Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:49:48.516Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variation in muscle fibre diameter among sections and intrasections and between contralateral muscles in seven bovine muscles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

E. R. Johnson  and
A. W. Beattie
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Sectional and intrasectional variations in muscle fibre diameter over a restricted axial range were examined in seven bovine muscles from foetuses, calves and steers. Significant sectional variations were found in four muscles, while two muscles showed significant intrasectional variations. The results indicate that sampling sites require accurate definition in comparative studies of muscle fibre diameter.

Two extensor muscles of the foreleg, m. extensor carpi radialis and m. extensor digitorum communis showed neither sectional nor intrasectional variation in muscle fibre diameter and appear to be more satisfactory muscles for use in muscle fibre growth studies than m. longissimus thoracis et lumborum.

A comparison of mean muscle fibre diameter in 60 pairs of contralateral muscles showed that there were no significant differences in 52 of the muscle pairs.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 81 , Issue 1 , August 1973 , pp. 9 - 14
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973

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

Baker, J. R. (1958). Principles of Biological Microtechnique. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
Brady, D. E. (1937). A study of the factors influencing tenderness and texture of beef. Proc. 30th Ann. Meet. Am. Soc. Anim. Prod. p. 246.Google Scholar
Butler, O. D., Garber, M. J. & Smith, R. L. (1956). Beef carcass composition and yield of wholesale cuts as estimated from left and right sides. J. Anim. Sci. 15, 891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butterfield, R. M. (1963). A study of the musculature of the steer carcase. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.Google Scholar
Butterfield, R. M. & May, N. D. S. (1966). Muscles of the Ox. Brisbane, Australia: University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar
Covington, R. C., Tuma, H. J., Grant, D. L. & Dayton, A. D. (1970). Various chemical and histological characteristics of beef muscle as related to tenderness. J. Anim. Sci. 30, 191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everitt, G. C. & Jury, K. E. (1966). Effects of sex and gonadectomy on the growth and development of Southdown x Romney cross lambs. Part II. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 66, 15.Google Scholar
Farrell, P. R. & Fedde, M. R. (1969). Uniformity of structural characteristics throughout the length of skeletal muscle fibres. Anat. Eec. 164, 219.Google Scholar
Goldspink, G. (1961). Fixation of muscle. Nature, Lond. 192, 1305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldspink, G. (1962). Studies of postembryonic growth and development of skeletal muscle, I. Proc. R. Ir. Acad. 62B, 135.Google Scholar
Hegarty, P. V. J. & Naude, R. T. (1969). The separation and measurement of unfixed mammalian muscle fibres. Vet. Rec. 84, 235.Google Scholar
Hiner, R. L., Hankins, O. G., Sloane, H. S., Fellers, C. R. & Anderson, E. E. (1953). Fibre diameter in relation to tenderness of beef muscle. Fd Res. 18, 364.Google Scholar
Joubert, D. M. (1956). An analysis of factors influencing post-natal growth and development of the muscle fibre. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 47, 59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lasley, E. L. & Kline, E. A. (1957). Splitting and cutting errors in swine carcass evaluation. J. Anim. Sci. 16, 485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Livingston, D. M. S., Blair, R. & English, P. R. (1966). The usefulness of muscle fibre diameter in studies of the lean meat content of pigs. Anim. Prod. 8, 267.Google Scholar
Luciani, L. (1921). Human Physiology, volume V, (ed. Pembrey, M. S.). London: MacMillam.Google Scholar
Rowe, R. W. D. & Goldspink, G. (1968). Surgically induced hypertrophy in skeletal muscles of the laboratory mouse. A. nat. Rec. 161, 69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowe, R. W. D. & Goldspink, G. (1969). Muscle fibre growth in five different muscles in both sexes of mice. I. J. Anat. 104, 519.Google Scholar
Swanson, L. A., Kline, E. A. & Goll, D. E. (1965). Variability of muscle fibre size in bovine longissimus dorsi. J. Anim. Sci. 24, 97.Google Scholar
Trautman, A. & Fiebiger, J. (1952). Fundamentals of the Histology of Domestic Animals. Translated and revised by Habel, R. E. and Biberstein, E. L.. London: Bailliere, Tindall and Cox.Google Scholar
Tuma, H. J., Venable, J. H., Wuthier, P. R. & Henrickson, L. R. (1962). Relationship of fibre diameter to tenderness and meatiness as influenced by bovine age. J. Anim. Sci. 21, 33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, L. R. (1944). The influence of sex upon carcass quality and efficiency of food utilization. Proc. N. Z. Soc. Anim. Prod. 4, 64.Google Scholar
Wilson, P. N. (1958). The effect of nutrition on the growth and development of the East African dwarf goat, II. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 51, 4.Google Scholar