Nutritional Manipulation of Pork Quality: Current Opportunities

meets market demands? What are market demands? Previous demands for leaner meat have driven the reduction of fat in pork and consumer demand for “normal” pork has driven selection of pigs without the halothane gene and now the RN gene. Current demands are for “normal” pork to meet domestic and export consumption and to meet specialized markets (ex. darker-firmer pork, highly marbled pork or organic pork). Markets drive demand and demand is the impetus for change but opportunities for change may not always be easily identified or implemented and may require integrated industry approaches. Quality pork is the combined result of genetics, nutrition, production management, transportation, slaughter, processing and retailing practices, and each share responsibility in the quality of the final product. Most nutritional manipulations will, therefore, not be magic bullets that lead to complete resolution of pork quality defects or unfettered production of “enhanced” quality pork. With the understanding that certain risks are involved in achieving desired outcomes for nutritional manipulations, there are a number of promising nutrients that have been shown to positively affect pork quality. The subject of nutritional manipulation of meat quality has recently been reviewed (ex. Pethick et al. 1997, Pettigrew and Esnaola 2001, Rosenvold and Anderson 2003) and a factsheet on the subject has been published by the National Pork Producers Council (Ellis and McKeith 1999;

[1]  J. Schrama,et al.  Dietary betaine supplementation affects energy metabolism of pigs. , 2003, Journal of animal science.

[2]  F. Dunshea,et al.  The effect of dietary magnesium aspartate supplementation on pork quality. , 1998, Journal of Animal Science.

[3]  S. D. Jones,et al.  The effect of ante mortem electrolyte therapy on animal physiology and meat quality in pigs segregating at the halothane gene , 1993 .

[4]  M. Linville,et al.  Creatine monohydrate supplemented in swine finishing diets and fresh pork quality: III. Evaluating the cumulative effect of creatine monohydrate and alpha-lipoic acid. , 2003, Journal of animal science.

[5]  F. Dunshea,et al.  Comparison of different dietary magnesium supplements on pork quality. , 1999, Meat science.

[6]  D. Thompson,et al.  Effect of chromium picolinate on growth and serum and carcass traits of growing-finishing pigs. , 1993, Journal of animal science.

[7]  F. Dunshea,et al.  Nutritional manipulation of meat quality , 1997 .

[8]  F. Mckeith,et al.  Creatine monohydrate supplementation and the quality of fresh pork in normal and halothane carrier pigs. , 2002, Journal of animal science.

[9]  A. Schaefer,et al.  Effects of feeding different levels of conjugated linoleic acid and total oil to pigs on live animal performance and carcass composition , 2001 .

[10]  M. Ellis,et al.  Effect of level, source, and time of feeding prior to slaughter of supplementary dietary magnesium on pork quality. , 2003, Meat science.

[11]  C. Lynch,et al.  Role of leucine in the regulation of mTOR by amino acids: revelations from structure-activity studies. , 2001, The Journal of nutrition.

[12]  L. Southern,et al.  Effect of chromium propionate and metabolizable energy on growth, carcass traits, and pork quality of growing-finishing pigs. , 2003, Journal of animal science.

[13]  E. Berg,et al.  Creatine monohydrate supplemented in swine finishing diets and fresh pork quality: I. A controlled laboratory experiment. , 2001, Journal of animal science.

[14]  L. E. Jeremiah,et al.  Effects of feeding different levels of conjugated linoleic acid and total oil to pigs on subsequent pork quality and palatability , 2003 .

[15]  H. J. Andersen,et al.  Factors of significance for pork quality-a review. , 2003, Meat science.

[16]  K. D. Miller,et al.  The impact of longissimus glycolytic potential and short-term feeding of magnesium sulfate heptahydrate prior to slaughter on carcass characteristics and pork quality. , 2002, Journal of animal science.

[17]  S. Joo,et al.  Effects of dietary conjugated linoleic acid on fatty acid composition, lipid oxidation, color, and water-holding capacity of pork loin. , 2002, Journal of animal science.

[18]  E. Berg,et al.  Growth parameters and meat quality of finishing hogs supplemented with creatine monohydrate and a high glycemic carbohydrate for the last 30 days of production. , 2003, Meat science.

[19]  A. Schinckel,et al.  Impact of betaine on pig finishing performance and carcass composition. , 2002, Journal of animal science.

[20]  D. Baker,et al.  Effect of dietary leucine level on growth performance, and carcass and meat quality in finishing pigs , 2003 .

[21]  D. Baker,et al.  The influence of short-term feeding of amino acid-deficient diets and high dietary leucine levels on the intramuscular fat content of pig muscle , 1996 .

[22]  D. Bauman,et al.  Dietary conjugated linoleic acids increase lean tissue and decrease fat deposition in growing pigs. , 1999, The Journal of nutrition.

[23]  M. Esnaola,et al.  Swine nutrition and pork quality: A review , 2001 .

[24]  Nutritional influences on pork quality 1 , 2022 .

[25]  E. Berg,et al.  Creatine monohydrate supplemented in swine finishing diets and fresh pork quality: II. Commercial applications. , 2001, Journal of animal science.

[26]  L. Southern,et al.  Effect of chromium propionate on growth, carcass traits, pork quality, and plasma metabolites in growing-finishing pigs. , 2003, Journal of animal science.