Table 4.
Item | Dietary crude glycerin (%) | SEM | Contrasts, p-value1 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
||||||||
0 | 7 | 14 | 21 | L | Q | C | 0 vs glycerin2 | ||
Fasted live weight (kg) | 474.6 | 487.8 | 484.2 | 471.2 | 11.76 | 0.89 | 0.59 | 0.94 | 0.81 |
HCW (kg) | 289.2 | 297.8 | 293.8 | 285.6 | 9.17 | 0.82 | 0.57 | 0.89 | 0.85 |
CCW (kg) | 283.2 | 291.5 | 287.9 | 279.7 | 8.93 | 0.82 | 0.57 | 0.91 | 0.85 |
Dressing percentage (%) | 60.8 | 60.9 | 60.8 | 61.1 | 1.02 | 0.89 | 0.89 | 0.84 | 0.93 |
Cold dressing percentage (%) | 59.63 | 59.70 | 59.58 | 59.88 | 1.01 | 0.87 | 0.90 | 0.88 | 0.93 |
Weight loss (kg) | 5.94 | 6.26 | 5.84 | 5.86 | 0.31 | 0.74 | 0.73 | 0.55 | 0.92 |
Weight loss (%) | 1.24 | 1.27 | 1.20 | 1.25 | 0.05 | 0.77 | 0.85 | 0.30 | 0.95 |
LM area3 (cm2) | 71.60 | 75.22 | 72.30 | 74.50 | 2.75 | 0.77 | 0.87 | 0.56 | 0.64 |
WBSF (kg) | 5.82 | 6.49 | 6.36 | 6.75 | 0.35 | 0.12 | 0.71 | 0.43 | 0.11 |
KPH fat4 (kg) | 22.72 | 24.48 | 24.42 | 25.68 | 1.84 | 0.43 | 0.91 | 0.77 | 0.45 |
KPH fat (%) | 4.81 | 5.00 | 5.00 | 5.43 | 0.41 | 0.32 | 0.77 | 0.73 | 0.48 |
Back fat thickness (cm) | 1.80 | 1.92 | 1.76 | 1.62 | 0.09 | 0.14 | 0.22 | 0.52 | 0.78 |
Marbling score5 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.8 | 0.09 | 0.19 | 0.33 | 0.66 | 0.57 |
Meat color6 | 3.86 | 3.32 | 3.76 | 3.75 | 0.13 | 0.67 | 0.61 | 0.79 | 0.31 |
SEM, standard error of the mean (n = 5); HCW, hot carcass weight; CCW, cold carcass weight; LM, longissimus dorsi; WBSF, Warner-Bratzler shear force;
Treatment and contrast p-values; p-value for L, linear effect; Q, quadratic effect; C, cubic effect.
Compares the effects of 0% glycerin with the combined glycerin treatment.
LM, longissimus muscle area, cm2.
KPH (kidney, pelvic, and heart fat) as a percentage of carcass weight.
Marbling score from 1 to 5; 1 = no marbling and 5 = highest marbling (Sethakul and Opatpatanakit, 2005).
Meat color score from 1 to 7; 1 = pale pink, 2 = soft pink, 3 = pink, 4 = light red, 5 = red, 6 = medium dark red, and 7 = dark red (Smith et al., 2001).