Breed and crossbreeding effects on weight, yield and quality of heavy italian dry-cured hams

E L S E V I E R Livestock Production Science 40 (1994) 197-205

LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION

SCIENCE

Breed and crossbreeding effects on weight, yield and quality of heavy italian dry-cured hams

Luigi Gallo a, Paolo Montobbio b, Paolo Carnier a, Giovanni Bittante a'* aDepartment of Animal Science, University of Padua, Via Gradenigo 6, 35131 Padua, Italy

bltalian Breeders Association (A.LA.), Via Tomassetti 9, Rome, Italy

Received 29 March 1993; Accepted 25 January 1994

Abstract

The aim of this study was to estimate direct heterosis and breed additive effects of Belgian Landrace (BL), Duroc (DU) and Spotted Poland (SP) in comparison with Italian Large White (LW) on weight, losses and percentage yields during processing, and qualitative traits of heavy dry-cured hams. Hams from 290 pigs of 16 genetic types, produced by LW, BL X LW, DU X LW and SP X LW gilts mated with LW, BL, DU and SP boars, were controlled during industrial processing; a sub-sample of 116 dry-cured hams were deboned and chemical composition, colour and organoleptic properties were assessed. Technological processing traits were slightly influenced by additive effects and the imported breeds gave yields of dry-cured hams comparable to those of LW. BL crossbred pigs reduced the incidence of bone on the weight of seasoned ham (P < 0.01 ), but tended to have a higher percentage of ham discarded during processing than LW and a lower ham flavour score (P < 0.05). These findings suggest a lesser dry-curing suitability of BL-derived hams, even though no pigs gave PSE meat. DU decreased the incidence of bone (P<0.05), protein content (P<0.05) and flavour score (P<0.10) and increased dry matter and sodium chloride (P < 0.05) of dry-cured hams with respect to LW. SP gave lighter boned hams than LW (P < 0.01 ), but with higher trimming discards (P < 0.05), and did not exert any influence on quality traits of seasoned hams. Direct heterosis never affected weight, losses and quality traits of seasoned hams, suggesting a negligible effect of crossbreeding on processing traits of pork meat.

Keywords: Pigs; Breed effect; Crossbreeding; Dry-cured hams

1, Introduction

Pork meat demand in Italy is largely oriented toward high quality processed products, above all the raw seasoned Parma type ham, the most valuable and typical Italian pig product. To satisfy this demand the meat processing industry requires pigs slaughtered at heavy liveweight ( 150 kg or more), with a good degree of maturity and effective processing suitability of the meat

*Corresponding author

0301-6226/94/$07.00 © 1994 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved SSD10301-6226(94)00010-5

( Santoro et al., 1980, Russo et al., 1989). Genetic strat- egies to increase the revenues of pig production should therefore refer to the whole productive system; so, not only live animal and carcass traits, but also quality and processing suitability of the meat, particularly for dry- cured ham processing, should be taken into account.

Crossbreeding between boars of imported breeds and sows of the Italian Large White and Landrace strains to produce heavy pigs has been widespread in Italy, to exploit the favourable effects of this mating system on reproductive and growth performance (Sellier, 1976,

198 L. Gallo et al. / Livestock Production Science 40 (1994) 197-205

Johnson, 1981) and to take advantage of the genetic improvement carried out on some European and Amer- ican breeds. However, breed and/or heterosis effects on meat quality traits have been investigated mainly on fresh meat (Hovenier et al., 1993), whereas, with few exceptions (Matassino et al., 1987, Bittante et al., 1991 ), processing suitability for raw seasoned "Parma type" ham has not been studied from a genetic point of view.

For this purpose an experiment was designed to investigate the role of some European and American breeds for crossbreeding in Italy. Live animal and carcass performance have been examined in a previous report (Bittante et al., 1993). This paper provides information on curing and quality of heavy Italian raw hams obtained from 16 genetic types involving Italian Large White, Belgian Landrace, Duroc and Spotted Poland breeds. The aim of this study was to estimate direct heterosis and breed additive effects of the imported breeds compared with Italian Large White on weight, processing losses and quality traits of dry-cured hams.

2. Material and methods

Ham data were collected from 290 pigs of 16 genetic types (128 gilts and 162 barrows) slaughtered at a liveweight of 144 + 11 kg. Pigs were produced according to a 4 × 4 mating design involving Italian Large White (LW), Belgian Landrace ( B L ) × L W , Duroc ( D U ) × L W and Spotted Poland ( S P ) × L W gilts mated to LW, BL, DU, SP boars.

Details of the origins of the pigs, rearing, feeding and slaughtering procedures have been reported in a previous paper (Bittante et al., 1993). The mating

design and the distribution of hams by genetic types are given in Table 1.

At the slaughterhouse 580 fresh hams were removed from the carcasses according to Italian methodology (Ministero Agricoltura e Foreste- Associazione Scien- tifica di Produzione Animale, 1991), by a cut parallel to the sacral vertebrae and in the middle between the sacral vertebrae and the ischium-pubic symphysis; the foot was not removed from the ham. After carcassjoint- ing, hams were trimmed, chilled for about 24 h (2 - 3°C) and then trimmed again, with the aim of giving the hams the proper shape.

Hams were then moved to a commercial ham factory located in S. Daniele del Friuli and processed according to the official methodology required by the Consortium of San Daniele ham (Repubblica Italiana, 1982). Hams were first spread with coarse salt and placed in a cold room (2-4°C). After about 4-5 days, they were sub- jected to a mechanical massage, treated again with coarse salt and placed in the same cold room for about 10 d. Hams were then brushed and moved to a "rest- ing" refrigerated room (4°C) for about 65 days, with the aim of attaining gradual dehydration and regular salt penetration. Afterwards, the hams were washed and placed in a "drying" room (10-15°C) for about 40 d. They were then put in a "seasoning" room ( 15-16°C for the first 80 d, then 18-19°C) till the end of the processing, which had an overall duration of about 12 months.

In order to record ham losses and technological yields, hams were weighed both at the slaughterhouse (at jointing and after trimmings) and at the ham factory (after salting, washing and seasoning).

At the end of processing 116 hams (representing 116 pigs) were chosen to assess some ham quality traits; the number of hams taken as sub-sample by

Table 1 Number of hams processed by genetic types (between brackets hams deboned)

Sire Dam

LW BL × LW DU × LW SP X LW

Total

Large White (LW) 16 (6) 14 (6) 18 (7) 14 (6) 62 (25) Belgian Landrace (BL) 66 (9) 20 (6) 52 (8) 52 (8) 190 (31) Duroc (DU) 44 (7) 40 (8) 42 (8) 46 (7) 172 (30) Spotted Poland (SP) 38 (6) 32 (7) 62 (9) 24 (8) 156 (30) Total 164 (28) 106 (27) 174 (32) 136 (29) 580 (116)

L. Gallo et al. / Livestock Production Science 40 (1994) 197-205 199

genetic type is given in table 1. Sampled hams were deboned and weight of bones, pigskin and soft trimmings and deboned saleable ham was recorded. At deboning the hams were evaluated by a skilled tech- nician of the ham factory, who scored the following traits: saltness, fat quality, ham flavour and ham colour ( I = poor, 2 = medium, 3 = high quality).

A sample of seasoned meat was taken from each ham at deboning in order to determine colour parameters L*, a* and b* (Commission Internationale de l'Eclair- age, 1976), using a tristimulus colorimeter (Minolta chromameter reflectance CR100/08), plus moisture, crude protein and sodium chloride content (Associa- tion of Official Analytical Chemists, 1984).

Data on both hams from each pig (processing and seasoning phases) were averaged before statistical analysis, while data on deboning and qualitative analysis, recorded on one ham for each pig, were processed individually.

All data were analyzed by multiple regression analysis using SAS package (SAS, 1988), according to the following model:

Yijk = a + S i q- b~ BLij k d- b2DUij k + b 3 SPij k

+ b4 DHijk + b5 HWijk "~ PDj + eij k

where: Yijk is an observation; a is the intercept; S i is the effect of ith sex (i = 0: gilts; i = 1: barrows); bl, b2, b3 are the breed additive effects of BL, DU and SP; BLijk, DUijk, SPijk are the percentage of genes contributed by BL, DU and SP breed; b4 is the effect of direct heterosis; DHuk is the direct heterosis percentage; b5 is the regression coefficient of fresh or seasoned ham weight (HW); PDj is the effect of the jth date of processing (j = 1-8); eij k is the error (0, tr2).

Maternal breed effects, maternal heterosis and specific direct heterosis were tested in a previous analysis, but they were removed from the ultimate model because of multicolinearity with other effects.

3. Results

3.1. Weight, losses and technological yields of dry- cured hams

Least squares estimates of sex, breed and direct heterosis effects on the percentage of hams discarded and

weight of hams at each step of the processing are given in Table 2.

About 16% of hams were discarded at the beginning or during the course of processing, because of qualitative defects. The most frequent defects were the pres- ence of haemorrhagic areas or abnormalities in fat aspect, meat smell or meat colour.

Sex did not significantly affect the percentage of discarded hams, although barrows exhibited a tenden- tially lower discarding rate.

The additive genetic effects of the imported breeds are presented in comparison with the Italian LW breed. DU and LW breed additive effects on this trait were similar, whereas SP and even more BL derived hams showed a not significant but evident increase in percentage of discarded hams ( + 8% and + 14% respec- tively).

Direct heterosis tended to reduce the percentage of discarded hams, but this effect did not reach statistical significance.

Concerning the weight of hams during the course of industrial processing, those from barrows exhibited higher trimming but lower chilling and seasoning losses; as a result, the weight of seasoned ham was almost the same for barrows and gilts.

The effects of the imported breeds on weights and losses of hams during the industrial processing appeared to be negligible for most traits. The effect of BL on seasoned hams was similar to that of LW, because the lower chilling losses induced by BL were balanced by greater transport losses (P < 0.10 for both traits). DU breed showed a significant reduction of chilling and seasoning losses (P < 0.01), which were partially compensated by higher washing losses (P<0.10) . The SP crossbred pigs gave hams with higher fat trimming losses (P<0 .01) but tended to reduce salting and washing losses and significantly decreased seasoning losses ( - 218 g, P < 0.01). As a consequence, additive effects of the imported breeds on the weight of seasoned hams were unimportant and, after adjusting for the weight of the ham at jointing, the weight of seasoned hams was unaffected by the genetic type of pigs.

Direct heterosis did not significantly affect losses of curing hams and the weight of seasoned hams from crossbred pigs was similar to that from purebred ones.

Table 3 reports the estimates of sex, breed and direct heterosis effects on hams at deboning.


Table 2 Estimated genetic effects on percentage of hams discarded and weight of hams during the course of industrial processing (580 hams)

Mean Barrows ~ Breed additive z Direct heterosis b 3

BL DU SP

RSD

Hams discarded ( % ) 16.3 - 4.4 14.6 - 0.8 8.1 - 4.9 Weight of: (g)

ham at jointing 14968 125 - 336 686 - 466 467 first trimming and

chilling losses 509 - 12 * ** - 54"** - 40 * ** - 30* * 7 second trimming 2202 46* - 10 - 2 352"** 31 transport losses 138 7 52* 38 21 - 7 ham at the factory 12093 - 63** - 32 - 4 0 - 350*** 12 salting losses 334 - 19 13 42 - 56 25 washing losses 1585 - 6 19 82* - 43 7 seasoning losses 1509 -40** - 4 7 - 168"** -218"** 25 seasoned ham 8661 - 5 - 34 - 5 - 4 0 - 4 5

n . s .

0.03*** 0.16"** 0.01"** 0.81"** 0.03*** 0.06*** 0.10"** 0.62***

36.2

1022

36 223

56 255

93 106 133 251

*P < 0.10; **P < 0.05; ***P < 0.01; n.s. not significant. 1With respect to gilts. 2With respect to LW. 3Regression on the weight of hams at jointing (average: 14968 5:1127 g). RSD = Residual Standard Deviation.

Table 3 Estimated genetic effects on hams at deboning ( 116 hams)

Mean Barrows j Breed additive 2

BL DU SP

Direct b 3 RSD heterosis

Weight of: (g) bones (with foot) 1584 28 - 277*** trimmed fat and skin 557 14 11 deboned seasoned ham 6385 - 23 242"**

-167"** -228*** - 1 8 0.12"** 83 18 I01"* - 1 3 0.08*** 75

125" 107 28 0.78*** 116

*P<0.10; **P < 0.05; ***P<O.Ol. 1With respect to gilts. 2With respect to LW. 3Regression on the weight of seasoned hams (average: 8584 + 613 g). RSD = Residual Standard Deviation.

Sex and d i rec t he te ros i s d id not s igni f icant ly af fec t

the w e i g h t o f bones or sof t t r i m m i n g discards , w he r ea s

the three impor t ed b reeds m a r k e d l y r educed the we igh t

o f b o n e in c o m p a r i s o n wi th L W purebred . Th i s e f fec t

was grea te r for B L ( - 277 g, P < 0 .01) and SP ( - 288

g, P < 0.01 ) than for D U ( - 167 g, P < 0.01 ). As sof t

t r i m m i n g s appea red to be una f fec t ed by B L and D U ,

these b reeds s igni f icant ly i m p r o v e d the we igh t o f

d e b o n e d seasoned h a m ( + 2 4 2 g, P < 0 . 0 1 , + 125 g,

P < 0 .10 r e spec t i ve ly ) . Desp i t e the l ower w e i g h t o f the

bones , the w e i g h t o f d e b o n e d h a m s f rom SP c rossb red

pigs did not d i f fer s ta t is t ical ly f rom that o f L W hams ,

because o f h igher p igsk in and soft t r i m m i n g d iscards

( + 101 g, P < 0 . 0 5 ) .

Es t ima ted genet ic ef fec ts on p roces s ing yie ld are s h o w n in Tab le 4.

Dress ing yie ld represen t s the yield at s laughter -

house: the we igh t o f d ressed ch i l led h a m is abou t 82%

of tha t o f the round at jo in t ing . P rocess ing and season-

ing yie ld are re la ted to the e f f ic iency o f h a m t ransfor -

mat ion , wh ich was near ly 7 2 % of d ressed ham. A t the

end o f process ing , the sa leab le f rac t ion o f h a m was

L. Gallo et al. / Livestock Production Science 40 (1994) 197-205

Table 4 Estimated genetic effects on percentage yield obtained during the processing of hams

201

Mean Barrows 1 Breed additive 2

BL DU SP

Direct heterosis

b 3 RSD

Dressing yield (A) (%) 81.9 - 0 . 3 0.2 0 - 2 . 4 * * * - 0 . 3 Processing and

seasoning yield (B) (%) 71.6 0.3 -0 .1 0.3 2.0** -0 .1 Deboning yield (C) 4 (%) 74.4 - 0 . 3 2.8*** 1.5" 1.1 0.5

ns

0.0003*** ns

1.6

1.9 1.3

*P<0.10; **P < 0.05; ***P<0.01; ns not significant. A = (ham at the factory/ham at jointing) × 100. B = (seasoned ham/ham at the factory) × 100. C = (deboned seasoned ham/seasoned ham) X 100. ~With respect to gilts. 2With respect to LW. 3Regression on the weight of hams at jointing (average: 14968 + 1127 g). 4Computed only for the deboned hams ( 116 hams). RSD = Residual Standard Deviation.

Table 5 Estimated genetic effects on qualitative traits of seasoned ham ( 116 hams)

Mean Barrows t Breed additive 2

BL DU SP

Direct b 3 RSD heterosis

Chemical composition: dry matter (%) 41.1 0.5 0.7 2.3** crude protein (%) 28.9 - 0.2 0. I - 2.0* * sodium chloride (%) 6.5 0.0 0.2 0.6**

Instrumental colour: L 37.4 0.7* -0 .1 1.7 a 15.1 0.2 - 1.1 - 0 . 4 b 7.0 0.4** 0.1 0.7

Subjective assessmend: fat quality 2.59 0.04 - 0.28 - 0.30 ham colour 2.34 - 0.07 - 0.25 0.08 ham flavour 2.43 -0 .19 -0 .85** -0 .64* saltness 2.10 0.00 - 0.55 - 0.07

0.7 0.0 -0 .002*** 1.8 0.9 0.1 ns 1.3

-0 .1 -0 .1 -0 .0002** 0.5

- 0.9 0.4 0.0009* * 1.8 - 0 . 4 0.1 0.0007** 1.5

0.4 - 0. I ns 0.9

-0 .20 0.21 -0.0002* 0.58 0.25 0.10 ns 0.75

-0 .14 0.10 -0 .0003** 0.64 0.10 0.48 ns 0.83

*P<O.lO; **P < 0.05; ***P<O.Ol; ns not significant. ~With respect to gilts. 2With respect to LW. 3Regression on the weight of seasoned hams (average: 8584 + 613 g). 4Quality score: 1 = poor; 2 = intermediate; 3 = good. RSD = Residual Standard Deviation.

a b o u t 7 5 % o f t he s e a s o n e d h a m . T h e r e f o r e , 1 kg o f

f r e s h h a m at j o i n t i n g wi l l p r o v i d e o n a v e r a g e l e s s t h a n

0.6 kg o f s e a s o n e d h a m a n d a b o u t 0 .4 k g o f d e b o n e d

h a m .

S e x a n d d i r e c t h e t e r o s i s d i d n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t

t e c h n o l o g i c a l y i e l d s o f h a m .

T h e a d d i t i v e e f f e c t o f B L and D U b r e e d s d i d n o t

i n f l u e n c e d r e s s i n g a n d p r o c e s s i n g y ie ld , bu t s ign i f i -

can t ly i m p r o v e d d e b o n i n g y i e l d ( P < 0.01 a n d P < 0 .10

r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , b e c a u s e o f t h e l o w e r w e i g h t o f b o n e s .

O n the con t r a ry , h a m s f r o m S P c r o s s b r e d p i g s g a v e


lower dressing yield (P < 0.01), but better processing and seasoning yield (P < 0.05) than LW hams.

3.2. Qualitative traits of dry-cured hams

Estimated genetic effects on chemical composition and instrumental and subjective assessment of ham quality are shown in Table 5.

Hams from barrows were brighter (L*: P < 0.01 ) than those from gilts, but no sex difference was found for other traits.

The BL breed additive effect did not influence the chemical composition and instrumental colour of seasoned ham, but decreased its flavour score (P < 0.05). DU additive effect significantly increased dry matter and sodium chloride content (P < 0.05) and decreased crude protein percentage (P < 0.05) as compared with LW. Instrumental assessment and subjective score of ham colour were not affected by DU breed, but the evaluation of ham flavour was slightly lower (P < 0.10). The additive effect of SP did not significantly influence any qualitative trait.

Direct heterosis had a negligible effect on all the quality traits of processed ham. Hence, chemical composition, instrumental colour and organoleptic traits of seasoned meat from crossbred pigs were similar to those of purebred ones.

4. Discussion

4.1. Effect of sex

In this study hams from barrows and gilts exhibited similar processing suitability and no significant effect of sex was detected on weight, losses and yields during processing. These results agree well with the findings of Santoro et al. (1981) and Bittante et al. (1991). Moreover, most quality traits of seasoned hams were unaffected by sex. A number of studies have examined the effect of sex on chemical, physical and organoleptic properties of fresh meat: Evans et al. (1978), Wood et al. (1986) and Martel et al. (1988) found negligible effects on pork meat quality, but some differences between gilts and barrows were reported by Barton Gade (1987), Langlois and Minvielle (1989) and Edwards et al. (1992). The effect of sex on chemical and qualitative properties of dry-cured hams has been

studied less widely. Matassino et al. (1987) found higher dry matter and lower protein content in barrows' hams compared with gilts. Quadri et al. ( 1981 ) did not observe any notable difference in organoleptic properties of dry-cured hams from barrows and gilts. There- fore, the effect of sex on processing and quality traits of dry-cured hams seems to be of minor importance, if any.

4.2. Breed additive and heterosis effects

The genetic model which the model of analysis relies on was simplified by assuming no maternal and no specific direct heterosis effects. The exclusion of maternal effects from the ultimate model of analysis was mainly due to some problems of multicolinearity with breed additive effects. This is presumably due to the mating design, because only LW sows were present as maternal purebred type. However, maternal effects can play a significant role on some carcass traits (McLaren et al., 1987, Wilken et al., 1992), but their influence on most quality traits seems to be of little value (Lo et al., 1992). Specific heterosis effects were also removed from the ultimate analysis; so, in this study heterosis is assumed to be constant whatever the combination of breeds involved.

The additive genetic effects of the imported breeds are expressed as deviations from purebred Italian LW; the latter is the traditional and widespread genetic type used in Italy to produce heavy pigs for dry-cured hams and is thus the natural control breed to evaluate genetic effects on processing suitability. The additive effects of the imported breeds on weight, losses and technical yields of hams during the course of industrial processing appeared negligible for most traits. Literature regarding breed genetic effects on quantitative processing results of dry-cured ham is rather scarce, but indications from this study agree with the previous findings. Bittante et al. (1991) reported that seasoned hams of similar weight and comparable processing yields were provided by LW purebred pigs and two- way crosses out from BL, DU and SP boars, and LW sows. Quadri et al. (1981) found similar seasoning yield for hams from BL crossbred pigs and LW purebred ones. Sellier (1988) reported similarjointing, seasoning and overall percentage yields of dry-cured hams from LW and BL purebred pigs. Despite the variability observed among swine breeds regarding a number of

L. Gallo et al. / Livestock Production Science 40 (1994) 197-205 203

parameters related to technological properties of pork meat (Sellier, 1988), the breed additive effects seem to play a secondary role in weight, losses and percentage yields of dry-cured hams.

BL breed additive effect tended to raise the percentage of discarded hams before or during the industrial processing. Despite the lack of statistical significance, partly due to the high residual variance characteristic of the dummy variable, this indication has a strong economic impact, as each ham failing the industrial processing is an economic loss for the ham factory. BL breed also significantly decreased the flavour score of seasoned hams. Bittante et al. ( 1991 ) reported that BL crossbred pigs gave hams more frequently discarded than those from LW purebred pigs; hams from BL crossbred pigs also exhibited defects of greater intensity, caused mainly by smell abnormalities. Smell defects can be an indicator of a bad course of seasoning process. BL breed is well-known to have a high incidence of halothane sensitivity and PSE meat defect, but in this study no BL crossbred pig exhibited PSE. BL breed could provide a meat with a lower dry-curing ability dependent on halothane sensitivity. Some pos- sible advantages related to the use of BL in crossbreeding schemes to produce heavy pigs for dry-curing "Parma type" hams, like the lower bone incidence in ham and the higher muscle/bone ratio (Dumont, 1991), might thus be compromised by an excess of hams failing the processing procedure.

Hams from DU crossbred pigs had a percentage of discard close to those from LW pigs, thus exhibiting an effective dry-curing suitability. The main genetic effect of this breed regards the modification of dry- cured ham chemical composition. Higher dry matter and lower crude protein content in the fresh meat of DU compared to LW (Yorkshire) sired pigs have been reported in the literature (Barton Gade, 1987, Martel et al., 1988) and also seems to be a characteristic of processed meat from DU-derived pigs. Moreover, the increase in dry-matter and the decrease in crude protein content of DU hams suggest a higher percentage of intramuscular fat than LW, as reported by Edwards et al. (1988) and McGloughin et al. ( 1988) in fresh meat. Qualitative traits of hams from DU crosses were similar to those from LW pigs for most variables. The higher meat sodium chloride content had no effect on salting subjective score. The only negative effect of DU on eating quality of dry-cured hams regarded the slight

decrease of ham flavour when compared to LW. No data about this influence of DU on processed meat are available from the literature, but fresh and cooked meat from DU seems to have specific flavour and flavour intensity properties that differentiate this American breed from LW (Martel et al., 1988, McGloughin et al., 1988). These differences could be at least partially explained by the specific fatty acid composition of sub- cutaneous fat of DU (Cameron et al., 1990).

The main breed effect of SP with respect to LW regarded the increase of trimming both at the slaughterhouse and at deboning; this is related to the higher carcass fatness induced by SP breed (Bittante et al., 1993), which decreased the economic value of the SP carcass at the slaughterhouse. Qualitative traits and organoleptic properties of dry-cured hams from SP crosses were very similar to those from LW and so are to be considered fairly good.

Direct heterosis had a negligible influence on quantitative processing traits and on chemical and qualitative properties of dry-cured hams. Heterosis effect on meat quality traits and eating quality have in general been small and not significant (Sellier, 1976, Lo et al., 1992, Hovenier et al., 1993). Estimates of heterotic effect for dry-cured ham traits or, more generally, for pork technological quality are extremely scarce, but Sellier (1988) indicated that heterosis for technological quality of pork does not exist in most breed crosses. Data from this study agree with those in the literature and suggest that ham traits are mainly additively inherited.

5. Conclusions

Crossbreeding between Italian Large White and imported breeds such as Belgian Landrace, Duroc and Spotted Poland to produce heavy pigs for ham industrial processing had few effects on curing suitability, processing quantitative traits, and chemical and quality properties of dry-cured Parma type hams. Partial excep- tion to this regard concerned Belgian Landrace breed effect, that tended to increase the percentage of ham discarded during the course of processing and decreased the flavour score of seasoned hams compared to Large White. Indications from this study suggest a lower aptitude of meat from Belgian Landrace crosses to provide dry-cured hams, despite the fact that no


Belgian Landrace derived pigs exhibited PSE meat. Duroc breed modified the chemical composition of

processed meat, but this influence did not affect the qualitative and organoleptic properties of dry-cured hams. The use of Duroc and Spotted Poland breeds in crossbreeding schemes involving Large White to produce heavy pigs for industrial processing should therefore be evaluated mainly on the basis of their effects on growth and slaughtering performance and carcass merit.

Direct heterosis exerted neither positive nor detri- mental effects on dry-curing suitability and quantitative and qualitative traits of dry-cured hams, thus suggesting that ham traits are mainly additively inherited.

References

Association Of Official Analytical Chemists, 1984. Official methods of analysis, 14th Edition, Washington D.C.

Barton Gade, P.A., 1987. Meat and fat quality in boars, castrates and gilts. Livest. Prod. Sci., 16: 187-196.

Bittante, G., Gallo, L. and Montobbio, P., 1991. L'incrocio di scrofe Large White con verri Landrace Belga, Duroc e Spotted Poland: effetto suile caratteristiche quantitative e qualitative dei prosciutti stagionati. Zoot. Nutr. Anim., 17: 239-253.

Bittante, G., Gallo, L. and Montobbio, P., 1993. Estimated breed additive effects and direct heterosis for growth and carcass traits of heavy pigs. Livest. Prod. Sci., 34:101-114.

Cameron, N.D., Wards, P.D., Porter, S.J. and Enser, M.B., 1990. Comparison of Duroc and British Landrace pigs for meat and eating quality. Meat Science, 27: 227-247.

Commission Internationale De L'Eclairage, 1976. Colorimetry: official recommendations of the international commission of the illumination. CIE Publ. N. 15, Paris.

Dumont, B.L., 1991. A note on variation in the muscle:bone ratio in the ham. Pigs News and Information, 12:1201 (Abstr.).

Edwards, S.A., Wood, J.D., Moncrieff, C.B. and Porter, S.J., 1992. Comparison of the Duroc and Large White as terminal sire breeds and their effect on pigmeat quality. Anim. Prod., 54: 289-297.

Edwards, S.A., Wood, J.D., Moncrieff, C.B., Porter, S.J. and White- house, J.M., 1988. The effect of breed and diet on pig carcass quality. Anim. Prod., 46:503 (Abstr.).

Evans, D.G., Kempster, A.J. and Steane, D.E., 1978. Meat quality of British crossbred pigs. Livest. Prod. Sci., 5:265-275.

Hovenier, R., Kanis, E., Van Asseldonk, T. and Westerink, N.G., 1993. Breeding for pig meat quality in haiothane negative pop- ulations - a review. Pig News and Information, 14:17N-25N.

Johnson, R.K., 1981. Crossbreeding in swine: experimental results. J. Anim. Sci., 52: 906--923.

Langlois, A. and Minvielle, F., 1989. Comparisons of three way and backcross swine: II. Wholesale cuts and meat quality. J. Anim. Sci., 67: 2025-2032.

Lo, L.L., McLaren, D.G., McKeith, F.K., Fernando, R.L. and Novak- ofsky, J., 1992. Genetic analyses of growth, real-time ultrasound, carcass and pork quality traits in Duroc and Landrace pigs. I. Breed effects. J. Anim. Sci., 70: 2373-2386.

Martel, J, Minvielle, F. and Poste, L.M., 1988. Effects of crossbreeding and sex on carcass composition, cooking properties and sen- sory characteristics of pork. J. Anim. Sci., 66: 41--46.

Matassino, D., Zullo, A., Ramunno, L. and Cosentino, E., 1987. Evaluation of some qualitative characteristics of seasoned ham in eight pig genetic types. In: P.V. Tarrant, G. Eikelenboom, G. Monin (Editors), Evaluation and control of meat quality in pigs. M. Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 393- 410.

McGloughin, P., Allen, P., Tarrant, P.V., Joseph, R.L., Lynch, P.B. and Hanrahan, T.J., 1988. Growth and carcass quality of crossbred pigs sired by Duroc, Landrace, and large White boars. Livest. Prod. Sci., 18:275-288

McLaren, D.G., Buchanan, D.S. and Johnson, R.K., 1987. Individual heterosis and breed effects for postweaning performance and carcass traits in four breeds of swine. J. Anim. Sci., 64: 83-98.

Ministero Agficoltura E Foreste - Associazione Scientifica Di Pro- duzione Animale, 1991. Metodologie relative alia macellazione degli animali di interesse zootecnico e alia valutazione e disse- zione delle loro carcasse. ISMEA, Roma, pp 70.

Quadri, G., Bergonzini, E., Zullo, A., Cosentino, E. and Matassino, D., 1981. Studio di alcuni tipi genetici di suino da salumificio allevati con un piano alimentare medio. Aspettiquanti-qualitativi ed economici del prosciutto stagionato. Suinicoltura, 22:21-49.

Repubblica Italiana: Gazzetta Ufficiale, 1982. 123: 4087-4091. Russo, V., Lo Fiego, D.P. and Nanni Costa, L., 1989. Quale suino

per l'industria di trasformazione? Suinicoltura, 30: 33-40. Santoro, P., Mordenti, A. and Ricci Bitti, F., 1980. Ricerche sulle

caratteristiche delle carcasse e delle carni del suino pesante da salumificio. Riv. Zoot. Vet., 3: 147-157.

Santoro, P., Camporesi A., Ricci Bitti, F. and Rizzi, L., 1981. Indagini sulla produzione del suino da salumificio con meticci derivati da razze estere. Riv. Zoot. Vet., 9:117-124.

SAS/STAT, 1988, User's Guide, Release 6.03 Edition, SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, NC.

Sellier, P., 1976. The basis of crossbreeding in swine: a review. Livest. Prod. Sci., 3: 203-226.

Sellier P., 1988. Qualifi della came nelle razze suine e negli incroci. Atti del Convegno Qualit~ della carcassa e della came suina. Reggio Emilia, 2-3 giugno 1988, Universith di Bologna, 163- 191.

Wood, J.D., Jones, R.C.D., Francombe, M.A. and Whelehan, O.P., 1986. The effects of fat thickness and sex on pig meat quality with special reference to the problems associated with overlea- ness. 2. Laboratory and trained taste panel results. Anim. Prod., 43: 535-544.

Wilken, T.M., Lo, L.L., McLaren, D.G., Femando, R.L. and Dziuk P.J., 1992. An embryo-transfer study of reciprocal cross differences in growth and carcass traits of Duroc and Landrace pigs. J. Anim. Sci., 70: 2349-2358.

L. GaUo et al. / Livestock Production Science 40 (1994) 197-205 205

R~sum~

Gallo, L., Montobbio, P., Carnier, P. et Bittante, G., 1994. Estimation des effets additifs de la race et de l'heterosis direct pour les catacteres technologiques et qualitatifs des jambons crus lourds Italiens. Livest. Prod. Sci., 40:197-205 (en anglais).

Avec cette exp6dence on a voulu 6xtimer l'effet additif des races Landrace Beige (LB), Duroc (DU) et Spotted Poland (SP) en comparaison de Large White Italien (LW) et l 'effet d'h6t6rosis directe sur le pois, le rendement de travail et sur les caracter~s qualitatifs de jambons crus lourds. Pendant la transformation industrielle on a control6 les jambons de 290 pores de 16 types g6n6tiques qui derivaient de truies LW, LB x LW, DU × LW et SP × LW ins6min6es par des verrats LW, BL, DU, et SP. Un sous-6chantillon de 116 jambons matures ont 6t6 a p e s d~soss6s et on a analys6 leur composition chimique, le coloeur et d'autres caracteristiques qualitatifs. Les param~tres technologiques de transformation n'ont pas 6t6 tr~s influenc6s par les effets additifs des races en examen, et les rendement en jambon cru fait ont 6t6 comparable avec ceux qui on a obtenu de LW purs. La race BL a r6duite l'incidence d'os du jambon (P < 0,01 ), mais en comparaison aux LW, en ce cas il y a en la tendence ~t augmenter le pourcentage de jambons 6cares pendant la transformation et il y a en une diminution du parfum des jambons (P < 0,05 ). De ces r6sultat on peut dire que la race BL pourrait avoir une aptitude inf6deure ~t la transformation des cuisseaux bien que aucun animal de ce type g~netique a donn6 de la viande PSE.

La race DU a provoqu6 une diminution de l'incidence d'os de jambon (P<0 ,05) , a augment6 son contenu en materie s6che et NaCL (P < 0,05) en r6duisant le teneur en prot~ine brute (P < 0,05) et le parfum (P < 0,10) sans influencer les autres caracteristiques qualitatives des jambons.

La race SPa donn6 des jambons avec les os plus legates en comparaison aux LW (P < 0,05), mais avec les plus grandes pertes de d6coupage aussi bien ~ l'abattoire que apres le d~sossement (P < 0,05) et n 'a pas influenc6 les caracteristiques qualitatives des jambons.

L'h6th6rosis directe n 'a jamais influenc6 les param~tres technologiques et qualitatives des jambons matures.

Kurzfassung

Gallo, L., Montobbio, P., Carnier, P. und Bittante, G., 1994. Genetische Wirkung und direkte Heterose auf Gewicht, Rueckgabe und Qualitaet von schweren italienischen Schinken. Livest. Prod. Sci., 40:197-205 (auf englisch).

Schinken aus 290 Schweine von 16 genetischen Typen, produziert von italienischen Large White (LW), belgische Landrace (BL) ×LW, Duroc (DU) × LW und Spotted Poland (SP) × LW Sauen, yon Verren der Rassen LW, BL, DU and SP befruchtet, wurden kontrolliert waehrend der industriellen Umformung zu "rohes Schinken". Der Zweck der Vorschung war die Bewertung des genetischen Effektes von BL, DU und SP Rassen im Vergleich zu LW, and die Bewertung des Effektes der direkten Heterose auf Gewicht, Rueckgabe und Qualitaet der Schinken. lm Vergleich zu LW zeigten die Kreuzungen aus BL einen groesseren Anteil an abgelegenen Schinken waehrend der Umformung, sie haben verbessert die Rueckgabe der Verknochung (P < 0.01 ) und haben verringert die subyektive Bewertung des Geraches (P < 0.05).

Die DU Rasse hat verbessert die Rueckgabe der Verknochung ( P < 0.10 ), hat vergroessert der Anteil an Trockensubstanz und NaCI (P < 0.05 ) und hat vermindert der Anteil an Protein (P < 0.05) der Schinken im Vergleich zu LW Rasse.

lm Vergleich zu LW Rasse, reduzierte SP die Rueckgabe des Schinkens beim Schlachthof (P < 0.01 ), hat vergroessert die Rueckgabe der Umformung (P < 0.05) und hatte keine Effekte auf die qualitativen Eigenarten der Schinken.

Die direkte Heterose hat hie Gewichte, Rueckgaben and qualitativen Eigenarten der Schinken beeinflusst.

Documents

Breed and crossbreeding effects on weight, yield and quality of heavy italian dry-cured hams