. 2016 Mar 19;2(2):79–85. doi: 10.1016/j.aninu.2016.03.004

Table 4.

Effect of dietary treatments¹ on carcass and meat quality.

Item	Control			Diet 2			Diet 3			P-value²
Item	B	G	$\bar{x}$	B	G	$\bar{x}$	B	G	$\bar{x}$	T	S	T × S
Hot carcass weight, kg	78.25	76.16	77.21	78.25	76.16	77.21	75.98	75.91	75.95	ns	ns	ns
Carcass yield, %	76.99	75.16	76.08	77.21	75.16	76.19	74.76	74.83	74.80	ns	ns	ns
Carcass length, cm	76.33	77.98	77.17	76.33	77.98	77.17	77.32	80.01	78.66	ns	ns	ns
Back-fat thickness, cm	2.59	2.54	2.57	2.59	2.54	2.57	2.72	2.34	2.54	ns	ns	ns
Loin eye area, cm²	45.68^b	52.85^a	49.28^B	45.68^b	52.85^a	49.28^B	54.41^b	59.48^a	56.94^A	*	**	ns
Longissimus dorsi muscle pH
pH₄₅ (at 45 min post–slaughter)	5.89^b	6.41^a	6.15	6.17	6.15	6.16	5.83^b	6.41^a	6.12	ns	*	ns
pH_{24 h} (at 24 h post–slaughter)	5.23	5.52	5.38	5.44	5.30	5.37	5.14	5.38	5.26	ns	ns	ns
Color parameters
Lightness (L^∗)	46.39	46.08	46.24^A	41.61^b	43.04^a	42.33^B	40.99^b	43.27^a	42.13^B	*	*	*
Redness (a^∗)	8.99^b	11.91^a	10.45	11.81	10.54	11.18	9.49	9.32	9.41	ns	*	ns
Yellowness (b^∗)	7.46^b	9.35^a	8.41^B	8.90	8.56	8.73^A	7.55	8.34	7.96^B	*	*	*
Water holding capacity
Drip loss, %	5.48^b	7.36^a	6.42	4.81^b	6.13^a	5.47	7.00^a	6.15^b	6.58	ns	*	ns
Cooking loss, %	30.96^b	33.40^a	32.18^A	32.16	33.04	32.60^A	29.99	30.10	30.05^B	*	*	*
Thawing loss, %	11.71	12.90	12.31	11.89	11.65	11.77	10.66^b	13.89^a	12.28	ns	*	ns
Shear force, kg/cm²	6.24	7.34	6.79	6.21	6.57	6.39	6.64	6.76	6.70	ns	ns	ns

B = Barrows; G = Gilts.

^a,b,A,B Means within rows with different superscripts differ (P < 0.05).

Control, diet contained without oil supplementation; Diets 2 and 3 consisted of the control diet supplemented with 3% oil, which contained a mixture of coconut and canola oil to UFA:SFA ratios of 2.5:1 and 5:1, respectively.

T = effect of treatment diet; S = effect of the gender of the pigs * (P < 0.05), **(P < 0.01).