Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T01:46:36.717Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Influence of rearing system, diet and gender on performance, carcass traits and meat quality of Polish Landrace pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2012

G. Maiorano*
Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Food Sciences, University of Molise, Via F. De Sanctis, snc, 86100 Campobasso, Italy
W. Kapelański
Department of Pig Breeding, University of Technology and Life Sciences in Bydgoszcz, ul. Mazowiecka 28, 85-084 Bydgoszcz, Poland
M. Bocian
Department of Pig Breeding, University of Technology and Life Sciences in Bydgoszcz, ul. Mazowiecka 28, 85-084 Bydgoszcz, Poland
R. Pizzuto
Department of Health Sciences, University of Molise, Via F. De Sanctis, snc, 86100 Campobasso, Italy
J. Kapelańska
Department of Pig Breeding, University of Technology and Life Sciences in Bydgoszcz, ul. Mazowiecka 28, 85-084 Bydgoszcz, Poland
Get access


Forty-eight Polish Landrace pigs (initially 32.43 ± 0.70 kg live weight) were assigned to a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial arrangement in order to assess the effects of the rearing system (outdoor v. indoor), diet (with corn grain silage v. without corn grain silage) and gender (barrows v. gilts) on performance, carcass traits, meat quality and intramuscular collagen (IMC) characteristics. During the trial period of 14 weeks, each group was housed in a pen of 12 m2, and the outdoor-reared animals had access to a paddock of 24 m2. Pigs were fed a diet computed according to standard requirements and supplied on a basis of 9% of metabolic weight (live weight0.75). Pigs were slaughtered at 110.69 ± 0.85 kg. The rearing system did not significantly affect growth, hot and cold dressing, meat quality of m. longissimus lumborum or IMC. Outdoor pigs had less (P < 0.05) backfat thickness, slightly higher (P = 0.082) lean percent and a meat with lower pH and fat than the conventional system. In light of these results, alternative pig rearing systems with indoor space and free outdoor access could be an interesting production system for the pigs. Compared with the pigs fed diets with corn grain silage, those fed diets without corn had higher (P < 0.05) lean, ham percentage and IMC content, lower (P < 0.05) neck percentage but similar main tissue components of the ham and meat quality. Compared with the gilts, barrows were fatter and showed a meat with different physico-chemical traits, which was slightly more tender and had similar IMC properties.

Product quality, human health and well-being
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2012

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.)


Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) 1999. Official method 950.46 moisture in meat; official method 991.36 fat (crude) in meat and meat products; official method 981.10 crude protein in meat. Block digestion method; official method 920.153 ash in meat. In Official methods of analysis (ed. P Cunniff), vol. II, 16th edition, pp. 115. AOAC, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.Google Scholar
Barton-Gade, PA 1987. Meat and fat quality in boars, castrates and gilts. Livestock Production Science 16, 187196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blasco, A, Gou, P, Gispert, M, Estany, J, Soler, Q, Diestre, A, Tibau, J 1994. Comparison of five types of pig crosses. I. Growth and carcass traits. Livestock Production Science 40, 171178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonneau, M, Lebret, B 2010. Production systems and influence on eating quality of pork. Meat Science 84, 293300.Google Scholar
Boutten, B, Brazier, M, Morche, N, Morel, A, Vendeuvre, JL 2000. Effects of animal and muscle characteristics on collagen and consequences for ham production. Meat Science 55, 233238.Google Scholar
Burgstaller, G 1995. Limited use of CCM for finishing pigs. Mais 4, 116119.Google Scholar
Corino, C, Musella, M, Pastorelli, G, Rossi, R, Paolone, K, Costanza, L, Manchisi, A, Maiorano, G 2008. Influences of dietary conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and total lysine content on growth, carcass characteristics and meat quality of heavy pigs. Meat Science 79, 307316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Correa, JA, Gariépy, C, Marcoux, M, Faucitano, L 2008. Effects of growth rate, sex and slaughter weight on fat characteristics of pork bellies. Meat Science 80, 550554.Google Scholar
Duizer, LM, Gullett, EA, Findlay, CJ 1996. The relationship between sensory time-intensity, physiological electromyography and instrumental texture profile analysis measurements of beef tenderness. Meat Science 42, 215224.Google Scholar
Enfält, AC, Lundström, K, Hansson, I, Lundeheim, N, Nyström, PE 1997. Effects of outdoor rearing and sire breed (Duroc or Yorkshire) on carcass composition and sensory and technological meat quality. Meat Science 45, 115.Google Scholar
Eyre, DR, Koob, TJ, Van Ness, KP 1984. Quantitation of hydroxypyridinium crosslinks in collagen by high-performance liquid chromatography. Analytical Biochemistry 137, 380388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernández-Dueñas, DM, Myers, AJ, Scramlin, SM, Parks, CW, Carr, SN, Killefer, J, McKeith, FK 2008. Carcass, meat quality, and sensory characteristics of heavy body weight pigs fed ractopamine hydrochloride (Paylean). Journal of Animal Science 86, 35443550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gentry, JG, McGlone, JJ, Miller, MF, Blanton, JR Jr 2002. Diverse birth and rearing environment effects on pig growth and meat quality. Journal of Animal Science 80, 17071715.Google Scholar
Grabowicz, M, Dorszewski, P, Kapelański, W, Obryk, M 2006. Suitability of chemically preserved wet maize grain in pig fattening. Annals of Animal Science, Suppl. No. 2/1 (2006), 155160.Google Scholar
Grau, R, Hamm, R 1957. Über das Wasserbindungsvermögen des Saugetiermuskels II. Mitt. Über die Bestimmung der Wasserbindung des Muskels. Zeitschrift Fur Lebensmittel-Untersuchung Und-Forschung 105, 446460.Google Scholar
Harris, PV, Shorthose, WR 1988. Meat texture. In Developments in meat science (ed. R Lawrie), 4th edition, pp. 245296. Elsevier, London, UK.Google Scholar
Högberg, A, Pickova, J, Stern, S, Lundström, K, Bylund, AC 2004. Fatty acid composition and tocopherol concentrations in muscle of entire male, castrated male and female pigs, reared in an indoor or outdoor housing system. Meat Science 68, 659665.Google Scholar
Honikel, KO 1987. The water binding of meat. Fleischwirtschaft 67, 10981102.Google Scholar
Huff-Lonergan, E, Lonergan, SM, Vaske, L 2000. pH relationships to quality attributes: tenderness. American Meat Science Association's Reciprocal Meat Conference Proceedings 53, 14.Google Scholar
Lebret, B 2008. Effects of feeding and rearing systems on growth, carcass composition and meat quality in pigs. Animal 2, 15481558.Google Scholar
Lebret, B, Meunier-Salaün, MC, Foury, A, Mormède, P, Dransfield, E, Dourmad, JY 2006. Influence of rearing conditions on performance, behavioral, and physiological responses of pigs to preslaughter handling, carcass traits, and meat quality. Journal of Animal Science 84, 24362447.Google Scholar
Maiorano, G, Filetti, F, Gambacorta, M, Ciarlariello, A, Cavone, C 2003. Effects of rearing system and genotype on intramuscular collagen properties of pigs. Italian Journal of Animal Science 2 (suppl. 1), 385387.Google Scholar
McCormick, RJ 2009. Collagen. In Applied muscle biology and meat science (ed. M Du and RJ McCormick), pp. 129148. CRC Press, London, UK.Google Scholar
Millet, S, Cox, E, Van Paemel, M, Raes, K, Lobeau, M, De Saeger, S, De Smet, S, Goddeeris, BM, Janssens, GP 2006. Immunocompetence in organically fed finishing pigs: effect of corn cob mix. Veterinary Journal 171, 301307.Google Scholar
Rajic, I, Sevkovic, N, Maricic, L, Manojlovic, S 1988. Maize corn silage in fattening pigs. Acta Veterinaria 38, 201208.Google Scholar
Rodríguez-Sánchez, JA, Ripoll, G, Calvo, S, Ariño, L, Latorre, MA 2009. The effect of seasonality of the growing–finishing period on carcass, meat and fat characteristics of heavy barrows and gilts. Meat Science 83, 571576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Różycki, M 1996. Assessment methods at Slaughter Performance Testing Stations. In Stan Hodowli i Wyniki Oceny Świń Wydawnictwo Własne (ed. National Research Institute of Animal Production) IZ. R. XIV, pp. 69–82. Kraków, PL.Google Scholar
Różycki, M 2003. Selected traits of Polish pedigree pigs – progress in the carcass meat deposition and meat quality. Animal Science Papers and Reports 21, 163171.Google Scholar
Sather, AP, Jones, SDM, Schaefer, AL, Colyn, J, Roberston, WM 1997. Feedlot performance, carcass composition and meat quality of free-range reared pigs. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 77, 225232.Google Scholar
Stoller, GM, Zerby, HN, Moeller, SJ, Baas, TJ, Johnson, C, Watkins, LE 2003. The effect of feeding ractopamine (Paylean) on muscle quality and sensory characteristics in three diverse genetic lines of swine. Journal of Animal Science 81, 15081516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szalata, M, Pospiech, E, ̡yczyński, A, Urbaniak, M, Frankiewicz, A, Mikołajczak, B, Medyński, A, Rzosińska, W, Bartkowiak, Z, Danyluk, B 1999. Tenderness of meat from pigs of various quality. Roczniki Instytutu Przemysłu Mięsnego i Tłuszczowego 36, 6176.Google Scholar
Terlouw, C 2005. Stress reactions at slaughter and meat quality in pigs: genetic background and prior experience. A brief review of recent findings. Livestock Production Science 94, 125135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woessner, JF Jr 1961. The determination of hydroxyproline in tissue and protein samples containing small proportions of this imino acid. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics 93, 440447.Google Scholar