| Literature DB >> 30140760 |
Henny Akit1, Cherie Collins2, Fahri Fahri1, Alex Hung1, Darryl D'Souza3, Brian Leury1, Frank Dunshea1.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of sex and dietary lecithin on growth performance, meat quality, muscle collagen content and gene expression of key genes involved in collagen synthesis in finisher pigs. A total of 256 pigs (Large White × Landrace) were allotted to a 2 × 2 factorial arrangement involving sex (gilt or immunocastrated [IC] male) and dietary treatment (0 or 5 g/kg of dietary lecithin). All diets were formulated to contain 4.6% tallow with relatively high total fat of 6.3%. After 5 weeks of dietary treatment, pigs were slaughtered and Longissimus dorsi muscle was obtained for evaluation of meat quality and collagen content. Rectus abdominis muscle was analysed for gene expression of key genes involved in collagen synthesis namely, type I (α1) procollagen (COL1A1), type III (α1) procollagen (COL3A1), α-subunit of prolyl 4-hydroxylase (P4H), lysyl oxidase and metalloproteinase-1 (MMP-1). The results showed that lecithin improved feed efficiency of all pigs (P < 0.05) but it had no effect on feed intake, average daily gain and dressing percentage (P > 0.05). Lecithin also had no effect on meat compression, shear force, collagen content and gene expression (P > 0.05). Immunocastrated male had higher growth rate and increased COL1A1 expression than gilts. However, sex had no effect on fat depth at the P2 site (65 mm from the midline over the last rib), collagen content and expression of other genes (P > 0.05). In conclusion, lecithin improved feed efficiency in finishing pigs without impacting pork quality. Thus, inclusion of lecithin in diets containing high amount of tallow during the summer period could be beneficial.Entities:
Keywords: Fat; Feed efficiency; Lecithin; Meat quality; Pigs
Year: 2018 PMID: 30140760 PMCID: PMC6103466 DOI: 10.1016/j.aninu.2018.01.008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anim Nutr ISSN: 2405-6383
Ingredients and nutrient composition of experimental diets (as-fed basis).
| Item | Experimental diets | |
|---|---|---|
| Control | Lecithin | |
| Ingredients, % | ||
| Wheat | 59.9 | 59.9 |
| Barley | 8.0 | 8.0 |
| Millmix | 13.6 | 13.6 |
| Canola meal | 7.0 | 7.0 |
| Meat meal | 3.8 | 3.8 |
| Water | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Tallow | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Salt | 0.2 | 0.2 |
| Limestone | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| Lysine HCL | 0.4 | 0.4 |
| Threonine | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| Copper premix | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| Rivalea finisher premix | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| Rumensin | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| Lecithin | 0.0 | 0.5 |
| Estimated nutrient composition | ||
| Digestible energy (DE), MJ/kg | 14.2 | 14.2 |
| Crude protein | 15.2 | 15.2 |
| Crude fat | 6.3 | 6.3 |
| Crude fibre | 4.1 | 4.1 |
| Total lysine | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| Available lysine to DE ratio, g/MJ DE | 0.5 | 0.5 |
Estimated from Rivalea Australia Pty Ltd. (NSW, Australia) composition data. This project was funded by Pork CRC. This was reported in Pork CRC report, 2011.
Characteristics of the primers used for quantitative real-time PCR.
| Gene | Accession number | Primers | Primer sequences (5′ to 3′) | Annealing temperature, °C | Amplicon size, bp |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BC050014.1 | Forward | GTCTGGTTTGGAGAGAGCAT | 60.9 | 189 | |
| Reverse | CTTCTTGAGGTTGCCAGTCT | ||||
| NM_009930.2 | Forward | TGATGTCAAGTCTGGAGTGG | 53.4 | 223 | |
| Reverse | TCCTGACTCTCCATCCTTTC | ||||
| EU722905.1 | Forward | GTTCCACAAATGAGTGCTGA | 60.9 | 212 | |
| Reverse | ATAATAACGACGGCTCATCC | ||||
| Lysyl oxidase | M65142.1 | Forward | CTGCTTGATGCCAACACA | 58.7 | 156 |
| Reverse | TGCCGCATAGGTGTCATA | ||||
| α-subunit | BC009654.1 | Forward | CCCAGTCAGGTCTGCTATTC | 51.0 | 204 |
| Reverse | GGAACAGTCTCTGGACAACC | ||||
| AY265350.1 | Forward | GAACGCCACTTGTCCCTCTA | 61.2 | 219 | |
| Reverse | GACTCAACACGGGAAACCTC |
COL1A1 = type I (α1) procollagen; COL3A1 = type III (α1) procollagen; MMP-1 = matrix metalloproteinase-1; α-subunit P4H = α-subunit of prolyl 4-hydroxylase; R18s = ribosomal 18s.
Effects of sex and dietary lecithin on average daily gain (ADG), average daily feed intake (ADFI), feed conversion ratio (FCR) and carcass quality.1
| Item | Gilt | Immunocastrated male | SED | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Lecithin | Control | Lecithin | Sex | Diet | Sex × Diet | ||
| Initial bodyweight, kg | 65.1 | 65.1 | 67.3 | 67.3 | 0.70 | <0.001 | 1.00 | 0.98 |
| Final bodyweight | 96.8 | 98.5 | 105.3 | 104.7 | 1.31 | <0.001 | 0.53 | 0.18 |
| From 0 to 14 d on experiment | ||||||||
| ADG, kg/d | 0.83 | 0.95 | 1.09 | 1.00 | 0.042 | <0.001 | 0.65 | 0.002 |
| ADFI, kg/d | 2.48 | 2.53 | 2.61 | 2.45 | 0.066 | 0.60 | 0.26 | 0.028 |
| FCR, kg/kg | 3.04 | 2.68 | 2.40 | 2.46 | 0.114 | <0.001 | 0.068 | 0.015 |
| From 15 to 35 d on experiment | ||||||||
| ADG, kg/d | 0.87 | 0.87 | 1.17 | 1.20 | 0.048 | <0.001 | 0.64 | 0.66 |
| ADFI, kg/d | 2.76 | 2.64 | 3.54 | 3.39 | 0.120 | <0.001 | 0.13 | 0.87 |
| FCR, kg/kg | 3.22 | 3.07 | 3.02 | 2.82 | 0.121 | 0.015 | 0.051 | 0.75 |
| From 0 to 35 d on experiment | ||||||||
| ADG, kg/d | 0.85 | 0.90 | 1.14 | 1.12 | 0.037 | <0.001 | 0.56 | 0.21 |
| ADFI, kg/d | 2.65 | 2.60 | 3.17 | 3.02 | 0.091 | <0.001 | 0.12 | 0.43 |
| FCR, kg/kg | 3.13 | 2.90 | 2.78 | 2.69 | 0.078 | <0.001 | 0.006 | 0.21 |
| Carcass quality | ||||||||
| Carcass weight | 75.5 | 76.8 | 80.3 | 80.1 | 1.04 | <0.001 | 0.39 | 0.29 |
| P2 backfat depth | 10.8 | 10.2 | 10.5 | 10.8 | 0.40 | 0.49 | 0.40 | 0.067 |
| Dressing, % | 78.4 | 78.5 | 75.9 | 76.1 | 0.47 | <0.001 | 0.70 | 0.79 |
SED = standard error of the difference; P2 = the site of 65 mm from the midline over the last rib.
From Pork CRC report, 2011.
Initial bodyweight was included as a covariate in the analysis.
Carcass weight was included as a covariate in the analysis.
Effects of sex and dietary lecithin on meat quality of longissimus muscle.
| Meat quality | Gilt | Immunocastrated male | SED | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Lecithin | Control | Lecithin | Sex | Diet | Sex × Diet | ||
| pH at 45 min | 6.46 | 6.35 | 6.41 | 6.39 | 0.111 | 0.93 | 0.41 | 0.58 |
| pH at 24 h | 5.76 | 5.75 | 5.80 | 5.79 | 0.075 | 0.47 | 0.81 | 0.99 |
| Lightness (L*) | 49.41 | 48.59 | 48.50 | 49.16 | 0.593 | 0.68 | 0.85 | 0.085 |
| Redness (a*) | 5.66 | 6.04 | 5.81 | 5.97 | 0.307 | 0.86 | 0.22 | 0.63 |
| Yellowness (b*) | 2.09 | 1.94 | 2.10 | 2.22 | 0.234 | 0.37 | 0.91 | 0.41 |
| Cooking loss, % | 20.6 | 23.0 | 21.5 | 23.1 | 0.01 | 0.49 | 0.007 | 0.55 |
| Warner–Bratzler shear force, kg | 3.04 | 3.07 | 3.43 | 3.16 | 0.208 | 0.11 | 0.41 | 0.32 |
| Chewiness | 1.53 | 1.52 | 1.51 | 1.51 | 0.082 | 0.82 | 0.87 | 0.92 |
| Cohesiveness | 0.35 | 0.36 | 0.35 | 0.35 | 0.007 | 0.90 | 0.48 | 0.76 |
| Hardness, kg | 4.36 | 4.26 | 4.30 | 4.26 | 0.185 | 0.79 | 0.60 | 0.83 |
| Collagen content, mg/g | 0.65 | 0.64 | 0.67 | 0.69 | 0.055 | 0.46 | 0.94 | 0.79 |
SED = standard error of the difference.
Fig. 1Relative mRNA expression of type I (α1) procollagen (COL1A1), type III (α1) procollagen (COL3A1), matrix metalloproteinase-1 (MMP-1), lysyl oxidase and α-subunit of prolyl 4-hydroxylase (α-subunitP4H) in rectus abdominis muscle of finishing pigs. The expression levels were normalized against that of Ribosomal 18s (R18s) reference gene. Each column represents the means ± SED of 32 pigs. The results were considered significant when P < 0.05 and as trends when 0.05 ≤ P ≤ 0.10. SED = standard error of the difference; F = female; IC male = immunocastrated male.