Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T06:13:36.614Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A survey of the carcass characteristics of the main types of British lamb

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

A. J. Kempster  and
A. Cuthbertson
A. J. Kempster
Affiliation:
Meat and Livestock Commission, PO Box 44, Queensway House, Bletchley, Milton Keynes, MK2 2EF
A. Cuthbertson
Affiliation:
Meat and Livestock Commission, PO Box 44, Queensway House, Bletchley, Milton Keynes, MK2 2EF
Get access

Summary

Commercial lamb carcasses were surveyed in 1971/72 as part of the development programme for a national classification scheme for Great Britain. Carcasses of 421 castrated male lambs were evaluated and their left sides dissected. The sample comprised seven groups representing the main breed types in the national population. Within these groups, lambs were selected from three regions on each of three occasions corresponding with the beginning, middle and end of the normal slaughtering season for each group.

The overall means (±SD) for side weight and percentage subcutaneous fat in the side were 8·3 ± 1·8 kg and 12·6 ± 3·2 respectively. When adjusted to the overall mean subcutaneous fat percentage (constant % SF), the breed-type side weight means ranged from 6·4 kg (Welsh Mountain) to 10·8 kg (British Longwool). At constant% SF, lambs slaughtered earlier in the season were lighter than those of the same breed type slaughtered later.

Significant differences (P<0·05) were recorded between breed-type groups in fat distribution and lean/bone ratio. These were reflected as important differences in percentage lean at constant % SF, group means ranging from 54·5 (lambs by Suffolk rams out of Scottish Halfbred ewes) to 56·7 (lambs by British Longwool rams out of hill ewes).

When lambs of the same breed type from different regions were compared at constant % SF and constant side weight, there were few important differences in carcass characteristics.

The results are discussed in relation to the classification scheme which has since been introduced by the Meat and Livestock Commission.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , October 1977 , pp. 165 - 179
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1977

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

Boccard, R. and Dumont, B. L. 1960. [Study on meat production in sheep. II. Changes in the relative importance of different body parts of lamb carcasses.] Annls Zootech. 9: 355–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, J. C. and Hendy, C. R. C. 1972. A study of retail requirements and genetic parameters of carcass quality in Polled Dorset Horn sheep. Anim. Prod. 14: 189–198.Google Scholar
Cuthbertson, A., Harrington, G. and Smith, R. J. 1972. Tissue separation—to assess beef and lamb variation. Proc. Br. Soc. Anim. Prod. (New Series) 1: 113–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, H. P., Read, J. L. and Russell, W. S. 1970. Influence of litter size and breed of sire on carcass weight and quality of lambs. Anim. Prod. 12: 281–290.Google Scholar
Jackson, T. H. and Mansour, Y. A. 1974. Differences between groups of lamb carcasses chosen for good and poor conformation. Anim. Prod. 19: 93–105.Google Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Avis, P. R. D., Cuthbertson, A. and Harrington, G. 1976a. Prediction of the lean content of lamb carcasses of different breed types. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 86: 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kempster, A. J., Cuthbertson, A. and Harrington, G. 1976b. Fat distribution in steer carcasses of different breeds and crosses. 1. Distribution between depots. Anim. Prod. 23: 25–34.Google Scholar
Kirton, A. H. 1964. Breeding dual purpose sheep—how important is conformation? Proc. Ruakura Fmrs' Conf. Week, pp. 11–24.Google Scholar
Kirton, A. H. and Pickering, F. S. 1967. Factors associated with differences in carcass conformation in lamb. N.Z. Jl agric. Res. 10: 183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClelland, T. H. and Russel, A. J. F. 1972. The distribution of body fat in Scottish Blackface and Finnish Landrace lambs. Anim. Prod. 15: 301–306.Google Scholar
MacDougall, D. B., Cuthbertson, A. and Smith, R. J. 1969. The assessment of pig meat paleness by reflectance photometry. Anim. Prod. 11: 243–246.Google Scholar
Seebeck, R. M. 1968. A dissection study of the distribution of tissues in lamb carcasses. Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 7: 297–302.Google Scholar
Timon, V. M. 1963. The measurement and inheritance of lamb carcass traits. Ph.D. Thesis, Sch. Agric, Univ. Durham.Google Scholar
Timon, V. M. and Bichard, M. 1965. Quantitative estimates of lamb carcass composition. 1. Sample joints. Anim. Prod. 7: 173–181.Google Scholar
Visscher, Z. H. 1974. A crossbreeding experiment with three breeds of sheep. Proc. Working Symp. Breed Evaluation and Crossing Experiments With Farm Animals, Zeist, Netherlands, pp. 475–491.Google Scholar
Weiner, B. J. 1971. Statistical Principles in Experimental Design, pp. 190–200. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar