Performance of Cinta Senese pigs and their crosses with Large White. 1 Muscle and subcutaneous fat characteristics

• Published in: Meat science Vol. 69; no. 3; pp. 545 - 550
• Main Authors: Franci, Oreste, Bozzi, Riccardo, Pugliese, Carolina, Acciaioli, Anna, Campodoni, Gustavo, Gandini, Gustavo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford Elsevier Ltd 01.03.2005; Elsevier
• Subjects: Animal productions; Biological and medical sciences; Cinta Senese pig; Crossbreeding; Fat quality; Food industries; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Local breeds; Meat and meat product industries; Meat quality; Terrestrial animal productions; Vertebrates; Crossbreeding; Cinta Senese pig; Fat quality; Local breeds; Meat quality; Farming animal; Meat product; Pig; Meat; Vertebrata; Meat animals; Mammalia; Quality; Fat; Muscle; Artiodactyla; Ungulata
• ISSN: 0309-1740; 1873-4138
• DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2004.10.005

Twenty-nine Cinta Senese (CS), 29 Large WhitexCinta Senese (LWxCS) and 12 Large White (LW) pigs were reared indoors and fed a commercial mixture. After slaughter (at avg. weight of 136, 139, 155 kg for CS, LWxCS, LW, respectively), a portion of the loin (sample cut) was dissected into lean and Longissimus lumborum (LL), intermuscular fat and bone. Chemical and physical analyses were conducted on LL. Chemical composition and fatty acid profile were determined on the outer layer of backfat. CS pigs had the highest percentage of bone and the lowest of lean in the sample cut, LWxCS showing intermediate values between parental breeds. In LL, CS showed lower moisture (73.23% vs. 74.28%) and higher fat content (3.19% vs. 0.87%) than LW; pH24 was higher in CS (5.78) than in LWxCS (5.67) and LW (5.50); meat was more red in CS and LWxCS than in LW; CS showed higher water holding capacity than LW, with LWxCS at an intermediate position; raw meat was tougher in CS than in LW, but differences disappeared after cooking. In backfat CS had lower moisture (6.5% vs. 6.9% and 7.8%) and higher lipid content (81.4 vs. 78.1 and 77.5%) than LWxCS and LW; concerning fatty acid composition, CS showed less SFA (saturated fatty acids; 36.2% vs. 37.12% and 37.7%) than the other two genotypes, and, together with LWxCS, less PUFA (polyunsaturated fatty acids; 10.4% and 10.2% vs. 11.1%) and more oleic acid (50.3% and 49.8% vs. 48.5%) than LW. Overall, evidence of additive genetic effects was present for most qualitative parameters with crosses showing intermediate values between parental breeds.