Abstract #577
Section: Nonruminant Nutrition
Session: Nonruminant Nutrition: Feed ingredients
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Tuesday 3:30 PM–3:45 PM
Location: Sebastian I-4
Session: Nonruminant Nutrition: Feed ingredients
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Tuesday 3:30 PM–3:45 PM
Location: Sebastian I-4
# 577
Effect of duck grease on growth performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality in growing-finishing pigs.
Jie Yu*1, Li Zhu1, Bing Yu1, Jun He1, Ping Zheng1, Xiangbing Mao1, Quyuan Wang1, Zhiqing Huang1, Junqiu Luo1, Daiwen Chen1, 1Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Key Words: duck grease, pork quality, growing-finishing pigs
Effect of duck grease on growth performance, carcass characteristics, and meat quality in growing-finishing pigs.
Jie Yu*1, Li Zhu1, Bing Yu1, Jun He1, Ping Zheng1, Xiangbing Mao1, Quyuan Wang1, Zhiqing Huang1, Junqiu Luo1, Daiwen Chen1, 1Animal Nutrition Institute, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Duck grease (DG), a by-product of duck industry, is abundant and inexpensive as a potential energy feed source because more than 60% of global ducks are produced in China. However, the nutritive value of DG in swine diet has not been assessed. In our previous study, the apparent digestible energy and metabolizable energy have been evaluated. The present study addressed the effects of DG compared with soybean oil (SO) on growth performance, carcass characteristics and meat quality in a 82 d feeding program. A total of 72 growing barrows (31.62 ± 2.31 kg initial body weight) were randomly assigned into 2 dietary treatment groups in 6 replicates/pens utilizing a completely randomized design. The pigs were fed a corn-soybean meal based diet containing same amount (2% in growing diet, 1% in finishing diet) of SO or DG. One pig at average body weight in each pen was electrically stunned and slaughtered at the end of the feeding experiment, and carcass characteristics and pork quality were measured. Unpaired t-test was applied to evaluate the comparisons between 2 groups. Growth performance and carcass characteristics were not different (P > 0.05). Pigs fed DG improved the apparent total-tract digestibility of dry matter (DM; 82.19 vs. 86.46%, P < 0.05) and gross energy (GE; 81.22 vs. 84.17%, P < 0.05). Visual color, ultimate pH, marbling score, and driploss were not different between DG and SO treatment. The intramuscular fat (IMF) content (2.77 vs. 3.67%, P < 0.05) and muscle fiber density (1112.82 vs. 1389.97 fiber number /mm2, P < 0.05) in longissimus dorsi (LM) were increased, while slice shear force was decreased in DG fed pigs (5.94 vs. 4.54 kg, P < 0.05). In conclusion, dietary DG improved pork quality without negatively influencing growth performance and carcass characteristics in growing-finishing pigs.
Key Words: duck grease, pork quality, growing-finishing pigs