Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:08:14.243Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Belgian Piétrain as a sire of crossbred pigs slaughtered at 64 kg live weight. 1. Performance and carcass characteristics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

A. N. Howard  and
W. C. Smith
A. N. Howard
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture, The University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU
W. C. Smith
Affiliation:
Faculty of Agriculture, The University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU
Get access

Summary

A Piétrain boar was placed on each of six farms where the terminal sire was a Large White and the breeding females were either Large Whites or Large White × Landrace. Cooperators were requested to obtain 10 litters by each boar and record their performance to slaughter at 64 kg live weight. Farrowing rate to first service was relatively higher for sows mated with Large White boars but not significantly so. Pietrain-cross piglets were heavier at weaning (7·5%) but breed of boar did not influence other litter traits or age of progeny at slaughter. Pietrain crosses had higher carcass yields (2·4%), shorter carcasses (2·5%) and larger eye muscles in cross-section (10·6%) and in commercial evaluations relatively more were placed in the highest grade.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , December 1976 , pp. 389 - 393
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1976

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

Bader, J. 1965. [The Pietrain—its performance and significance in cross-breeding (commercial crossing).] SchrReihe Max-PIanck-Inst. Tierzucht No. 23.Google Scholar
Glaner, H. D. 1970. [Comparison of fattening, carcass and breeding performance of pig breeds and crosses on the results from a large East Holstein farm.] Ziichtungskunde 42: 67–78.Google Scholar
Hazel, L. N. 1946. The covariance analysis of multiple classification tables with unequal sub-class numbers. Biometrics 2: 21–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, J. W. B. 1968. Crossbreeding experiments. In Index of Research supported by PIDA. Pig Industry Development Authority, London.Google Scholar
Kirsch, W., Fender, M., Rabold, K., Fewson, D. and Schoen, P. 1963. [Comparative breeding, fattening and carcass trials with Improved Landrace, Pietrain and Fi crossbred pigs.] Züchtungskunde 35: 254–264.Google Scholar
Knoertzer, E. 1961a. [Some biometric data on the Pietrain pig.] Bull. tech. Inf. Ingrs Servs agric. 164: 977–1011.Google Scholar
Knoertzer, E. 1961b. [Crossing Pietrain and Large White pigs.] Bull. tech. Inf. Ingrs Servs agric. 165: 1021–1042.Google Scholar
Lean, I. J., Curran, M. K., Duckworth, J. E. and Holmes, W. 1972. Studies on Belgian Pietrain pigs. 1. A comparison of Pietrain, Landrace and Pietrain Landrace crosses in growth, carcass characteristics and meat quality. Anim. Prod. 15: 1–9.Google Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. 1971. Pietrain pigs—removal of controls. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, London (Mimeograph).Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1967. Statistical Methods. 6th ed. Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, la.Google Scholar
Sokal, R. R. and Rohlf, F. J. 1969. Biometry. The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Spath, H. R. 1964. [The Pietrain pig. A comparison of its performance characteristics in Belgium and Germany.] Dissertation. Landw. Fak., Georg-August-Univ., Gottingen.Google Scholar
Vos, M. P. M. 1971. Crossing performance of Dutch pig breeds. Annls Genet. Sel. anim. 3: 99–100.Google ScholarPubMed