Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T20:27:18.822Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A simple method to increase precision or reduce expense in regression experiments to predict the proportion of lean meat of carcasses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

B. Engel  and
P. Walstra
B. Engel
Affiliation:
Agricultural Mathematics Group, PO Box 100, 6700 AC Wageningen, The Netherlands
P. Walstra
Affiliation:
Research Institute for Animal Production ‘Schoonoord’, PO Box 501, 3700 AM Zeist, The Netherlands
Get access

Abstract

By a combination of complete and incomplete dissections a considerable increase of precision or reduction of expense may be obtained in the construction of a prediction formula for the proportion of lean meat of a carcass from objective carcass measurements. This approach, referred to as double-regression, is demonstrated on data involving dissection of pig carcasses in The Netherlands. Advantages of double-regression relative to ordinary regression with respect to precision and experimental cost are discussed. Expressions for optimal sample sizes at fixed total cost are derived.

Keywords

carcass compositionpigsregression
Type
Papers
Information
Animal Production , Volume 53 , Issue 3 , December 1991 , pp. 353 - 359
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1991

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

Anonymous. 1981. Commercial pig evaluation in the Netherlands 1979-1981. Research Institute for Animal Production ‘Schoonoord‘, report B-180.Google Scholar
Cochran, W. G. 1963. Sampling techniques. 2nd ed. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Conniffe, D. and Moran, M. A. 1972. Double sampling with regression in comparative studies of carcass composition. Biometrics 28:1011–1023.Google Scholar
Cook, G. L., Jones, D. W. and Kempster, A. J. 1983. A note on a simple criterion for choosing among sample joints for use in double sampling. Animal Production 36: 493–495.Google Scholar
Engel, B. 1987. Increasing precision or reducing expense in regression experiments by using information from a concomitant variable. Agricultural Mathematics Group, Wageningen, Research report LWA-87-1.Google Scholar
Engel, B. and Walstra, P. 1991. Increasing precision or reducing expense in regression experiments by using information from a concomitant variable. Biometrics 47: 13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Community. 1984. EC Regulation No. 3220/84, determining the Community scale for grading pig carcasses.Google Scholar
European Community. 1985. EC Regulation No. 2967/85, laying down detailed rules for the application of the community scale for grading pig carcasses.Google Scholar
Lane, P., Galwey, N. and Alvey, N.. 1987. GENSTAT 5 an introduction. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Walstra, P. 1980. Growth and carcass composition from birth to maturity in relation to feeding level and sex in Dutch Landrace pigs. Mededelingen, Landbouwhogeschool Wageningen, 80-4.Google Scholar
Walstra, P. 1986. Assessment of the regression formula for estimation of the lean meat percentage by HGP- measurements in The Netherlands. EC Working Paper, Brussels VI/4849/86.Google Scholar
Walstra, P. 1987. The instrumental classification and grading of pigs in The Netherlands. Workshop. Experiences in Europe about pork objective grading, Reggio Emilia.Google Scholar