrProp. Twenty-four-hour loin pH was increased (P = 0.10) in pigs fed CrProp, but 45-min loin and ham pH and 24-h ham pH were not affected (P = 0.39 to 0.83) by CrProp. Subjective (color, marbling, firmness, and wetness) and objective (Commission Internationale de l’Éclairage L*, a*, b*) assessments of the loin muscle (at the 10th-rib interface) were not affected (P = 0.62 to 0.99) by CrProp. Forty-eight-hour drip (P = 0.10) and 21-d purge loss (P = 0.01) were decreased in pigs fed CrProp, but cook and total loss (drip + cook loss) and shear force were not affected (P = 0.35 to 0.53) by CrProp. Plasma cortisol, glucose, and lactate concentrations were not affected (P = 0.28 to 0.97) by CrProp after transportation or during exsanguination. These data indicate that CrProp may improve some aspects of pork quality (loin pH, drip and purge loss) but not growth performance or carcass traits.

Key Words: Carcass Traits • Chromium Propionate • Pigs • Pork Quality


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Literature Cited
 
The effects of supplemental dietary Cr on growth and carcass traits have been investigated, but responses to Cr have been inconsistent. Some reports indicate that Cr has a beneficial effect on ADG or feed efficiency (Lindemann et al., 1995Go; Mooney and Cromwell, 1995Go), but others indicated no effect (Evock-Clover et al., 1993Go; Mooney and Cromwell, 1999Go; Matthews et al., 2003Go). Carcass leanness also has been reported to be improved in pigs supplemented with Cr (Page et al., 1993Go; Mooney and Cromwell, 1995Go), but others have reported no effect of Cr on carcass leanness (Evock-Clover et al., 1993Go; Mooney and Cromwell, 1999Go; Matthews et al., 2003Go).

The effects of Cr on pork quality have been studied to a lesser extent than the effect of Cr on growth performance and carcass traits. The recent research of Matthews et al. (2003)Go and Shelton et al. (2003)Go indicated that Cr propionate (CrProp) improved subjective marbling scores and some measurements of water-holding capacity in fresh and frozen chops. O’Quinn et al. (1998)Go reported that Cr picolinate decreased drip loss and marbling score. Furthermore, O’Quinn et al. (1998)Go reported subjective color scores were lower in gilts fed Cr nicotinate than in gilts fed Cr picolinate.

Research has indicated that Cr may partially alleviate some of the effects of shipping stress in feedlot calves (NRC, 1997Go), but we are unaware of research evaluating the effect of Cr on shipping stress in pigs. However, if Cr alleviates some of the effects of shipping stress, it might also improve pork quality.

With the heightened awareness of pork quality in the swine industry and possible supplementation of Cr in swine diets, the effects of Cr on pork quality need to be more clearly defined. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of Cr as CrProp on growth, carcass composition, shipping shrink, and pork quality of finishing gilts.


   Materials and Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
Results
 Discussion
 Literature Cited
 
The Louisiana State University Agricultural Center Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee approved procedures related to animal care used in this experiment.

General
Forty crossbred gilts were allotted to two dietary treatments in a randomized complete block design on the basis of BW. Each treatment consisted of four replicates of five pigs per replicate, with an initial mean BW of 73 kg. A two-phase-finisher program was used with diets formulated to provide 0.82 and 0.64% total lysine for the weight ranges of 73 to 80 kg and 80 to 115 kg, respectively. All other AA and nutrients met or exceeded NRC (1998)Go requirements. Dietary treatments included the following: 1) a corn-soybean meal diet containing 15% wheat middlings (basal; Table 1Go); or 2) basal diet + 200 ppb Cr as CrProp (KemTRACE chromium, Kemin Industries, Inc., Des Moines, IA). Treatment diets in meal form and water were provided for ad libitum consumption. Pigs were housed in a curtain-sided building with 1.5 m x 3.0 m pens and concrete slotted floors. Pigs and feeders were weighed every 2 wk for calculation of ADG, ADFI, and G:F. The experimental period lasted 54 d.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Composition of basal diet, as-fed basis
 
Shrink Loss, Carcass, and Pork Quality Evaluation
At trial termination (BW = 115 kg), four pigs from each replicate pen were randomly selected for determination of shrink loss (from feed withdrawal and shipping), carcass traits, and pork quality. On the day before slaughter, selected pigs were weighed and had feed withdrawn. After 18 h of feed withdrawal, pigs were reweighed for determination of shrink due to feed withdrawal. Pigs were then transported for 2.66 h (209.2 km) in two 6.1 m x 2.0 m trailers. Treatments and replications were equally represented within each trailer. The average temperature was 18°C during transportation. After transport, the pigs were weighed again for determination of shrink due to shipping. Immediately after weighing, pigs were bled for determination of plasma cortisol, lactate, and glucose concentrations and then transported to the Louisiana State University Agricultural Center Meats Laboratory for slaughter. Slaughter practices included electrical stunning followed by exsanguination. During exsanguination, a blood sample and rectal temperature were collected. All carcass data (loin muscle area; 10th-rib, 1st-rib, last-rib, and last-lumbar vertebrae backfat thickness; carcass length; and muscle score) were collected on the left side of the carcass after a 44-h chill at 2°C. Loin muscle area, 10th-rib backfat thickness, average backfat thickness, and dressing percent were determined as previously described by Matthews et al. (1998)Go. Fat-free lean, percent lean, and muscle score were determined using the equations and procedures outlined by the NPPC (2000)Go.

Forty-five-minute and 24-h pH were determined in the loin muscle between the 10th and 11th ribs and in the semimembranous muscle of the ham using a hand-held pH meter (model IQ150, IQ Scientific Instruments, Inc., San Diego, CA) fitted with a stainless steel probe (part No. PH07-SS, IQ Scientific Instruments, Inc.). After collection of all carcass data, two 2.54-cm chops were collected from the 11th and 12th ribs, and a loin section from the 4th to 10th ribs also was collected. The 12th-rib chop was used to determine fresh chop drip loss (48 h) using a suspension method described by Matthews et al. (2001a)Go. Fresh chop cooking and total loss were then determined as described by Matthews et al. (2001c)Go. The 11th-rib chop was used to determine frozen chop thaw, cooking, and total losses as previously described by Matthews et al. (2001c)Go. Immediately after collection of the loin section, Commission Internationale de l’Éclairage L*, a*, and b* values (determined using the CIELAB space with a D65 illuminant) were obtained from three orientations on the 10th-rib loin interface using a Minolta spectrophotometer (model CM-508d; Minolta Corp., Ramsey, NJ). Pork quality scores (color, marbling, firmness, and wetness) also were determined on the 10th-rib loin interface using the guidelines of the NPPC (2000)Go. Two individuals independently scored the loins and the average was used. For determination of purge loss, the loin sections were deboned and fat was uniformly trimmed. After trimming, loin sections were weighed, placed in vacuum bags, and vacuum-sealed. The loin sections were refrigerated at 2°C for 21 d, and then removed from the vacuum bags, blotted free of any excess surface moisture, and weighed again to determine the amount of purge loss. Percent purge loss was calculated as follows: ([initial loin weight, g – final loin weight, g]/initial loin weight, g) x100.

Plasma Analyses
After collection of blood, the samples were kept at 2°C for 3 to 8 h, and then centrifuged for 15 min at 1,500 x g at 4°C. Plasma was collected and frozen (–20°C) until subsequent analysis for cortisol, glucose, and lactate concentrations. Plasma cortisol concentrations were determined with a RIA kit (cortisol 125I RIA kit, Costa Mesa, CA). The intraassay CV for cortisol determined with a porcine plasma pool was 6.0%. Glucose concentrations were determined using a spectro-photometric procedure (Sigma, 1990Go). Plasma lactate concentrations were determined using an enzymatic-colorimetric procedure using a lactate reagent (No. 735-10, Sigma, St. Louis, MO) at 540 nm.

Statistical Analyses
Data were analyzed by ANOVA procedures (Steel and Torrie, 1980Go) using the GLM procedure of SAS (SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC) as a randomized complete block design. The pen of pigs served as the experimental unit for all data. Effects were considered significant at P < 0.10.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
Discussion
 Literature Cited
 
Growth performance of pigs was not affected (P = 0.76 to 0.96; Table 2Go) by CrProp. Feed withdrawal, shipping, and overall shrink loss also were not affected (P = 0.14 to 0.91) by CrProp. Carcass length was increased (P < 0.09) in pigs fed CrProp, but other carcass measurements were not affected (P = 0.35 to 0.89) by CrProp.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Effect of chromium propionate on growth performance, shrink loss, and carcass traits of finishing giltsa
 
Forty-five minute pH, subjective pork quality scores (color, marbling, firmness, and wetness), objective color scores (Commission Internationale de l’Éclairage L*, a*, b*), and 45-min and 24-h temperature of the loin muscle were not affected (P = 0.39 to 0.99) by CrProp, but 24-h pH of the loin muscle was increased (P = 0.10) in pigs fed CrProp (Table 3Go). Loin purge loss was decreased (P = 0.01) in pigs fed CrProp. Similarly, drip loss of fresh chops was decreased (P = 0.10); however, cooking and total losses and shear force of fresh chops were not affected (P = 0.35 to 0.53) by CrProp. Thaw, cooking, and total losses of frozen chops and pH and temperature measurements of the ham also were not affected (P = 0.51 to 0.95) by CrProp.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 3. Effect of chromium propionate on pork quality of finishing giltsa
 
Plasma cortisol, lactate, and glucose concentrations were not affected (P = 0.28 to 0.97) after shipping or during exsanguination.


   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
Literature Cited
 
The results of this study indicate that Cr as CrProp had no effect on growth performance and carcass traits (except carcass length) of pigs. A review of the literature indicates that the effect of Cr on growth performance and carcass traits is inconsistent. Many reports have indicated that Cr does not affect growth performance (Evock-Clover et al., 1993Go; Xi et al., 2001Go; Matthews et al., 2003Go), which agrees with our data. Nonetheless, other reports have indicated that Cr improves some aspects of growth performance (Lindemann et al., 1995Go; Mooney and Cromwell, 1995Go, 1997Go). Similarly, the effects of Cr on carcass composition have been inconsistent. Page et al. (1993)Go reported that Cr improved back-fat thickness, loin muscle area, and percent muscling. Mooney and Cromwell (1997)Go reported that Cr increased loin muscle area, but Cr had no effect on backfat thickness or percent lean of finishing pigs. Mooney and Cromwell (1995)Go reported that muscle accretion rates were increased and fat accretion rates were decreased with Cr supplementation, but backfat thickness and loin muscle area were not affected by Cr. Xi et al. (2001)Go reported that lean ratio, fat ratio, backfat thickness, and loin muscle area were all improved with Cr supplementation. In contrast, other reports (Mooney and Cromwell, 1999Go; Matthews et al., 2001bGo, 2003Go) have indicated that Cr does not affect measurements of carcass traits and our data are in agreement with exception of an increase in carcass length.

Research assessing the effects of Cr on pork quality is more limited than research on growth and carcass composition, but it is equally variable. O’Quinn et al. (1998)Go reported that gilts fed Cr picolinate had higher subjective color scores than did gilts fed Cr nicotinate. Matthews et al. (2003)Go reported that CrProp had no effect on color scores (subjective or objective), and our data are in agreement. Matthews et al. (2003)Go also reported that 45-min and 24-h pH measurements were not affected by Cr. Our data are in partial agreement, in that 45-min pH was not affected by Cr, but 24-h pH was higher in pigs fed Cr. O’Quinn et al. (1998)Go reported that Cr picolinate decreased marbling scores, but Matthews et al. (2003)Go reported that CrProp increased marbling scores. Boleman et al. (1995)Go reported that Cr picolinate had no effect on marbling score, which agrees with our findings. Matthews et al. (2003)Go reported that a combined firmness-wetness score tended to be improved in pigs fed CrProp, but our data indicated that individual firmness and wetness scores were not affected by CrProp. Furthermore, reports have indicated that Cr does not affect shear force (Page et al., 1992Go; Matthews et al., 2003Go), and our data are in agreement.

The earlier research assessing water-holding capacity indicated that Cr picolinate does not improve drip loss or cooking loss (Page et al., 1992Go; Boleman et al., 1995Go). However, some of the more recent data indicate that Cr picolinate may decrease drip loss (O’Quinn et al., 1998Go) and that CrProp may decrease thaw loss (Matthews et al., 2003Go). Our data are in agreement with these findings, in that drip loss and purge loss of fresh pork were decreased by CrProp supplementation, but thaw loss was only numerically lower in pigs fed CrProp.

We are unaware of any research that has addressed the percent weight loss (shrink) due to fasting or shipping in pigs fed Cr. Rosebrough and Steele (1981)Go studied the effects of Cr on feed withdrawal in turkey poults, but they did not analyze the weights after feed withdrawal or estimate percentage of weight loss differences because of possible gut fill influences at initiation of feed withdrawal. Our data indicate that the percent weight loss due to feed withdrawal and shipping were not affected by CrProp.

Plasma cortisol, glucose, and lactate concentrations after shipping and during exsanguination were not affected by CrProp supplementation. Matthews et al. (2003)Go proposed that differences in pork quality in pigs fed Cr could possibly be attributed to either decreased stress or a change in glycolytic potential. The absence of a change in plasma cortisol concentrations seems to indicate that Cr does not affect the stress status of the pig; thus, a change in glycolytic potential would seem more likely. We did not assess glycolytic potential, but plasma glucose and lactate concentrations did not differ between pigs fed the control and diets containing CrProp. However, the glycolytic potential of the muscle tissue could still be affected despite the lack of differences in plasma glucose or lactate during exsanguination. Rosebrough and Steele (1981)Go reported that liver glycogen levels and glycogen synthase activity were increased in turkey poults fed Cr, but they did not assess muscle glycogen levels in response to Cr. Research should be conducted to determine whether Cr affects glycolytic potential in muscles of pigs.

The results of our research indicate that CrProp does not affect growth performance or carcass composition, but that it may affect some aspects of pork quality. If it can be demonstrated that Cr consistently affects these quality measurements, these changes in pork quality could be beneficial to the pork industry.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 4. Effect of chromium propionate on plasma constituents of finishing giltsa
 

   Footnotes
 
1 Approved for publication by the Director of the Louisiana Agric. Exp. Stn. as Publ. No. 04-18-0328. Back

2 The authors thank the Louisiana State Univ. Agric. Center Meats Laboratory for assistance with data collection. The authors also thank C. Airhart, R. Payne, J. Shelton, B. Watson, and S. Williams for assistance with data collection and sample analyses. Back

3 Current address: Premium Standard Farms, 22123 Highway 5, P.O. Box 99, Milan, MO 63556. Back

4 Current address: AFB Int., 937 Lone Star Dr., O’Fallon, MO 63366. Back

5 Correspondence—e-mail: lsouthern{at}agctr.lsu.edu.

Received for publication September 3, 2004. Accepted for publication December 22, 2004.


   Literature Cited
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Literature Cited
 


Boleman, S. L., S. J. Boleman, T. D. Bidner, T. L. Ward, L. L. Southern, J. E. Pontif, and M. M. Pike. 1995. Effect of chromium picolinate on growth, body composition, and tissue accretion in pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 73:2033–2042.[Abstract]

Evock-Clover, C. M., M. M. Polansky, R. A. Anderson, and N. C. Steele. 1993. Dietary chromium supplementation with or without somatotropin treatment alters serum hormones and metabolites in growing pigs without affecting growth performance. J. Nutr. 123:1504–1512.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Lindemann, M. D., C. M. Wood, A. F. Harper, E. T. Kornegay, and R. A. Anderson. 1995. Dietary chromium picolinate additions improve gain:feed and carcass characteristics in growing-finishing pigs and increase litter size in reproducing sows. J. Anim. Sci. 73:457–465.[Abstract]

Matthews, J. O., A. D. Higbie, L. L. Southern, D. F. Coombs, T. D. Bidner, and R. L. Odgaard. 2003. Effect of chromium propionate and metabolizable energy on growth, carcass traits, and pork quality of growing-finishing pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 81:191–196.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Matthews, J. O., L. L. Southern, T. D. Bidner, and M. A. Persica. 2001a. Effects of betaine, pen spacing, and slaughter handling method on growth performance, carcass traits, and pork quality of finishing pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 79:967–974.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Matthews, J. O., L. L. Southern, J. M. Fernandez, J. E. Pontif, T. D. Bidner, and R. L. Odgaard. 2001b. Effect of chromium picolinate and chromium propionate on glucose and insulin kinetics of growing barrows and on growth and carcass traits of growing-finishing barrows. J. Anim. Sci. 79:2172–2178.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Matthews, J. O., L. L. Southern, A. D. Higbie, M. A. Persica, and T. D. Bidner. 2001c. Effects of betaine on growth, carcass composition, pork quality, and plasma metabolites of finishing pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 79:722–728.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Matthews, J. O., L. L. Southern, J. E. Pontif, A. D. Higbie, and T. D. Bidner. 1998. Interactive effects of betaine, crude protein, and net energy in finishing pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 76:2444–2455.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Mooney, K. W., and G. L. Cromwell. 1995. Effects of dietary chromium picolinate supplementation on growth, carcass characteristics, and accretion rates of carcass tissues in growing-finishing swine. J. Anim. Sci. 73:3351–3357.[Abstract]

Mooney, K. W., and G. L. Cromwell. 1997. Efficacy of chromium picolinate and chromium chloride as potential carcass modifiers in swine. J. Anim. Sci. 75:2661–2671.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Mooney, K. W., and G. L. Cromwell. 1999. Efficacy of chromium picolinate on performance and tissue accretion in pigs with different lean gain potential. J. Anim. Sci. 77:1188–1198.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

NPPC. 2000. Pork Composition and Quality Assessment Procedures. Natl. Pork Prod. Counc., Des Moines, IA.

NRC. 1998. Pages 124–142 in Nutrient Requirement of Swine. 10th ed. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.

NRC. 1997. The Role of Chromium in Animal Nutrition. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.

O’Quinn, P. R., J. W. Smith, II, J. L. Nelssen, M. D. Tokach, R. D. Goodband, and K. Q. Owen. 1998. Effects of source and level of added chromium on growth performance and carcass characteristics of growing-finishing pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 76(Suppl. 2):56. (Abstr.)

Page, T. G., S. L. Boleman, M. M. Pike, T. L. Ward, S. J. Boleman, L. L. Southern, T. D. Bidner, and J. E. Pontif. 1992. Effect of chromium picolinate on carcass traits and aging on pork quality. J. Anim. Sci. 70(Suppl. 1):218. (Abstr.)

Page, T. G., L. L. Southern, T. L. Ward, and D. L. Thompson, Jr. 1993. Effect of chromium picolinate on growth and serum and carcass traits of growing-finishing pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 71:656–662.[Abstract]

Rosebrough, R. W., and N. C. Steele. 1981. Effect of supplemental dietary chromium or nicotinic acid on carbohydrate metabolism during basal, starvation, and refeeding periods in poults. Poultry Sci. 60:407–417.[Medline]

Shelton, J. L., R. L. Payne, S. L. Johnson, T. D. Bidner, L. L. Southern, and R. L. Odgaard. 2003. Effect of chromium propionate on growth, carcass traits, pork quality, and plasma metabolites in growing-finishing pigs. J. Anim. Sci. 81:2515–2524.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Sigma. 1990. Glucose (Trinder). Quantitative, enzymatic determination of glucose in serum or plasma at 505 nm. Tech. Bull. No. 315. Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis, MO.

Steel, R. G. D., and J. H. Torrie. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., New York.

Xi, G., Z. Xu, S. Wu, and S. Chen. 2001. Effect of chromium picolinate on growth performance, carcass characteristics, serum metabolites, and metabolism of lipid in pigs. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 14:258–262.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J ANIM SCIHome page
M. D. Lindemann, G. L. Cromwell, H. J. Monegue, and K. W. Purser
Effect of chromium source on tissue concentration of chromium in pigs
J Anim Sci, November 1, 2008; 86(11): 2971 - 2978.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Matthews, J. O.
Right arrow Articles by Bidner, T. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Matthews, J. O.
Right arrow Articles by Bidner, T. D.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS